This is part 2 of Allison Mack’s role in the sex trafficking of Nicole. But realy it is much more than that.
[See part 1 Allison Mack’s True Role in the Sex Trafficking of Nicole [Part 1]]
There are some – and I think it is worthy of debate – who believe Nicole was not sex trafficked in the true sense of the crime – as it was intended by Congress.
Victims of sex trafficking usually are people who are forced to have sex with – usually multiple people – for commerce – under threat of serious harm.
This is a precedent setting case, I think, for Nicole – the only proven victim of sex trafficking in the Raniere case – experienced only limited sexual encounters – with only one man – for no discernible financial gain.
It was, all told, limited in number; she had perhaps a dozen or so encounters with Raniere – and at the time she told Raniere she was OK with the experiences.
There is of course the curious condition that she had given blackmail worthy material to Allison Mack which, Nicole testified, put her in a position where she could not say “no” to having sex with Keith.
The jury, which had heard six weeks of the most disgusting testimony about Raniere, had undoubtedly come to hate this fucker by the time they rendered their verdict of guilty of sex trafficking Nicole and six other felonies.
Had they any sympathy – had the other crimes not been so abundantly proved – and had he not been proven to be a coward and a rat bastard – one of the most vile and selfish men imaginable – it is not clear that the sex trafficking offense – the most serious crime he was charged with – and the only one with a mandatory minimum [15 years] – would have stuck.
I have my doubts.
It is certainly worth studying – for it I suspect has lowered the threshold for sex trafficking.
A woman – 30 plus years old – joins a group and voluntarily gives blackmail material to join – and agrees to obey the queer set up of “master and slave” – her being a slave. Done, it is said, to help her become a better person.
In time, she is ordered – as part of her training – to do whatever a man named Keith Raniere requires.
Yes, she is lied to about his being the leader of the secret group in the beginning. But she voluntarily handed over blackmail material and obeyed Allison’s and Raniere’s commands at the time – even the sex -related commands – without saying no.
She even said she was Ok at the time.
Had it not been a Raniere, a despicable dirt bag – and monster – had this happened with a more sympathetic character – and had Nicole been less sympathetic – lees of a victim – had she been judged as strong – as an adult making adult decisions – and having the maturity and strength to withhold consent – this might have not been sex trafficking – but rather written off as a stupid girl and a sexually deviant rascal – with a strange woman in the middle [Allison Mack] kind of coaching and coaxing this along.
It might have been extortion [a lower crime]. It might have been blackmail [a lower crime]. It might have even been forced labor [a lower crime] But was it sex trafficking?
Of course, I was pleased with the conviction. I wanted to get Raniere and have him enjoy the maximum time in prison – for all the other crimes he committed and was not charged for doing – and I am the one who first suggested Nicole go to the FBI because I thought crimes had been committed against her.
I am not sure I thought then it was sex trafficking – but that was not mine, but the jury’s decision.
Indeed they might have in this case done a reverse jury nullification. Nicole might not have been really sex trafficked – not as Congress intended the law – but because he was such a deviant – they hung him with the crime that he may not have technically committed.
I am not a legal expert – but I think it is worth discussing. I am saying that the circumstances that led to Raniere’s conviction for sex trafficking should be studied simply because they are not anything like a typical sex trafficking offense.
This may be precedent or it may even be overturned on appeal. [I doubt the other charges will be overturned – and perhaps this won’t either.]
The facts are unique and perhaps so bizarre that it could never happen again. But it should be studied.
And we should study the woman in the middle – Allison Mack – who was also charged with sex trafficking – and later got a plea deal for racketeering and racketeering conspiracy – to judge her role. The feds alleged she committed sex trafficking – even if they let her wiggle out of it. Did she also commit sex trafficking?
Since she will be sentenced – in early 2020, and the judge has huge discretion on her sentencing, readers I think are interested in her fate – and her culpability.
In Part #1 we examined how Nicole was ordered to make email communication with Raniere and how he responded with some word salad and/or disturbing enslavement concepts such as “true freedom is not being able to do what one likes” and “true love is pain.”
In Part # 2, we will examine how Nicole was ordered to take late night walks with Raniere. We will look at her first few walks – and how she was being set up to obey Raniere.
We will in Part #2, stop short of the actual sex trafficking incident – where she is blindfolded, and tied, naked on a table.
For now we go from word salad to walks – in the gradual progression of Nicole’s unhappy and evidently illegal experiences with Raniere and Mack.
The following is testimony from the trial of Keith Alan Raniere.
It is June 7- 2019. Nicole is on the witness stand.
Assistant US Attorney Moira Kim Penza is examining her.
Nicole is in her early 30s. She is brunette, slender – pretty – by most people’s standards. And sympathetic – especially when compared to the ugly beast sitting in same courtroom listening attentively – sometimes passing on post-t notes to his attorneys.
Penza is asking Nicole about the time period of April -May 2016.
***
Q During that time period, what are your feelings about DOS?
A Confusing. It was stressful and scary to constantly be facing this commitment that there was no out of. It felt really scary, but also, like, Allison was still being nice a lot of the time and she was helping me with some career stuff, so it was a little bit confusing.
***
Nicole testifies that Allison set up an interview for Nicole with an agency which had offices in New York City and Los Angeles — to represent her for doing commercials, theater, film. Allison also set up Nicole’s first off-Broadway audition, which she said “went really well.”
Nicole testified “She really was like helping me, these were actual steps towards my career that would have been helpful. So I was sort of like in this kind of pull of being “this is scaring the daylights out of me, like what’s happening,” but she is also helping me with my career. So I was just confused … not sure how to feel about [DOS].
Q During April and May of 2016… were you spending … time in Clifton Park, New York? {where Raniere and Mack lived].
A Yes.
Nicole testified she lived in New York City during the wekk and worked full time at a nightclub, from 9:30 at night until 5:00 in the morning. Then on Sunday she would take the bus to Albany, and since Monday was her day off she stay Monday night in Albany and take the bus back Tuesday in order to go to work Tuesday night.
Q …. [Why] did you decide to go up to Clifton Park?
A Allison told me to.
Q …. how did you take it when she told you to come up to Clifton Park?
A …. the first time, [it was] fine, but then it was — I was so exhausted. And I was moving at the same time, like moving apartments, so I fought back on it a little bit because … I … couldn’t do everything…. I was so exhausted.
Q And did you tell her that? Did you push back to Allison?
A Yeah, I tried to.
Q And how did she react?
A She said it was very important for me to be up there and … show her commitment… at least like once a week for the beginning — … she said it was very important and … this is what I committed to [in DOS], I needed to make that a priority.
Nicole testified that she took the train from Grand Central to Albany – costing her $42 one way, [and the bus was $20.] She would try to take the train because she could sleep on the train {Nicole was sleep deprived]. She paid for it herself she testified.
Q At that point in time, was that amount of money something that concerned you?
A Yeah, I was working really hard to support myself in the [New York] City.
Q …. when you would get to Clifton Park, where would you stay?
A I would stay at Allison’s house.
Q Did you have a bed there?
A No.
Q Where would you sleep?
A In Allison’s bed.
Q What was it like staying with Allison?
A …. she had a nice little house, so that was nice. But it was very stressful, especially in the beginning because I would go up there and I wouldn’t really know what to expect. …. you don’t really feel that comfortable because you’re not in your space….
Q At some point, while you were staying with Allison, did the defendant [Raniere] walk by the house?
A Yes.
***
Q So what happened on that occasion?
A I was waiting for Allison to get home, and I was just at the house by myself, and I saw Keith walk by and I thought, “oh, like that’s the person I’ve been e-mailing back and forth with, like I should go say hi.” And, so, I went outside and I said “hi.”
Q And what happened when you said “hi”?
A He like said “hi” and finished talking to the person that he was talking to and asked me if I wanted to go on a walk.
Q And did you go on a walk with him?
A Yeah….
Q … did you attach any particular significance to going on a walk with the defendant?
A I had heard people [say] … he helped people work through things [on walks] — and people waited around awhile to go on these walks….
Q Did the defendant say anything to you about why he was going on a walk with you?
A Yeah, he said …. because we had been going back and forth on e-mail, that I had earned a walk.
Q What else happened on that walk?
A …. he asked me some questions,… I remember him asking how much I knew about him, which was not a lot, or knew about his lifestyle, which was not a lot.
Q Did he tell you any details about his lifestyle?
A Just that he had a partner, Pam [Cafritz], but that he wasn’t married and that he… had more than one partner.
Q Do you remember any other details…?
A Not really, except just thinking, like, I wasn’t really sure why I needed to know that information, but aside from that, no.
Q … did something happen that ended the walk?
A Yeah. …. we were walking… and it started to rain, and he asked me if I … knew how to get back to Allison’s house from where we were…. and I said yes, I thought I did. And he said — and I think he was commenting to the rain – or maybe how we had met – I don’t know what it was to, but he said, “isn’t this funny that this is our first date?”
Q Did you say anything in response?
A I just remember, like, not quite being able to wrap my head around it, because I thought “what? Like, what?”
Q Did he say something else?
A Well, he asked me if I was okay because I obviously looked kind of shell shocked, I imagine, because I was … trying to wrap my head around it; like, what did he just say and what does that even mean? And so when he asked me if I was okay, I said “yeah, I’m just feeling overwhelmed. I’m okay, though, I’m just feeling overwhelmed.” And he said “bye” and I ran back to Allison’s house.
