By Frank Parlato
The latest filing by the Raniere defense team is a three page document of lies. The post below is my rebuttal to the defense team’s incredible assertions about the adult Mexican woman who was imprisoned for 18 months in a room with no human company.
The defense’s language is below and my responses follow:
Raniere Defense: The Government … points to Raniere’s “participation in the psychological torture of a young woman” as apparently relevant to the charges at issue.
Frank Report: The defense is referring to the Mexican woman who was imprisoned for 18 months. I have referred to her as Jane Doe #3 or just Jane in an earlier post.
Raniere Defense: The Government has apparently been severely misinformed about the “imprisonment” of this woman. The adult woman was living in a townhouse near Albany with her family (her mother, brother, and one sister).
Frank: That home is owned by Clare Bronfman and was used as a Rainbow Cultural Garden Center for child experiments, as well as a temporary residence for some of Jane’s family. Another sister was living with Raniere and Pam Cafritz in their home.
Raniere Defense: When it was discovered that the woman [Jane] may have stolen other people’s property, she faced a choice:
(i) return to her home in Mexico,
(ii) make amends for the theft or
(iii) remain in an unlocked bedroom of her family’s residence with her family until she made such amends.
Frank: The defense says she faced a choice. Who was this person that dictated her choices? The defense does not say. We know the answer – it was Raniere.
The defense further says “the woman may have stolen other people’s property.” They do not say she definitely stole, but “MAY” have stolen other people’s property. What was the property? Who was the other person or persons? Raniere’s lawyers don’t say; nor do they ascribe any value to what may have been stolen.
I am fairly certain I know what the property that “may” have been stolen is: When you hear it, you’ll cringe. So what did this “adult woman” [Jane] steal that justified her facing a choice of going to her to a room [for 18 months], going ‘home’ to Mexico or making amends?
What Raniere is referring to is that she stole his semen. He told her – as he told all the women – that once he ejaculated on her – he owned her and by her having an affair with another man -[Ben Meyers] – she was stealing Raniere’s life force and energy.
This was her theft, I am certain. She took Raniere’s semen under false premises. Jane was stealing his semen or, said another way, — because she allowed another man to touch her body – because her body was Raniere’s property – she was giving away HIS property – i.e. her body- which no longer belonged to her. That was her theft!
Raniere’s attorneys do not say Jane had to remain in the room until she returned the stolen property or made restitution. They say she had to remain in the room, go back to Mexico, or make “amends”.
Jane Doe #3 could not earn money to make restitution confined in a room. Neither could she hide the so-called stolen property inside the room – for she was not allowed any possessions – no TV, no books, no games or any possessions other than her clothes and a notebook and a pen.
So unless that property was her own body – which Raniere claimed to own – how could locking her in a room allow her to “make amends?”
The amends she had to make was to agree to never allow her body to be touched by another man – for the rest of her life.
She would not do that. She was too honest to agree to that. She could have lied like Raniere does. She could have said she would join his harem as he demanded. He already had her sister in his harem.
Imagine the torture of Jane Doe #3. Her family is supporting a madman. His sister is living with Raniere as one of his harem women – and all of her family believes he is a divine being and that Jane is being defiant.
Raniere orders the family to keep her in a room. He orders them not to talk to her about her ethical breach. The room does not need to be locked, Jane is in the US illegally [so is her sister living with Raniere]. Jane has no money to go home. She might not be able to cross the border.
A lock is not needed. There is always someone home. There are cameras. Other NXIVM members stand guard including Ben Meyers and Michelle Salzman.
Jane cannot escape.
And to tell you how crazy this all was – after more than a year of Jane being imprisoned – her mother also agreed to be imprisoned in an adjoining room to try to put an end to her daughter’s suffering. Ultimately, her mother left the cult, like Jane did.
Raniere gave it out to the NXIVM community that Jane had an ethical breach and she had stolen something – but he did not say that it was his semen. He let the community assume she was a thief and defiant about making amends. He gave it out that he was the ethical one.
Since Jane was in a room with no outside communication, the truth could not be told. When she finally left – after 18 long months – she ran for her life and tried to hide in Mexico. She did not return to her home in Mexico – if she even had a home there. .
Raniere’s lawyers: Eventually, she voluntarily chose to return to Mexico and was driven there by her father and another person. Her father arranged for her to safely enter Mexico, where she is now living.
Frank: She escaped from a second story window during Vanguard Week when Raniere was out of town. Her father and a sympathetic harem woman drove her to the border. Her despicable father – having been ordered by Raniere to have her cross the border with nothing – zero – gave his daughter only $100 and left her to fend for herself. Her father was not poor. He owned a successful company in Mexico. He could have given her enough to live and get a new start. He did not. He left her at the border with $100.
And as a final poetic irony, the other harem woman who helped Jane escape – later escaped herself from Raniere. She fled and went into hiding. She is still in hiding; so is Jane Doe. And Keith Raniere – his lawyers assure us – is an ethicist.
I disagree. He is a criminal.