This is Part 14 of our series on Lauren Salzman, based primarily on her testimony in the trial of Keith Alan Raniere.
Lauren is an interesting case study for there is a debate on whether she is more of a victim or more of a perpetrator.
Most everyone says she is both but the debate is over where to draw the line.
Part 1: How Lauren Salzman Described Her Branding Session
Part 3: Lauren Salzman Describes Collateral She Got From Her Slaves, After Lying to Them About DOS
Part 5 Lauren Salzman and Her Slaves Got Bare-Ass Paddling
Part 6: Lauren Salzman Manages Her Slaves – With Cruelty and Insanity
Part 8: More Insanity: Lauren Salzman Touches Man at Volleyball; Keith Says ‘No Avatar Baby’
Part 9 Lauren Salzman Sent to Mind-F–k Gay Woman Who Did Not Want Keith as a Sperm Donor
Part 11 Lauren Salzman Explains Raniere’s Creepy Readiness Drills
Part 12 How Lauren Salzman Was Cheated Out of Motherhood by Keith Raniere and DOS
Part 13 Lauren Salzman Names Inner Circle and Keith’s Relationships With Them
Assistant Us Attorney Tanja Hajjar is examining Lauren Salzman. It is May 20, 2019.
In this post, Lauren talks about her brand, a proposed tattoo Keith wanted on top of the brands and the kind of photographs Keith wanted from the first line DOS women.
Q Was one requirement of DOS to get a brand?
A Yes.
Q Did you get branded?
A I did.
Q What was the brand of?
A Keith’s initials.
Q Did you know that at the time?
A I did, yes.
Q And what about the slaves under you, did they know?
A No. We were not allowed to tell them.
Q At any point, did you or the other first-line DOS masters express concern about the fact that the brand was of the defendant’s initials?
A Yes, I did and others did as well. Keith said that it shouldn’t matter. It wouldn’t make a difference that it doesn’t — that nobody would know, and that we were being like just making problems or focusing on being negative, you know, about things that weren’t really an issue. He didn’t want to change it. He wanted it to be this way, and insisted, it would not be a problem, even though a number of us did think it was a concern.
Q At some point, were you told about an additional tattoo that would be made to the brand?
A I was, yes.
Q Can you explain that?
A My understanding was that the tattoo was to be — so the brand is a scar. The — and that the tattoo would go over the scar so it would be — the initials would be retattooed over the scar, but then there would be additional parts of the tattoo. Like Keith had an idea that he wanted to have some kind of a nicer — pretty design, but that it would have in it a special symbol of the lineage. So everybody who was under me in line, each of the eight DOS masters were considered a lineage. So each one would have their own unique special symbol that everybody in that line would have. There would be a special symbol, I think between the master and slave. So the girls that I enrolled would have a special symbol that they shared just with me. And then each of them would have a special symbol that they shared just with the girls that they enrolled. Our number of enrollment was part of that and there may have been other things that I can’t recall possibly having to do with what area you were from or something. But I’m not a hundred percent sure about that.
Q Did you, in fact, get a tattoo over your brand?
A No.
Q Why not?
A Because Keith never decided on the design.
Q You testified, Ms. Salzman, about meetings that you had with the first-line masters in DOS?
A Yes.
Q Where were those meetings held?
A Initially, they were held at — at different people’s homes. Usually, the homes that were least likely to have people notice that we were having meetings there and where we could take our naked pictures and nobody would know that we were doing that. But then later, we bought a home. Rosa Laura bought it, that was the sorority house. It was on 9 Milltowne Drive in Halfmoon, and that was where we had all our meetings after that.
***
Q You mentioned naked photographs you were required to take at DOS meetings?
A Yes.
Q Did the defendant impose requirements about what the photographs should look like?
A Yes. Well, generally, I mean, we were supposed to be uniform, so like all looking the same. So one time, like, Daniella had a baseball cap and we got feedback that either we all had to wear hats or nobody had to wear hats. Nobody should wear hats. So we were to be uniform, fully frontally naked, the brand should show, and we should appear happy in the pictures. Like if we weren’t happy, we got feedback that we weren’t happy and we needed to retake the picture.