Q Did the defendant say anything about when he would contact you again?
A Yeah, I think, like, in that same sentence he, like, asked me if … I wanted to go on another walk. I think I just said yes. I don’t remember.
Q So, on that run back, how are you feeling?
A Scared, and, again, still trying to, like, kind of — just, like, my body doesn’t feel okay. I wasn’t really thinking. I didn’t know what to think, but I remember that my body really did not feel okay.
Q Were you attracted to the defendant?
A No.
Q Did you have any interest in dating him?
A No. Like, no.
Q … What happened when you got back to Allison’s house?
A There was a Source [Allison’s acting class based on Raniere’s teachings] meeting going on at the time I got back, so I, like, sat there while they finished the meeting on video. And when it was done, she asked me … where I had been and how the walk had gone, and I said that I thought that this had been like a whole plot to get me up here for Keith and — that’s what it felt like. I wasn’t, like, accusing her…. but I was like “this feels like a plot to get me up here for Keith.”
Q And how did Allison respond?
A She said, “oh, sweetie, … I’m so glad that you told me that. That’s not true, but it’s really, really good that you can trust me enough to tell me that. But that’s not true, that’s not what’s happening, but that’s such a good sign that you can trust me enough to tell me that.”
Q At that point, what was the effect of Allison saying that to you?
A I mean, I was already stuck…. I thought I didn’t have a choice, so I wanted to … believe her.
Stay tuned for Part 3 – where Allison sets Nicole up for additional walks and requires her to tell Raniere that she will do anything he tells her to do.]
Frank Parlato 
Janine Morrison 
J.J. O'Hara 
Richard Luthmann 
Marie White 
Paul Serran
Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
Another trafficking case in today’s news that will be interesting to follow: https://www.courthousenews.com/church-leader-arraigned-on-forced-labor-fraud-charges/
[…] Allison Mack Begins to Set up Nicole for ‘Sex Trafficking’ Via a First Walk With Raniere… […]
I don’t think it’s a strech for this to be sex trafficking, even though the details differ from a typical case. I also don’t think this is precedent for other cases, as the facts and circumstances are unique to each case, and future trials are based on the law, not other cases. Of all the potential appeal issues, there are none related to Nicole and especially her testimony. If Raniere’s lawyers thought they could defend him against any of the charges, one would think they would have tried the sex trafficking, the only one with a 15 year mandatory sentence, but they didn’t. Only a few cross examination questions, no defense witnesses or defense at all were even attempted. They knew his goose was cooked.
Read the affidavit. The allegations included free labor, etc. The free work by the slaves was payment in kind.
They got ’em. In my opinion, this will absolutely survive an appeal.
Trafficking is alleged and described here:
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4421505-Complaint-and-affidavit-in-support-of-arrest.html
NXIVM DOS fits the definition of sex trafficking and when combined with the branding together with the collection of blackmail material and the use of physical punishment against disobedient slaves, one has a clear case of sex trafficking against Allison Mack and Keith Raniere.
I’ve also thought that as well. I think the collateral and coercion is what tips the scale, but I agree these women could have just said hell no. This is an extreme example, but Charles Manson told those crazy women to kill people and they did, but they were adults. He’s was a lunatic, but didn’t physically kill those people. Should he have spent life in prison because other adults took his command to kill?
Yes. Manson was a danger to society. He’s dead now, so it’s a moot point.
In the business of sex trafficking experts have a very loose definition of what constitutes “grooming.”
Please permit me to cite some definitions and examples:
“What is grooming and how does it work?
Grooming is a process used by people with a sexual interest in children (or adult women as the case may be) to prepare a child for sexual abuse. It is often very carefully planned and it can take place over weeks, months or even years.”
https://www.thinkuknow.co.uk/parents/articles/what-is-sexual-grooming/
So the whole process of “grooming” can take a long time.
“Here’s what you need to know about grooming.
1. Anyone can be a victim.
No one is immune to grooming, though some are more susceptible than others — including minors, “because of their naiveté,”
https://www.allure.com/story/what-is-sexual-grooming-abuse
2. It often starts with friendship.
Groomers don’t jump right into abuse, which is often sexual; they begin with building a friendship.
3. Perpetrators use favors and promises to build trust.
Initial friendliness typically encourages the victim to let down their guard and think of the perpetrator as a mentor, benefactor, romantic interest, or friend.
5. Grooming can be difficult to distinguish from romance.
The slow process of building trust and establishing secrecy as normal can make it hard for both victims and victims’ acquaintances to recognize grooming for what it is.
https://www.allure.com/story/what-is-sexual-grooming-abuse
“What is grooming?
Grooming is when someone builds a relationship, trust and emotional connection with a child or young person so they can manipulate, exploit and abuse them.
Children and young people who are groomed can be sexually abused, exploited or trafficked.
https://www.nspcc.org.uk/what-is-child-abuse/types-of-abuse/grooming/
From reading the story of Nicole it is very clear that Allison Mack was grooming this young woman for sex with Raniere.
Allison Mack was using her bogus acting school “The Source” to recruit and groom young women for sex with Raniere.
AND SEX TRAFFIKCING DOES NOT NEED THE EXCHANGE OF MONEY.
“Sex trafficking involves some form of forced or coerced sexual exploitation that is not limited to prostitution, and has become a significant and growing problem in both the United States and the larger global community. The costs to society include the degradation of human and women’s rights, ”
” It is important to note that sex trafficking and prostitution are not synonymous and that prostitution is simply one type of work performed by victims of sex trafficking. Sex trafficking is an umbrella term that may include commercial sex work such as prostitution, but also pornography, exotic dancing, stripping, live sex shows, mail-order brides, military prostitution, and sexual tourism. Although victims of sex trafficking can be of any age and of either sex, the majority are women and adolescent girls. Although many nations have outlawed the trafficking of females, ”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3651545/
In other words Raniere does not have to pay any money to either “Nicole” or Allison Mack for there to be sex trafficking.
Allison Mack is a Sex Trafficker and Pimp under current definitions of sex trafficking.
And Allison Mack’s bizarre behavior with the 8 year old girl gymnast in Clifton Park looks like it could be grooming of that girl for eventual sex with Raniere or Mack.
“Transcript of interview with neighbor who claims Allison Mack molested 8 year old girl”
https://frankreport.com/2018/07/03/transcript-from-neighbor-who-claims-allison-mack-molested-8-year-old-girl/
I invite anyone who doubts what I just wrote to contact professionals who deal with sex trafficking or the victims of sex trafficking on a regular basis.
I’m the person who got the Trafficking Act of 2000 passed giving sex trafficking its federal recognition. I started the movement in 1987 because of being a victim of, and witness to, actual sex trafficking during Iran Contra. I provided escape and protection from this when we were the so called “criminals” and had nowhere to run for safety – and as a result – I was framed as the http://www.hightechmadam.com and labeled a felon. Thinking something had to be done, I started http://www.sexworkersanonymous.net. I’ve also answered over 500000 calls on our hotline so I think I’m in the position to point out if this was “sex trafficking” – why wasn’t I called in on the case? Michael Horowitz was the author of the original Act, and I got a reporter to get him on the record to confirm this movement I started, that wouldn’t exist without the work I put into this, has been hijacked by peope who are DESPERATE to take eyes off REAL sex trafficking. Who use celebrities like Catherine Oxenberg, desperate to save her daughter, granted, or Ashton Kutcher, desperate to get funding for THORN, and using very clever methods to “hide in plain sight” what modern sex trafficking DOES look like today so they can continue to operate unhindered. The laws are such now the ONLY way I can break through this media blacklist on my head now would be to run for political office, or get myself arrested again. Jeanne Palfrey, the DC Madam, took a guilty beating in court so she COULD get the truth out. Only she was murdered and lied about before she could. Dennis Hof, believe it or not, ran for office after filing a lawsuit talking about how his free speech was being blocked, and I believe he was murdered before he could mouth off also. You will note with ALL fakes like Samoly Mam, 8 Minutes, William Hilliar, and ALL faked cases, even those that may be good causes, and true victims of something else other than sex trafficking – is my being shut out of the case. George Knapp noted this exclusion with Chris Baughman and the Alisha Grundy case – and to his credit started nosing around. He exposed a HUGE fraud. Thank you for noting yes this is a precedence case – one where in my opinion they’re pushing the morality envelope. These were adult women of sound mind who were not drugged, not threatened in any REAL way, who chose to do what this man asked. By the standards set in this case, I think 1/3 of all relationships could be as guilty of Ranier. People haven’t caught on this case was a HUGE invasion of private bedrooms yet and won’t because 99% of the population won’t bother to read court transcripts to figure out what really went down here. This man was sick – but he was not trafficking these women in the way the law was written. The people behind this agenda do it because how do you call out this is covering up real cases without sounding like a horrible jerk? I know because I’ve gone through this when I tried calling out people like Samoly Mam, Chong Kim, and others. Now I’m that “bitch”. That CORRECT bitch – but no one remembers that. But after the 20th fake I exposed – they switched to these “real” like this one. If I attack Catherine’s daughter, then I’m just a monster. All I can think of to do about it is to model what I see Frank Dux do – so I’m working on my own memoirs.