Marc Agnifilo challenges DOJ

Agnifilo: Allison Mack’s ‘kinky’ slave wanted to be blindfolded and tied while unknown woman performed oral sex on her – as Raniere watched

He is not one of the highest paid attorneys in NYC for nothing.

Marc Agnifilo is now on the attack and he’s gunning for bear.

In his affirmation to the US District Court, filed November 16, 2018, Agnifilo claims an array of troubling things – including that the DOJ is refusing or delaying giving him evidence that will help his client – even though the law requires them to do so.

He has gone farther claiming the FBI attempted to get DOS slaves still loyal to Raniere to change their stories – something which, if the defense did that – might be construed as obstruction of justice or witness tampering.

[More about this in a future post.]

Perhaps the most extreme allegation is Agnifilo’s claim that one of the alleged victims of Raniere, a DOS slave referred to in the indictment as Jane Doe 5 [She is listed as Jane Doe 1 in the original criminal complaint] is not a victim after all.

Jane Doe 5 was the DOS slave of Allison Mack’s who allegedly was blindfolded and tied down naked in a shed.

According to the original complaint, Raniere allegedly led Jane to a house across the street, directed her to remove all her clothes, blindfolded her, led her through trees to a shack, where she was tied on a table. Another woman then began performing oral sex on her, as Raniere circled around the table commenting on her body. (Complaint at ¶ 45.)

Now Agnifilo is claiming this was not coercive. He suggests Jane Doe 5 wanted to do this “kinky” act and there is a witness who can corroborate this.

Agniflo wrote in his court filing, “As the only enumerated example of sexual activity within DOS, Ms. Mack allegedly assigned Jane Doe 5…  to meet Raniere. .. The government alleged, ‘Jane Doe 5 did not want to participate in this sexual activity, but believed it was part of her commitment to DOS and that if she broke her commitment to DOS her collateral could be released.’ (Id.)”

Agnifilo goes on to write that a witness casts doubt on the government’s version.

He writes, ” I believe that another witness has informed law enforcement that Jane Doe 5 told the witness about the sexual experience referred to in the Complaint…. This witness told law enforcement that Jane Doe 5 told the witness that she (Jane Doe 5) was into ‘kinky’ stuff, like the rendezvous described in the Complaint. Jane Doe 5 went on to tell the witness that she apparently ‘fantasized’ about having an experience such as this and wanted to participate in it…. I believe it is also very possible that Jane Doe 5 has said similar things to the Government during their many proffer sessions. This would be clear Brady material if said….”

Brady material is any evidence the US Attorney is in possession of which might point towards a defendant’s innocence. Brady Material is based on precedent set in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963).

Keep in mind however that the witness who purportedly told the government that Jane Doe 5 said she wanted to be tied up and blindfolded, is likely a NXIVM member. If so, remember that, for a NXIVM member, lying is considered highly ethical, if it protects the mission or Raniere.

This witness will likely be called to testify by the defense to try to impeach Jane Doe 5.

***

In the summer and early fall of 2017, I interviewed Jane Doe 5 prior to her going to the FBI.

In fact I was the one who first asked her to go to the FBI. The story she told me – over several interviews and several hours – is consistent with the DOJ’s version of events.

She described being coerced, intimidated and feeling forced to do a number of unsavory things. She spoke of threats Allison Mack made including some by text and emails.

She told me that it was not until she read the Frank Report in June 2017 revealing the existence of DOS that she felt safe to leave because the collateral of other women who left was not released.

Going back to the blindfold event – even if she did admit to having fantasies of this [I have no knowledge of this] that does mean she should have been coerced into it. Suppose she wanted to be blindfolded etc. in a safe and controlled environment and admitted it to Allison. That does not mean she wanted to do it with creepy Keith Raniere and an unknown woman – maybe Allison or Clare Bronfman.

If it is true that she admitted this “fantasy’, it might have been grotesquely altered by Mack and Raniere conspiring to create their own fantasy – perversely using her [while holding her collateral] as their ‘sex toy’.

I can imagine Raniere getting joy by using her own fantasy against her – to turn something she might have imagined would be pleasurable into something horrifying – as the threat of collateral might be released forced her to do it.  Raniere might have altered her fantasy to one that was much darker and meaner with unfriendly participants. In other words, Raniere might have actively worked to make her fantasy a nightmare to fulfill his own sexual perversions.

Agnifilo points out that the blindfold act is the only enumerated sexual act in the indictment. Others may crop up at trial.  These might help a jury understand more about Raniere and his claims of innocence.

.

About the author

Frank Parlato

Frank Parlato is the founder of the FrankReport, publisher and editor-in-chief of Artvoice, The Niagara Falls Reporter, Front Page and the South Buffalo News.