Q When you got feedback, who gave you the feedback?
A Keith.
Q Were the photographs sent to the defendant?
A Yes.
Q Who sent the photographs to the defendant?
A Whoever took the pictures, I mean.
Q Did he respond?
A Sometimes. Not always.
Q When the defendant gave feedback on the photographs, would you sometimes have to retake the photographs?
A Yes. Whenever there was feedback given on the photographs, we incorporated the feedback and retook the picture with the feedback incorporated.
Q What does that mean, when you incorporated the feedback?
A We made a change that was suggested. If we didn’t look happy, we did a picture that was happier. If our legs weren’t spread enough, we had to spread our legs more. Whatever the feedback was, we did it.
Q Did the defendant request explicit sexual photographs from you and the other first-line DOS masters?
A Yes.
Q How often?
A Sometimes — I mean, from time to time, but it was enough that everyone knew that he preferred those types of pictures. And so generally our focus — a lot – generally we would tend to just take that picture at the onset like because it was viewed as preferable to him that we took a picture with our legs spread or up close vaginal pictures, that he liked that better and everybody in the group knew it enough that we would focus the pictures on that.
Q Did the defendant ever give you or the other first-line DOS masters feedback with regard to the grooming of pubic hair?
A Yes. He wanted to know — he looked at a picture specifically of my vagina and said — wanted to know why it looked groomed.
Q Were you aware based on your prior sexual relationship with the defendant of his preference in that regard?
A Yes.
Q How did you feel about the photographs?
A I had mixed feelings about the photographs. I mean, for me it was very uncomfortable. Like the elephant in the room for me was that he was having sex with a lot of these people and he wasn’t having sex with me anymore, and so I felt very insecure about that, and I would have to, like, consistently set that aside to be able to do what was being done. And I would tell myself that it wasn’t sexual because it was Keith’s, and the reason that we were doing this was just so that we would learn to become comfortable with our bodies and that, you know. It was just about vulnerability. But I knew he liked certain things, and he was asking for those things and he was asking for those things from people he was having sexual relationships with, and as he had –and when he had taken pictures of me when we were having a sexual relationship. So it was hard to keep that part of it out of it.
But I wanted to believe that that wasn’t part of it. And then at the same time, I went — some of my best friends in my whole life, and we’re, you know, taking naked pictures three times a week, eventually you get very comfortable with everybody, you know, and I tried to make jokes or make it fun or try to think of like fun themes that we could do, like, to take the pictures which made it easier for me to do it and to feel okay doing it. And it made it more comfortable between all of us. But it was really difficult, and I didn’t want to be doing it.
Q What was the effect on you of the requirement to look happy in the photographs?
A Well, it was just fortified that we should always — like if we weren’t happy with some of the things that we were doing — and this was true of anything, it wasn’t just this. That it was — that we had some issue and it was indicative of our issue, that we could choose to be joyful at any moment. And if we didn’t have — if we weren’t choosing issues as the highest priority, then we would just be joyful with anything that we were doing.
So the photographs specifically for the reasons I just described were especially difficult. So then I was there pretending that I was happy taking sexual pictures with the people he was preferring to have sex with instead of me, and that — it was — sometimes it was very difficult. Like I tried to make it fun, and sometimes it was fun and I could have fun doing it. But a lot of times, it was just very painful and hard to put on a happy face for that.
***
Yes, they had to put on a happy face. And here is Lauren – self-flagellating Lauren. Keith is having sex with the other DOS women – all of them but her. And she sticks with him. Loves him. She does not mind the naked pictures or spreading her legs. She minds that he is having sex with seven of the eight women she has to pose with three times a week and not with her.
Poor demented Lauren.
Frank Parlato 
Janine Morrison 
J.J. O'Hara 
Richard Luthmann 
Marie White 
Paul Serran
Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
[…] […]
“Q Did you, in fact, get a tattoo over your brand?
A No.
Q Why not?
A Because Keith never decided on the design.”
Unasked Q’s for Lauren:
Q WHO designed the tatoo’s Keith never decided on?
Q Was that the same artist who designed the brand?
Q Are you aware that Tatoo ink can enter the bloodstream and can cross the blood brain barrier?
Q Were DOS slaves permitted to get other tattoos?
Q Isn’t it true that your sister, Michelle, designed the brand and the mock-ups for the tatoo’s?
Q Was there ever any discussion about potential risks such as blood poisoning with regards to the tattooing?
Q Was your mother, Nancy, ever at all aware of the branding or proposed tattoo designs?
Q Who performed your oversized branding? When was that?
Q Was that Tattoo artist a member of NXIVM?
Q Did that branding / Tatoo artist know Gina Hutchinson?
Q WHO designed the tatoo’s Keith never decided on? There was probably a competition. By the way, the word is “tattoo,” and the plural is “tattoos,” not “tatoo’s.”
Q Was that the same artist who designed the brand? Raniere probably designed the brand, so probably not.
Q Are you aware that Tatoo ink can enter the bloodstream and can cross the blood brain barrier? So what? People get tattoos all the time with no apparent brain damage.
Q Were DOS slaves permitted to get other tattoos? Who cares?
Q Isn’t it true that your sister, Michelle, designed the brand and the mock-ups for the tatoo’s? I doubt it, she wasn’t in DOS.
Q Was there ever any discussion about potential risks such as blood poisoning with regards to the tattooing? Probably not, tattoos are very common these days.
Q Was your mother, Nancy, ever at all aware of the branding or proposed tattoo designs? I doubt it, she wasn’t in DOS, either.
Q Who performed your oversized branding? When was that? Probably Dr. Roberts, she was well practiced by then. Probably 2017, why?
Q Was that Tattoo artist a member of NXIVM? Probably not, that is a very specialized skill. If Raniere didn’t make a decision, they probably never picked the tattoo artist, either.
Q Did that branding / Tatoo artist know Gina Hutchinson? Of course the artist knew Gina, and probably knows Flowers as well. It’s always about you and Flowers, isn’t it, Hutchinson? LOL
I seriously cannot how stupid these women are. Okay, maybe that’s harsh, as I myself was totally naive until life kicked me hard in the ass in my late 20s, but really, these women have absolutely no self respect. They literally gave away all their power to a complete slime ball not worthy to lick the shit off their shoes. And I’m not talking about the ones who didn’t know the whole story about Raniere. These first line DOS women really, really hate themselves.
“until life kicked me hard in the ass in my late 20s, ” Anonymous
Some of these women are about to get a long overdue kick in the ass.
The harder the better.
Raniere and the NXIVM teachings taught them there are no victims and anything that sounds “negative” is merely a defect that they have, and they must work to fix it. That’s the whole mentality that is slow-boiled into their skulls.
I find the line between victim and perp to be very easy to draw. It’s the same line as everybody else who commits crimes. They are [theoretically] charged for crimes committed, regardless of other good or bad things they did in their lives. Only during sentencing are the good or bad things considered to determine the punishment.
Interesting that lack of sex with Raniere resulted in Salzman having the most DOS recruits.
I guess Stormy is the only one who supposedly tattooed over her scar, but then she has an occupation need to do that.
The tattoo was a brilliant idea to know who each slave’s upline master was. I recall my Amway upline Platinum scam artist, Dr. Jim LaRose, getting confused over who was above/below each other with someone in my downline. I don’t know if he was genuinely confused or just trying to make me feel uncomfortable about my lack of recruiting others. I never asked, because that would have been considered a “negative” and “de-edifying” question. Sound familiar?
Mic drop on the Lauren expose. Horrible to read, and no comment necessary. I really hope Lauren has awakened from her 20 year trance.
The time for hoping is long gone. All of the NXIVM 6 should be locked up for the maximum time possible to allow them time to “awaken” and protect society from them.
I’m having a hard time with the implication that Lauren never whined about her predicament to her own mother — Nancy Salzman, who ostensibly owned the NX-U.S. corporation — or to her sister, the talented Michelle Salzman, whose sketchings feature emaciated, forlorn females with a curious blacked-out space right where the brands were located on the live model.
In fact, some of Michelle’s slave sketchings are complete with a jeweled belly chain — such as India Oxenberg borrowed loose diamonds from her mother to craft — some with a thought bubble reiterating a phrase I first heard from Kristin Keeffe circa 1989 explaining why Gina should not be upset Keith Raniere was having sex with not only Kristin but all her friends and join the harem: “Gina doesn’t own Keith’s penis.”
(And, btw, I quoted Keeffe on that to Jim O’dato of the Albany Times Union in 2010 long before I knew of Michelle or her etchings.)
I believe based on the facts that Lauren is lying to protect not only her family but her own inheritance stashed with her unindicted family members — including her outlaw hacker brother in-law, Ben Myers.
In a similar fashion, while Clare Bronfman may be “taking the fall” — more like a toe-stub — for her family — sister Sara continues to be enriched by her NXIVM experience.
But let’s all just ignore the facts and blame the sexy, almost-Hollywood tabloid headline makers like Allison Mack and Kristin Kreuk — who are hated anyway bc they’re beautiful.
Heidi:
Key sentence:
“I’m having a hard time with the implication that Lauren never whined about her predicament to her own mother”.
My opinion is, and has been, that they suffered from symptoms similar to Battered Women’s Syndrome, and didn’t know they were in a predicament.
Mr. KAR, a/k/a Vanguard, who could actually change weather and jam radar, and is the smartest man in the world, is a sociopath that rewired victim’s brains to his demented benefit and to their complete detriment.
If he was not behind bars, his destruction of people would have kept going.
My humble opinion.
Appreciate your opinion, Fool Me Not, and while it may well be the case that many NX victims do suffer with “Battered Women’s Syndrome” the facts prove it was Nancy Salzman (if not Lauren, as well) who was doing most of the “battering.”
Nancy was over 40 years old when she partnered with Keith and at first proclaimed him to be “delusional.” (Something I learned of first from my sister, Gina.).
Nancy was supposedly helping Toni Natalie with her battered woman boyfriend issues with Keith, initially. Nancy was a successful, trained “therapist” — a “hypnotherapist” — someone who by then must have known how to spot and avoid a “batterer.”
Nancy was not “in love” with Keith at all IMO — she saw a business opportunity taking advantage of women possibly prone to being battered or, at least, subjugated and seized it.
In my books, Nancy is more guilty than Keith who, indeed, is and always was mentally ill.
I don’t disagree at all. But I don’t have enough information to make an informed opinion.
Why DID a trained therapist fall for this? Did she ever try to stop it?
Who created the bowing BS and pomp and circumstance?
The culture in NXIVM from Day 1 and every day thereafter was there are no victims, and any “negative” feeling is something that is YOUR problem and not a real problem. Similar to Scientology, Amway, and other MLM scams. In fact, the Amway Rules Supervisor testified in court during one of my hearings that I was saying “negative” things, using the same word the upline used. Never mind what I was, and still am, saying was factual.
“I’m having a hard time with the implication that Lauren never whined about her predicament to her own mother — Nancy Salzman,” Heidi Hutchinson
Would Nancy Salzman have given a damn?
If you read the stories about Kristin Snyder’s strange disappearance from a meeting in Anchorage, it appears that Nancy Salzman did not give a damn about the woman’s apparent death.
Nancy Salzman was a woman who laundered dirty money from Mexico.
Nancy Salzman was a woman who hacked Rick Ross’s computer.
It is probable that Lauren Pimp Salzman participated in many of Nancy Salzman’s crimes.
“But let’s all just ignore the facts and blame the sexy, almost-Hollywood tabloid headline makers like Allison Mack and Kristin Kreuk — who are hated anyway bc they’re beautiful.” Heidi Hutchinson
No, Heidi they (Mack and Kreuk) are hated because they are evil.
They are hated because they hurt, abused and enslaved women.
Only Kreuk was smart enough to leave her involvement in NXIVM before the stuff hit the fan.
Heidi, who was the greatest film maker in Nazi Germany?
Leni Riefenstahl, an ardent Nazi and an actress and filmmaker to boot.
Riefenstahl was very attractive but she was evil down to her bones.
Heidi, you must learn to look deeper, below the skin to see the true evil underneath.
