Reader: Clare’s Ankle Bracelet Won’t Be Removed
Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us! (Email & username are optional)
Well, this will certainly mess up plans for V-week…
Clare Bear and her sister Sara seem to have no issue with losing millions for what they believe is a noble cause.
What’s a 100 million dollars more?
NXIVM teaches that lying is noble when it protects and upholds Good. They use the metaphor of Nazi’s at the door asking if any Jews are in the house. When saying No, your protecting the ones your hiding in the attic. So lying can be Noble in all their minds.
This is how they justify lying in court and to their lawyers. This is how for years they have filed on law suit after another against those the see as their enemies. This is how they justify lying to their own community.
Is it worth 100 million for the Cast Off the Bronfman childen, youngest half sisters Clare and Sara to protect Clare Bear from this entire mess?
They have been more than willing to waste a lot more to protect their Vanguard and do his evil deeds.
Does Clare really give a shit about saving her brother in law and mothers ass-sets? Clare only cares about herself and her precious Vanguard.
Will she finally bale on him to save herself? That is the 100 million dollar question.
Will she every be totally broke if she bails on her bail?
Is it possible Clare could have put some of that cash from Mexico into accounts that are well hidden and she already have another identity waiting for her to use.
Money can buy a lot of things. It’s well know that they have hired people to educate them on how to hide assets and change their identities, ju add t as they have to hack who they see could expose them. One only need to question the millions paid for private investigators.
What about the millions they have spent on hacking Federal Judges and others financial information.
Clare and the criminals she has financed believe they are above the law. She really is the Godmother of NXIVM’S criminal enterprise.
Response to “A Reader”‘s article:
#1 Pretty accurate – Some suppositions, but they are realistic assumptions.
#2 Clare is charged with white collar crimes. At worst, she’d be in a minimum security facility, housed with low-risk inmates. Let’s also remember the fact that she is a first-time offender – The judge may opt for alternative sentencing, which he has the discretionary power to do (and there are 2 sets of ‘justice’ in America). There is also the possibility of a reversal in appellate court (assuming she loses at trial and gets time). Given how high her bail was, I don’t believe she’d get a chance at alternative sentencing, but stranger things have happened.
#3 Spot-on analysis, here.
#4 is flat-out bad:
“I hope the judge orders that her sister Sara can’t fund anybody else on Clare’s behalf during her bail period, since otherwise the restrictions on her finances are meaningless…”
How can a judge impose restrictions on a private individual’s finances due to their familial relationship to a defendant in a court case, especially if that person has not been charged with a crime?
Clare wasn’t restricted from communicating with Sara in any way, and Sara, as a free individual, can do whatever she pleases with her money.
#4 in this post reads almost like it was authored by everybody’s favorite comment troll (the real one), but otherwise, it was a decent analysis.
Your conclusion regarding who almost wrote #4 is flat-out bad. LOL
Scott, your meaningless posts are like fingers on a chalkboard
All law enforcement agencies will concentrate their attention on the more violent crimes of sex trafficking, enforced servitude and extortion as opposed to the more complex crimes Clare Bronfman was involved in.
Before law enforcement of the financial crimes gets very serious it has to approach the levels of a Bernie Madoff level of fraud.
Billions of dollars in damages.
Raniere and Mack are the ones who will feel more heat than Clair.
“Before law enforcement of the financial crimes gets very serious it has to approach the levels of a Bernie Madoff level of fraud. Billions of dollars of damages.”
Kind of a rambling, general statement. Changing “billions” to “millions” might make it more palatable. “Very serious” needs amplification.
I would leave the legal analysis to those with legal experience. And the fact that you live in Cook County, where they have lawyers and courthouses, does not make you a legal expert.
By the way, which Madoff did you like better: DeNiro (HBO) or Dreyfuss (ABC)? I thought the lovely Michelle Pfeiffer, still going strong at age 60 (and I bet she never had the benefit of the wisdom and knowledge of “The Source”), played an excellent Ruth in the HBO production.
Many people have been severely punished for far less than billions of dollars. They will all feel heat, but the sentencing guidelines will probably result in hammering the violent criminals more than the financial criminals.
Prison would be good for Clare. She could work towards getting a GED to hang on the wall next to the world’s most expensive scarf.
HA HA – Nicki “I suck at Comedy” Clyne should take a lesson in comedic sarcasm from you AOTW!!
Personally, i think she should be sentenced to mucking horse stalls at Saratoga Race Course, Aqueduct and Belmont etc. Time for her to shovel real horse shit rather then the philosophical crap NXIVM spouted.
Obviously Clare doesn’t want to go to jail. But eating baloney sandwiches might be preferable to whatever her diet is now. She’s very thin.
I don’t know which is worse, the Raniere diet or the prison diet.
Clare might just regain some of her senses adding a little protein to her diet. Apart from swallowing Vanguard’s cum, the Vegan regime the slaves are on offers little in the way of a complete protein chain – lack of which boggles the brain. Also, better prison bologna than Vanguard’s “Rational Inquiry.”
I can definitely see the judge letting her off home confinement if all of her pledged assets have the proper liens on them by August 21. It’s certainly very possible, especially seeing how leniently he treated Lauren.
But I don’t think he’ll let her remove the ankle bracelet, since her lawyer’s argument for that request is basically that Clare has no motivation to flee any longer because her family would be left “destitute” —- and since she already turned herself in, this fact supposedly proves she’d never flee (which is not a well-reasoned argument).
1) Clare’s mother and brother in law would not be left “destitute” if she fled, since Clare’s sister Sara probably has a net worth around $300-$400 million dollars at least, and if her mom or husband had to forfeit a few small assets (to the court) then Sara could easily replace those assets by snapping her fingers while eating a bowl of Cocoa Puffs. So I don’t think that argument is a logical one that the judge will accept. In fact, it’s probably why Sara herself didn’t want to personally guarantee the bond with her own assets.
2) While the fact that Clare turned herself in weighs slightly in the direction of her not fleeing, the truth is that Clare has no reason to flee *right now* since the trial isn’t happening until 2019. Once the trial begins and Clare can judge how the jury is reacting to the government’s evidence (once she can judge whether she’s likely to be convicted or not), her reasons to flee could become much more immediate, especially if her case isn’t going well and she senses that she’ll soon be taken to federal prison for up to 5 years. While I agree that 5 years isn’t nearly as frightening as 15 years, being locked in a cage with lots of smelly women and eating baloney sandwiches for 5 years might not seem palatable to a woman who’s been pampered 24/7 since birth. Only then would the judge be thankful that he didn’t remove her ankle bracelet.
3) While her lawyer argues that the Bail Reform Act wasn’t intended to cover the type of abusive litigation that Clare has engaged in, I think that the government will argue that *any* action taken with the *specific intent* to silence potential witnesses against her will be appropriate for the judge to consider. The fact that she sent email spreadsheets to Keith with lists containing the personal information of people that have wronged them (which included a Jane Doe witness) is also proof of her neverending attempt to silence, harass or intimidate people that the court should consider, since it goes to her personality of neverending harassment of perceived enemies.
4) I hope the judge orders that her sister Sara can’t fund anybody else on Clare’s behalf during her bail period, since otherwise the restrictions on her finances are meaningless. If Clare wants to fund somebody or something that the judge has forbidden the trust from paying for, then Sara could just fund those things herself (with a gift or loan to 3rd parties at Clare’s request) and the judge’s bail rules would be mocked. I hope the judge tells Clare that he’ll revoke her bail if he sees any evidence of Sara doing anything like that on her behalf.