16 Comments

Click here to post a comment

Leave a Reply

  • raniere’s defence denies the prosecution’s witness’ version of events? well he would wouldn’t he? has to. Im so sorry for the victim at this stage of the legal procedure, where they have to endure a reliving of events that led them to this point, publicly and in the face of rank denial, that might, just might, be taken as the official version of events, even if not the truth, because sometimes brute force and ignorance creates just enough chaos to obscure it. I would say in this case, the possibility of obscuring the truth is slight, theres just too much evidence and scrutiny (Thanks Frank!) And witnesses for the prosecution, you’re PR is in the hands of free-willed largely anonymous, supporters, and not dependent on obedience to the patrons of a deep but finite third party trust. Leaving and helping to deconstruct nxivm is the ethical thing to do. Stay brave Jane Doe.

  • Kristin Kreuk “liked” this tweet by a member of the CW Network’s PR team:

    “Thank you Vancouver!! u @RoseBhura, til next time!!”

    https://mobile.twitter.com/Lynnsy2/status/1064384854857412608

    Kristin Crook recruited Rose Bhura into NXIVM. Perhaps this CW Network PR team member, Lynn Esparo was also recruited into NXIVM by Kristin Crook and she is involved in shielding Crook from press questions about NXIVM. The fact that she knows Kreuk and Bhura and works at the CW Network is suspicious. If she was in NXIVM, even if it was just one intensive like Kristin Crook wants people to believe about her, that would be immoral. A potential NXIVM member protecting another NXIVM member who may of recruited her.

  • [Portion deleted since it insults another commenter]

    Nxivm makes Amawy look like childs game of Chutes and Ladders when it comes to what people have gone through with Nxivm.

    {portion deleted same reason as above]

  • KAR will say whatever he needs to to get out of the situation he has put himself in. His lawyer wasn’t there so he can only go on what KAR tells him.
    If there are text and emails between KAR, Mack, and others, the truth will come to light during the trial not via KAR lawyer writing letters to the Judge attempting to testify ahead of a trial.
    If current Nxivm supporters are willing to lie under oath and risk being labeled as such when the DOJ presents email and texts to refute a witnesses testimony, they should take heed to the fact they might be charged with perjury.

  • Everyone should just settle down, Agnifilo is merely doing his job – introducing another theory to damage the prosection’s version of kinky sex claim so it is not beyond a reasonable doubt. If there is no further evidence to the contrary, what the jury is left with is a “she said-she-said” or worse, if multiple pro-NXIVM witnesses reinforce Agnifilo’s version, which would be very hard for the prosecution to expect to be successful.

    • I agree Scott – that theory is so obvious it would be irresponsible for the defense not to go that route. I’m aligned with Frank’s POV/commentary in his post but that doesn’t mean a jury will. And it’s all about reasonable doubt

  • Even if it was a fantasy, being coerced to enact that fantasy is another matter. Fantasising is safe and pleasurable. Few people enact a fantasy which would leave them feeling vulnerable, with a participant that they don’t know. Without trust or consent, how can someone relax or enjoy such an experience?

  • Hilarious, (and kind of bizarre), that Agnifilo would try to claim that Keith’s version of events is accurate, considering all the previously recorded accounts provided by this Jane Doe witness.
    Agnifilo must be aware of the contradictory evidence, yet he thinks the jury will trust Keith’s fantasy version of events??

    If lawyers don’t already have a bad enough reputation…

  • Funny how Marc Agnifilo never mentions the repeated demands for collateral. Or the fact that the collateral had to pass muster as being sufficiently damaging to the slave or her family. How anyone can assert real consent under those circumstances is beyond me.

  • This sounds like what one would expect from a Rainere attorney. Blaming victims and IMO all who had collateral/blackmail material are victims. And Allison has already chosen to accept responsibility for DOS. Of course they will use other Nxivm to refute victim allegations. There is no such thing as a decent high paid attorney. That’s how they get where they are, willing to sacrifice anyone for their client.

    • I posted about this under another “article” here concerning victims. What about true / still believers? Are they victims? I guess they could be victims but still be culpable.

      It’s complicated stuff. It’s like the story a few days ago about some 90+ year old nazi concentration camp guards that are on trial. Separate trials. Both claim innocence but while one “seems” to admit the horrors and says he feels guilt the other is aloof and I’ve seen him in various documentaries where he laughs and says “it’s how it was, I couldn’t stop it”. Are they victims without contrition and redemption?

    • Anne, as stated above, Agnifilo is merely doing his job, so chastizing him is not a smart position to take. Just because Mack claims responsibility for DOS does not automatically mean Agnifilo’s version of this particular story is not enough to cause reasonable doubt of the prosection’s version.

  • Lawyers will say anything with a straight face if you pay them enough money.
    That’s why everyone loves lawyers so much.
    If this sexual encounter was consensual, why the blindfold to take away the woman’s sight and the rope to restrain her?
    This story sounds more like a fantasy held by Raniere and Mack.

    I

    • Shadow, the blindfold and rope could easily be part of Agnifilo’s version of the kinky sex story. Remember, we’re not talking about selling girl scout cookies, where a blindfold and restraining ropes would be out of place, we’re talking about kinky sex.

Archives

     
     

CONTACT

frankparlato@gmail.com
Phone / Text: (716) 990-5740
%d bloggers like this: