Today’s Status Conference in the U.S. v. Raniere Et Al case may go on for a while. Those who are attending are advised to bring snacks – and to take a bathroom break before the hearing begins.
The “good news” for attendees is that the lawyers representing Clare Bronfman, Nancy Salzman, and Kathy Russell – and the lawyers representing Lauren Salzman – have all asked the presiding judge in the case, U.S. District Court Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis, to postpone the oral arguments that were scheduled to take place regarding those defendants’ requests to be tried separately from Keith Raniere and Allison Mack.
In her February 5th letter to Judge Garaufis, Alexandra A.E. Shapiro – who technically only represents Clare Bronfman – wrote on behalf of Bronfman, Nancy Salzman, and Russell to request that the scheduled oral arguments on their request to be tried separately from Raniere and Mack be postponed until some unspecified date in the future. In doing so, she cited the fact that the prosecution had filed “…a 40-page motion to admit evidence of nine separate categories of uncharged conduct as proof of, among other things, the charged RICO enterprise and pattern of racketeering activity”.
In making the request, Ms. Shapiro was careful to distinguish between Bronfman, Nancy Salzman and Russell, who are referred to as the “Non-DOS Defendants” – and Lauren Salzman, who apparently is best described as a “DOS-But-Supposedly-Not-Involved-In-Sex-Trafficking Defendant”. At least that’s what Lauren has claimed in her own request to be tried separately from Mack and Raniere.
So, assuming that Judge Garaufis grants the requested postponement – which he undoubtedly will – Wednesday’s Status Conference will probably be limited to oral arguments on the following unresolved issues::
– Clare Bronfman’s motion to suppress certain evidence that she claims is entitled to attorney-client privilege – and, therefore, not usable by the prosecution; and
– Kathy Russell’s motion to dismiss all the charges against her pursuant to the court’s supervisory power over the grand jury – or, in the alternative, to compel discovery on the part of the prosecution regarding the circumstances surrounding Russell’s appearance before the Grand Jury.
The likely outcome of all these outrageously expensive filings is fairly easy to predict:
– The judge will eventually deny Bronfman’s motion to dismiss because there is no legal basis for her request that the prosecution be denied the opportunity to present relevant evidence to the jury;;
– The judge will eventually deny Russell’s pitiful motion to dismiss – which is based, in essence, on her admission that she talked herself into an indictment rather than a walk-away plea deal; and
– The Trust Fund that Clare Bronfman set up to pay for her co-defendants’ legal fees will be depleted that much sooner.
So, Wednesday’s hearing should still be quite interesting – and because several of Frank Repor’st observers/reporters will be in attendance, we will have a detailed post on the event tomorrow.
One thing that will not be announced tomorrow, however, is Judge Garaufis’ decision regarding Keith Raniere’s third request to be released from the Metropolitan Detention Center while he awaits the start of his trial on April 29th (That “start date” will never happen!).
That’s because Judge Garaufis announced today that “Raniere’s third motion for request for release pending trial (Dkt. 303) is DENIED”.
In his denials of Raniere’s prior two requests to be released on bail, Judge Garaufis was very clear that his denials were “without prejudice” – which allowed the Court Jester, Marc Agnifilo, to file subsequent motions for Raniere’s release.
This time, however, Judge Garaufis did not include any such notation – which likely was a gigantic suggestion to Agnifilo to stop wasting the court’s time with requests that Raniere be allowed out on bail before his trial.
As the judge previously noted, Raniere “…poses a serious risk of flight if he is released pending trial” – and that “there is at least some risk that if he is released, he may unlawfully exploit women or obstruct justice”.
Translated into everyday language, the judge is now telling Agnifilo to “Stop wasting my time with these never-going-to-happen requests that your dirt-bag client be released on bail prior to his trial because that slimy little motherfucker will undoubtedly skip town and never show up for trial” – or words to that effect.
Viva Executive Success!
Viva Executive Success! If the outcome was to stay in prison, KAR won!
Toni Natalie’s already courageously served a life sentence to this point conveyed on her by KAR and executed by Bronfman/Salinas/Raniere crime syndicate lackeys and ruthless, top-dollar, world class professional assasines.
Her only “crime” was leaving KAR and attempting to defend herself by helping to expose him — a position KAR put her in himself due to his unrelenting attacks on Toni and her loved ones in and out of court.
The conditions Toni endured for decades at KAR’s doing — on his orders — were far worse than a week of cold, dark confinement.
KAR may have shivered in his cell but did he ever lay awake a single, windy night, starting at every creak under threat of kidnap, rape and torture in a Mexican prison?!
No, KAR spent his nights walking cozy, safe, suburban streets preying on young girls tenderized to do his most demented, perverse biddings and scheming to increase his power in order to satisfy his unquenchable bloodlust by devouring his imagined enemies.
Toni Natalie is a fucking GODDESS!
Well said, Heidi. Everyone who has stood up and spoken out about the atrocities KAR orchestrated should be celebrated. It’s easy to turn tail and hide when you’re put in the crosshairs of a psychopath like KAR who will stop at nothing to exact his pound of flesh for defying him but that small group of people, including yourself and Mr Parlato, continued talking and publicizing and wouldn’t relent. You all deserve to be proud of your efforts and my wish is they are rewarded with a guilty on all counts verdict.
Three strikes on that bail motion and ye-e-e-e-r “IN!” Raniere. Still. Perhaps with greater incentive to stop complicating and delaying the trial? Or, hey, maybe you’ll finally do one weensie favor for mere mortals and have Clare or Emiliano make a relatively small donation to MDC to improve conditions??
“Quite frankly” is exactly the same as starting a sentence with “honestly” when you are about to bald-faced lie, and are trying to convince someone you aren’t. They didn’t freeze if they are still alive, dumb ass. I don’t see him doing anything for the homeless people freezing on the streets. At least your scumbag client had shelter.