Clare Bronfman Sentencing Date May Be Pushed Back Again – “Additional Crimes” Alleged in Her PSR

The great and glorious Vanguard not only stripped Clare Bronfman of scores of millions of dollars, he stripped her of her clothing and made her wear a jockstrap. Lastly, he stripped her of her freedom. She is going to prison soon.

There are new filings regarding Clare Bronfman.

She has asked for more time to respond to her Presentencing Report [PSR] because she has not yet seen the full “Victim Impact Statements”

At least one of three redacted filings filed last week appears to have something to do with “Victim Impact Statements”.

Clare will now have 14 days from the date she gets the “Victim Impact Statements” to respond to her PSR – and then the prosecution will probably get 7 days to reply.

The most interesting thing about these filings is that they confirm that Clare’s PSR contains information about “additional crimes” that Clare is alleged to have committed – which, of course, may make it hard for the NDNY to continue to sit on its hands with respect to Clare.

The letter from Clare’s attorney reads in part:

“We write to seek additional time to file defendant Bronfman’s objections to the PSR, which are currently due on January 9, 2020. The reason for the request is that defendant has not yet been provided with the complete “Victim Impact Statements,” which are included in part in the PSR.

“While the government has agreed to share the Victim Impact Statements in full with the defense, it has not done so yet because the government’s request (to which defendant Bronfman consents) for a protective order covering these victim statements is still pending…..

“Once the statements are provided, defendant will need sufficient time to investigate and address the allegations in the statements, including finding and providing any evidence necessary to correct any incorrect statements to Probation.

Thus, for the reasons described below, we respectfully request that our objections to the PSR be due fourteen days
after the Victim Impact Statements are provided in full to the defense.

“The PSR recites certain ‘additional crimes’ that are not part of the counts of conviction, and states that Victim Impact Statements were solicited from ‘additional Jane and John Does who were impacted by the defendant’s criminal conduct’ but who are not victims of the counts of conviction. PSR ¶ 116.

“Based on only the selected portions of victim statements included in the PSR, defendant cannot discern what the alleged crimes are that the victims are purportedly addressing, or in some cases the victims’ identities. Defendant needs this information in order to make any appropriate legal or factual objections to the inclusion of these statements and allegations in the PSR.

“In particular, defendant must correct any material misstatements in the Victim Impact Statements so that the Court has complete and accurate information at sentencing…..

“‘Due process requires that the defendant not be sentenced on the basis of materially false information, and he is thus
entitled to an effective opportunity to respond to the sentencing position advanced by the government, including an opportunity to review and comment upon the presentence report prepared by the probation office of the court…”

“In order to do so, defense counsel needs access to the complete victim statements and their identities and sufficient time to respond to the allegations therein. Defendant requests fourteen days in which to respond because addressing the allegations, many of which are new allegations not raised previously in the course of this litigation, will require defense counsel to search the extensive discovery materials for correspondence with the authors of the victim statements or other relevant information in order to identify any contradictory evidence that should be provided to Probation related to the allegations.

“Without knowing who the victims are or the full scope of their allegations, defendant is unable to do so before obtaining the statements.

“As noted above, the government does not dispute the defendant’s right to see the complete Victim Impact Statements including the identity of the victims, and will provide them once the Court rules on the proposed restrictions …

“For the foregoing reasons, defendant respectfully requests that the date for filing her objections to the PSR be adjourned until 14 days after defendant is provided with the complete Victim Impact Statements.

“Respectfully submitted,

“Kathleen E. Cassidy”


What this likely means is that victims have come forward alleging crimes that were not covered in Clare’s plea deal conviction. Or that the Probationer Officer who is preparing Clare’s PSR came across evidence of “additional crimes” from some other source.

Either way, it means that Clare’s PSR contains information about additional crimes that she is alleged to have committed above and beyond the ones she was charged with – and the ones to which she pleaded guilty.

The question is can a person be convicted of one crime and then, in effect, be sentenced for another crime – for a longer period – because the PSDR contains allegations of other crimes?

Where is due process?

Now, of course, Clare is guilty of many more crimes than she was charged with – but the notion that anyone can be sentenced for crimes she was not convicted of – because of mere allegations does not seem to be due process.

Of course, Clare deserves a longer sentence than the 21-27 months she thought she was going to get. But we do not wish to see due process abrogated for anyone.

What this means in her case is that Clare’s sentencing date may be pushed back beyond the presently scheduled February 14th date.  It all depends on when she gets the full Victim Impact Statements.

What’s holding it up is an order concerning non-disclosure to the public of the victims’ names, etc.

If that gets done in a week – there is a chance sentencing might still occur on February 14th. But if you are planning to attend her sentencing – don’t buy your tickets yet.

My guess for sentencing is April 1.


Document 831 – Request From Clare Bronfman For Extension Of Time To Respond To PSR (01.06.2020)

Document 832 – Order Approving Request From Clare Bronfman For Extension Of Time To Respond To PSR (01.07.2020


About the author

Frank Parlato


Click here to post a comment

Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us! (Email & username are optional)

  • I believe that all of the top five NXIVM defendants will be flooded with Victim Impact Statements.
    That includes:

    Keith Pervert Raniere
    Allison Pimp Mack
    Clare Cruella Bronfman
    Nasty Nancy Salzman
    Lauren Pimp Salzman

    Over one hundred women violently assaulted with hot irons by Allison Pimp Mack and Lauren Pimp Salzman.

    And the recent story that Raniere and Pimp Salzman secretly drugged a woman’s food reveals that NXIVM was not just a sex trafficking operation but also a drug trafficking operation.

    Lauren Salzman Testifies That She and Raniere Secretly Put Drugs in Scrambled Eggs of Disturbed Student

    And here is the kicker for the NXIVM defendants.
    A recent case at USC in Southern California charges a USC gynecologist with sexually assaulting numerous women from 1988 to 2016.
    USC has agreed to settle that suit for up to 250,000 dollars to each of the most seriously injured victims.

    I would say that being burned in the pubic region with a hot iron is very serious and painful.
    The NXIVM nutcases burned over one hundred victims in their private parts with hot irons.

    Judge Signals Approval of U.S.C.’s $215 Million Settlement With Ex-Gynecologist’s Patients
    More than 18,000 women are expected to receive $2,500 to $250,000 from the University of Southern California.

    I would suggest that Keith Pervert Raniere, Allison Pimp Mack and Lauren Pimp Salzman could be sued for a lot of money and a huge court order for restitution.

  • Regarding the criminal charges without due process, being used in prison sentencing…

    I hate Clare Bronfman, who doesn’t?


    Considering criminal charges or allegations of criminal behavior, to determine sentencing, without due process as guaranteed by the constitution is by definition unconstitutional.

    Don’t believe me? Google the 5th and 14th Amendments to the constitution.

    • At this point, there is no sentence delivered, so there’s been no sentence’s duration time being “stretched” yet. You know what the Judge’s sentencing options are and that a judge can decide to exceed the parameters of what are suggested by sentencing guidelines. Also a judge can deliver a minimized sentence, less than prosecutors might have wanted.

      It looks like there has been a lot to review and not necessarily all of it came via victim impact statements. None of us in the audience knows what information or considerations have been brought before Judge Garaufis.

      Clare Bronfman (supposedly) will appeal, at least based on her plea bargaining inclusions, if she receives more than 27 months, if I recall exactly. Judge Garaufis has been preparing for Bronfman to get ready to appeal. He can give his reasoning for whatever sentence he gives to Bronfman when he delivers it. Let’s see what happens. There is going to be a lot to hear and see. All anyone can do is speculate right now. The pitcher’s mound is still empty. It’s taking forever to get started.

      Plus Raniere is still trying to get his victims’ names to be made public during further court proceedings. Waiting for something to be decided about that, too.

  • Did you submit a victim impact statement that you can share? Do you know how many additional people did so? When people submit their statements are they considered “under oath” and could be charged with a crime if what they write in their statements is false? I agree that it would be unfair to sentence someone to a longer term based on allegations in the victim statements based on uncharged, unconvicted crimes but does that mean the allegations can be totally unrelated to what the person is being sentenced for? Like what if someone accused Clare of selling them a lame horse or raping them? Could Allison Mack or some of the NXIVM faithful send victim impact statements against you to try and get back at you during your sentencing if you get convicted?

      • Diane:
        Do you know that Chicago was the epicenter of a National Horse Mafia that sold people lame horses for premium prices?
        And people, like Candy Heiresss Helen Brach who tried to report the Chicago Horse Mafia, were killed and their bodies never found.
        There were numerous murders of horses, people, arsons of stables and cases of insurance fraud.
        In 1955 a stable worker named Kenneth Hansen sexually molested three pre-teen boys and with help from a stable owner named Silas Jayne disposed of the bodies.

        Horse murders
        Thirty-six people were indicted and tried for insurance fraud, mail and wire fraud, obstruction of justice, extortion, racketeering, and animal cruelty in connection with the horse murders; 35 were convicted.[5][6] Of the 23 people indicted in Chicago in July 1994, 20 pleaded guilty.

        Helen Brach
        Helen Voorhees Brach (born November 10, 1911 – disappeared February 17, 1977) was an American multimillionaire widow whose wealth had come from marrying into the E. J. Brach & Sons Candy Company fortune; she endowed the Helen V. Brach Foundation to promote animal welfare in 1974.
        An investigation into the case uncovered serious criminal activity associated with Chicago stable owners including Silas Jayne and Richard Bailey.

        Silas Jayne
        Silas Carter Jayne[1] (July 3, 1907 – July 13, 1987)[2] was a Chicago-based stable owner who was implicated in multiple notorious crimes.

        He was convicted of rape as a teenager for which he served a year in reformatory. He was convicted for conspiracy to murder in 1973 of George Jayne, his maternal brother, for which he served seven years imprisonment.[3] After his death, Silas Jayne was linked to one of the most notorious crimes in the city’s history, the 1955 Peterson–Schuessler murder of three young boys. Jayne is also suspected of having been involved in the 1956 murder of the two Grimes sisters, and in the 1977 disappearance of heiress Helen Brach.

  • April Fools’ Day would be perfect sentencing day for all of the NXIVM 6 convicts, it’s a Wednesday this year. No weekend court sessions, no weekend travel, etc. It would also be easy to remember for decades to come.

About the Author

Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist.

His work has been cited in hundreds of news outlets, like The New York Times, The Daily Mail, VICE News, CBS News, Fox News, New York Post, New York Daily News, Oxygen, Rolling Stone, People Magazine, The Sun, The Times of London, CBS Inside Edition, among many others in all five continents.

His work to expose and take down NXIVM is featured in books like “Captive” by Catherine Oxenberg, “Scarred” by Sarah Edmonson, “The Program” by Toni Natalie, and “NXIVM. La Secta Que Sedujo al Poder en México” by Juan Alberto Vasquez.

Parlato has been prominently featured on HBO’s docuseries “The Vow” and was the lead investigator and coordinating producer for Investigation Discovery’s “The Lost Women of NXIVM.” In addition, he was credited in the Starz docuseries 'Seduced' for saving 'slave' women from being branded and escaping the sex-slave cult known as DOS.

Parlato appeared on the Nancy Grace Show, Beyond the Headlines with Gretchen Carlson, Dr. Oz, American Greed, Dateline NBC, and NBC Nightly News with Lester Holt, where Parlato conducted the first-ever interview with Keith Raniere after his arrest. This was ironic, as many credit Parlato as one of the primary architects of his arrest and the cratering of the cult he founded.

Parlato is a consulting producer and appears in TNT's The Heiress and the Sex Cult, which premieres on May 22, 2022.

IMDb — Frank Parlato,_Jr.

Contact Frank with tips or for help.
Phone / Text: (305) 783-7083