Picture of Leni Riefenstahl with her Vanguard, Adolf Hitler:
Miss Heidi: You should heed Shadowstate’s advice and learn to look beneath the skin, to see the true evil.
Much the way that we must look beyond the Shadow fantasy, that he is somehow involved in the takedown of Raniere and NXIVM, to the reality of the situation, which is that for years Shadow stalked Allison Mack, and that Shadow’s arrival at the Frank Report coincided with Frank Report’s increased scrutiny of Allison Mack
As to Reifenstahl, she was Hitler’s preferred documentarian. Did that make her great? Better than the much more versatile and prolific Carl Froelich? Not to mention the fact that any number of great film makers in Nazi Germany may have been arrested, incarcerated and eventually executed in concentration camps.
A word to Niceguy and other Shadow defenders and apologists. Shadow is my pinata, and I will continue to whack away at him, hoping to either dislodge the truth about his past (pre Frank Report) involvement with Allison Mack, or at the very least, dislodging his foot from his mouth.
Yeah, I’m sure Lauren whined to her mom Nancy about Keith and her own predicament. Makes sense. Clearly though, it seems Michelle was far more talented artistically because she could draw very well from a photo or from a live model.
To me, Allison is a case in point for parents to be wary when it comes to considering whether their young children should seriously and prolifically engage in acting. A child needs to grow up and develop a stronger of sense of self before they’re tasked to start playing many different personalities and characters.
“A child needs to grow up and develop a stronger sense of self before they’re tasked to start playing many different personalities and characters.” Intriguing. Actors have always been very suspicious to the establishment. That is why they were never given a proper burial during the middle ages and were always buried against a wall. As Norman Mailer wrote, human psychology is strange enough but that of a thespian may be too difficult to fathom. But is that a bad thing? Why do we worship actors and actresses so much? Because they show glamor, a word akin to grimoire, witchery . . .
Wow! That’s crazy from every angle. How messed up it must have been for Lauren. She can’t turn to her own mother and her sister was also compromised by this organization.
One would think that after going through all of this, why would she not try to reestablish a relationship with her father (assuming he is still alive) rather than continuing to hang out with her mother? Does she have any other relatives that weren’t part of this syndicate? If so, she needs to try to connect with them.
That judge was right, Lauren is broken. Hopefully, prison may give her some distance and clarity on this whole thing.
Jarhead, did you miss the pics of Lauren and Nancy Salzman in line at Starbucks enroute to grandma’s house for a family T-day feast?
There is no love (or apparently money — Lauren’s cell service is still on and IDK what they were driving but it wasn’t a bicycle built for two) lost, no rift in the Salzman family.
You’re reading the testimony correctly and it’s having the desired effect on you — and it’s all a pack of lies. …How can intelligent people be duped, you ask?
Heidi – Just so I’m clear – Are you saying Lauren isn’t being truthful in her testimony? Is the testimony the pack of lies? Or is it lies by omission?
Either way, I guess I’m one of the duped. To me, she just blabbed away about the lunacy of her life.
My thought is that her moral compass is so messed up. She did all those things and admitted to doing so, and now she’ll have to pay the consequences. But my comment wasn’t meant to deflect responsibility away from her, Heidi. I’m saying that she must still be harboring these deviant ideas because she’s still associating with her mother.
Thanks for the clarification, Jarhead, and I apologize if I appear defensive about this but, to answer Nutjob’s comment, I KNOW Lauren is lying by omission and bc of some factual contradictions.
I want the whole truth and nothing but JUSTICE FOR GINA and LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL — equally apportioned according to their actual crimes, not their excuses, trickery and alibis.
Ms. Heidi,
All of this “Keith was a compartmentalizing genius” bs is just ridiculous, so I am with you on calling out the lies insofar as the Queen of EMs, Dear Prefect *had no clue*.
I mean, ok! Like what? Nan was on painkillers watching the Real Housewives?? “Oh, you gals bought another house? Dear lord, what are you scamps up to?” Yeah. That is how the organization worked.
Right. Nan is just a doddering old lady drinking tea at Uncommon Grounds.
Disturbing testimony. I had trouble reading it as well. What kind of man could treat women that way?
The same kind of man as the women who would treat each other that way.
Why wouldn’t Nancy Salzman have known that Lauren was amongst the first who were branded? These two saw each other, interacted, worked and lived in the same world. They were still mother and daughter, too. Just because Nancy was too advanced in age for Raniere to want in the DOS way doesn’t mean that Nancy was oblivious to what her daughters were doing. It’s probable that both Salzmans facing sentencing have a lot to hide. The Salzmans were all wrapped up tight in Raniere World for years before DOS became another step.
It makes more sense that Nancy knew what both of her daughters were doing. Crown Princess Michelle was engaged in design work, you see. Cinderella Scuttlebutt Lauren could go get a gun to her head in Puerto Vallarta any old time, was possibly a chronic spinster already.
Nancy was getting $45,000 for her hearly wardrobe. The poor galumph could have had $250,000 a year for wardrobe if she’d been new-age enough for Californialand. Nancy settled for peanuts for bartering off two daughters. Nancy seems to have thought that she was some kind of a d-list televangelist with a bordello out back.
Everybody clutching their pearls were involved already, everyone was getting screwed by Raniere and knew everybody else was screwing him, too. Nancy was already his pimpmama. Raniere’s worker bees knew that potential recruits who had money or fame had to have special servicing. Some knew that Raniere was a pedo.
Jness was hunting for adolescents. Allison Mack had a couple of weird boyfriends before she became Keith’s nouvelle Gloria Swanson. It’s not like she hadn’t seen Hollyweird, and Mack didn’t step into Nxivm like it was some pitchblack cave and she was wearing sunglasses.
There were a lot of hardassed, seasoned women working for Raniere and for their own economic “well-being.” Not everyone working with Raniere was naive. Some were just pathetically bloody needy. He had fellow mercenaries with various colored sashes. How many of the sashed men and women can pretend not to have known that they were working for a criminal enterprise?
Long before DOS, things were dark and getting progressively more in the dark. Nancy and Lauren still hang out today. People all over the world saw the two of them photographed in a Starbucks line. It was like suddenly seeing a couple of Charlie Manson hags, two gas pumps away, except this is now.
So who is wearing big pants to manage the ankle-monitor fashion emergencies? When do they get dates for their sentencing proms? Are either Nancy or Lauren schtupping new guys now that Raniere is out of commission? Can Lauren get PREGNANT pre-sentencing? Some gentlemen might even pay more to enjoy someone who has to plug into a wall outlet, according to literature.
Now Raniere is back to limbo until he hears a new sentencing date. How are his attorneys being paid, or does Raniere need to get different representation after he’s sentenced? Is it trying us that he was heard making rumblings about soon not being able to afford his “funded” lawyers? What does he think about Nancy and Lauren being so mad at him? What would be his current state of affairs with Clare and Sara Bronfman?
Raniere has got to be be one of the oldest in his current detention center. How is he being housed, right now? Has he been in special housing the whole time that he’s been incarcerated, because that’s a long time. He cannot have begun to adapt to what’s coming for him, if and when he gets moved.
Thanks for the post, although I couldn’t even read most of it because it was so gross. Reading these dumb dumbs, it is hard to feel much empathy for adults who willingly compromise their freedoms and integrity. Giving someone compromising material of yourself is indicative of a very immature person. Lack of intelligence being the leitmotif of most DOS behavior, these people stopped growing intellectually after Jr. high school.
Fuckthis, the scary thing is that these were not unintelligent women. That was obvious from the testimony of the DOS slaves. Even an intelligent person can be subject to indoctrination in a moment of vulnerability or trauma.
We all have to guard against Groupthink, especially the most intelligent among us.
I agree with you, Dianne. Most of these women are intelligent and I had hoped when they said the words, out loud, in court they would realize just how crazy it sounds but Lauren kept falling into using the language she was taught while in NXIVM. It’s chilling.
Diane,
Mark Vincete is an intelligent and successful man. He is an excellent example that “group think”, can affect anyone.
It’s not the intelligence level, it’s screening out those who don’t pass the slow boil test.