Marc Agnifilo Cross-Examines Dani

Part 1: Dani’s Cross Examination: Agnifilo Starts off With Fake ID Dani Made for Cami

It has taken a little time for Frank Report to catch up on all the news concerning Keith Alan Raniere’s trial.

Last week, Dani finished her testimony and began her cross-examination.

it was May 30, after lunch, and after testifying for several days, when Dani began her cross-examination  by Keith Raniere’s attorney, Marc Agnifilo.

After introducing himself, Agnifilo went right into his cross-examination and the first thing he did was ask Dani about her making a fake ID for her sister Cami.

Here is the exchange:

Q Did you make Camilla a fake identification card for her to leave the United States?

A Yes.

Q You didn’t tell us about that on direct examination, did you?

A No.

Q Okay. So tell us about it now.

A Well, I made a fake ID.

Q Okay. How did you do that?

A I — I didn’t make it myself. I had somebody else make it.

Q Go ahead. Tell us who, how did you do it, why did you do it?

A So, I had a person in Mexico City make the ID and they made it and I got it…. It was a Mexican ID.

***

Q From — like a national Mexican identification card?

A Yes.

***

Q Okay. And whose idea was it to make Cami a fake ID so that she could leave the United States?

A Could I clarify that? It wasn’t to leave the United States.

Q What was it for?

A It was so she could travel by plane within Mexico.

Q Okay. And whose idea was it to make this fake Mexican national identification card for your sister?

A It was mine.

Q And did you speak with anybody before you decided to have this fake identification card made?

A Yes.

Q Who’s that?

A I spoke to a lawyer.

Q A Mexican lawyer or an American Lawyer?

A A Mexican lawyer.

Q Based where?

A Out of Mexico.

Q And who suggested the idea of the fake ID card, you or the lawyer?

A I think it was my idea.

Q And you told the lawyer you were going to make a fake Mexican national identification card for your sister?

A I think so, yes.

Q And the lawyer was okay with that?

A: I mean, I suppose.

Q But you told the lawyer?

A He was aware.

Q Was he aware of it because you told him?

A Yes.

Q What’s Tepito?

A It’s an area within Mexico City.

Q And does the area Tepito have any relevance in you creating this fake identification card?

A I don’t know. I think that’s where the person who made it was at, but I am not sure.

Q And who made it?

A I don’t know.

Q Who did you speak to in order to get it made?

A I didn’t speak to anybody directly.

Q How did you go about doing it?

A It was, as I remember -…  my mom who spoke to someone.

Q Did you tell the Government that you had made a fake Mexican national identification card for Cami to be able to fly in Mexico?

A I think I did.

Q Yeah? When do you think you told them?

A I don’t remember exactly. I think it was — I don’t remember exactly.

***

From there, Agnifilo jumped right into the next topic of him accusing Dani of being a thief.

Stayed tuned for Part 2 of Dani’s cross-examination as Agnifilo cleverly tries to impeach and discredit Dani and at times attempts to portray her as a criminal – as opposed to his own client, the defendant, Keith Alan Raniere.

 

About the author

Frank Parlato

Frank Report’s founder and lead writer Frank Parlato is one of the internet’s most decorated investigative journalists. His writing and investigations have helped expose major criminal organizations and scandals.

Frank’s work has been cited in major publications all over the world, including The New York Times, New York Post, The Daily Mail, VICE News, CNN, Rolling Stone, and more.

He is also the publisher and editor-in-chief of Artvoice, The Niagara Falls Reporter, Front Page and the South Buffalo News.

15 Comments

Click here to post a comment

Leave a Reply to niceguy Cancel reply

  • Dani did commit multiple crimes. She’s not entirely innocent. But she is doing the right thing by being upfront about it during cross examination; that way it does not impeach her direct testimony. She comes across as honorable and believable. It would mess up the prosecution’s case if she tried to cover up or if she was evasive. And she’s good at using the old lawyerly “I don’t remember”, “I don’t think so”, so if she is caught out in a mis-statement of fact (i.e., a lie) it can be chalked up to memory lapse.

