I haven’t reviewed all the filings in detail yet but I did come across a very interesting statement: i.e., if Judge Garaufis does not dismiss all of the charges against all the defendants, the (remaining) defendants plan to file motions for suppression and motions for severance. What that means is that they’ll be proposing that some/all of the government’s evidence be suppressed (i.e., it can not be introduced at trial) — and they’ll be looking for several individual trials rather than one all-inclusive trial.
Given the time of year – and the likelihood that most of the pending motions will be denied (I think the court will likely order the prosecution to turn over any Brady material – and may order it to file a Bill of Particulars on some of the charges – but that’s about it) – the chances of this trial starting in March are very slim. And they’ll get even slimmer if/when the prosecution files another superseding indictment.
In all, the attorneys for the current six defendants – Keith Raniere, Allison Mack, Clare Bronfman, Nancy Salzman, Lauren Salzman, and hapless Kathy Russell – recently filed the following documents:
From the summary letter of Shapiro, we further summarize the initial pretrial motions:
RE: Count One: RICO Conspiracy /All Defendants
Dismiss Count One
– For failure to allege a “pattern” of racketeering
– As impermissibly duplicitous
– As being unconstitutionally vague.
– For failure to allege a sufficient enterprise or a horizontally-related pattern of racketeering activity.
Dismiss the predicate acts for failure to specify the underlying offenses or allege essential elements:
– Racketeering Act 1-A: Identity Theft Conspiracy / Raniere and Russell
– Racketeering Act 1-B: Identification Document Conspiracy / Raniere and Russell
– Racketeering Act 2-A: Identity Theft Conspiracy / Raniere, Bronfman, Russell,
and Nancy Salzman
– Racketeering Act 2-B: Identity Theft / Raniere and Russell
– Racketeering Act 2-C: Identity Theft / Raniere and Bronfman
– Racketeering Act 4: Identity Theft Conspiracy / Raniere
– Racketeering Act 5-A: Encouraging and Inducing Illegal Entry / Bronfman
– Racketeering Act 5-B: Money Laundering / Bronfman
– Racketeering Act 6-A: Labor Trafficking / Raniere and Lauren Salzman
– Racketeering Act 6-B: Document Servitude / Raniere and Lauren Salzman
– Racketeering Act 8.
– Racketeering Act 10: Identity Theft Conspiracy / Raniere and Bronfman
Dismiss the following predicate acts on the grounds that they are unconstitutionally vague, fail to state an offense, are not alleged with adequate particularity, and/or are multiplicitous:
– Racketeering Act 7: State Law Extortion / Raniere, Mack, and Lauren Salzman
– Racketeering Act 9-A: Forced Labor / Lauren Salzman
– Racketeering Act 9-B: State Law Extortion / Lauren Salzman
RE: Count Two: Forced Labor Conspiracy / Raniere, Mack, and Lauren Salzman
Dismiss Count Two
– For failure to allege the offense with adequate particularity.
– For failure to state an offense.
RE: Count Four: Sex Trafficking Conspiracy/Raniere and Mack
RE: Count Five: Sex Trafficking / Raniere and Mack
RE: Count Six: Attempted Sex Trafficking / Raniere and Mack
– Failure to allege the offenses with adequate particularity.
– Failure to state an offense.
– For being unconstitutionally vague.
– Because the allegations are duplicitous and fail to set forth a factual violation of the sex trafficking statute.
RE: Count Seven: Identity Theft Conspiracy / Raniere and Bronfman
Dismiss Count Seven
– For failure to allege essential elements.
– For lack of venue.
RE: Other Motions
– Move for a bill of particulars.
– Move for prompt disclosure of Brady materials.
– Move to obtain the trial testimony of foreign witnesses.
If the Court denies their motions to dismiss, Defendants anticipate filing motions for severance and suppression.
Stay tuned for further analysis regarding some of the motions…