    She’s good. She’s an excellent witness for the prosecution; I don’t know if she was well coached or if she’s just clever, but she’s not going to give the defense anything to work with. Not that they have anything much to work with, Raniere has already been conclusively proven guilty IMO.

    • It wouldn’t matter, the witness is probably under immunity… She does sound believable but Agnifillo (despite my disgust for him) is not doing bad…
      He seems to push on the part she doesn’t remember…

      Also, the testimony isn’t that good for this whole case in reality as except the fact they can clearly pinpoint if the underaged pictures were taken before or after the victim was 16, Nothing Dani said is more damning than what Lauren already said.

      If anything, she opens a little door for defense.

      Luckily, the door is locked by Lauren testimony (i didn’t think I would say that one thing she (Lauren) did was good).

      The only thing this testimony is: heartbreaking…
      A whole family destroyed by a monster

      I hope they’ll be able to fix this mess once the trial is done.

      • Dani was brought into this cult as an underage victim along with her younger sister. She’s used to lay a foundation to the idea that VanWank is a massive ethical charlatan in addition to being the manipulative head of a racketeering and sex trafficking organization for himself.

        If you think Dani doesn’t do anything for the defense, you’re clueless. She’s a fantastic witness for the prosecution. It wouldn’t go through several days of witness testimony otherwise.

        • And that is unfortunately not a crime…She admitted that she wanted to be part of this at first (even if her Reason were noble and in the end , she was lied to).

          Lying (unless in court) isn’t a crime (in the eyes of justice), or else a LOTS of people around here would be in prison…in fact, “here” would exist as even Frank is guilty of that crime sometimes.

          If you think Dani does anything against the defense, you are a dreamer…

          She is awesome, she is courageous but to this case, except the part where she will allow to define the age of her sister for the potentially underaged pictures…

          Once again, just like for lies, being an asshole isn’t a crime (or once again, quite a few people over here would be charged)…

          In terms of crime, it didn’t have much to the plate (as she admits that she stayed “willingly” (more like not ,but it’s a psychological lock)) …now if an expert comes and explains WHY she stayed so long…that would be extremely good for the prosecution.

  • Even if Agnifilo shows Dani lies, Lauren Salzman all ready testified to Dani’s imprisonment and corroborated Dani’s testimony.

    Agnifilo cannot fully discredit Dani.

    Now we all know why the DOJ intelligently did not charge Raniere or the others with kidnapping.

    Nice play Moira.

    • agree about the testimony. But I don’t think it’s coming from Moira (she was messy at first…the whole case changed when Lesko arrived).

      Nevermind who is behind the idea, It’s really a good thing and Lauren’s testimony makes anything he (the monster) or his lawyer day useless…at least on this part of the case.

      But kidnapping?

  • Dani needs to make sure she doesn’t put on her resume that she told the government that she had a fake ID made for her sister. She has a habit of committing crimes and then telling others about it. Raniere probably won’t let her back in NXIVM now, as she’s demonstrated she’s not as bright as others have claimed she is.

    However, her mom should now be in trouble, as well as Cami. If Cami is from Mexico, what’s the need for a fake ID in the first place? Shouldn’t she be able to get a real one? After all, Dani did, but I’m not sure which came first.

    • Paralegal here again: As a cooperating witness, she would have HAD to have told the government about that. If anything, this shows that she really is incredibly intelligent – there is absolutely no upside to lying now about the facts to the government, only downside. As she explained in her testimony, the fake ID was to be able to travel by plane within Mexico.

About Frank Parlato

About Frank Parlato

Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist.

His work has been cited in major publications all over the world, including The New York Times, The Daily Mail, VICE News, CNN, Fox News, Rolling Stone, People Magazine, and more.

Frank Report is dedicated to Frank's investigative journalism and the pursuit of truth.

Read more about Frank Report's mission.

Got A Tip?

If you have a tip for Frank Report, send it here.
Email: frankparlato@gmail.com
Phone / Text: (716) 990-5740

Archives

Loading cart ⌛️ ...
%d bloggers like this: