J.J. O’Hara
At 12:02 PM on Tuesday, January 7th, a commenter using the handle “Anonymous”, posted a comment about my most recent analysis concerning the case of the U.S. v. Parlato.
While I welcome any comment concerning my various posts about this case, I was especially glad to get this one.
That’s because it appears that it was written by someone who has chosen to use the same tactics that I have predicted the prosecution will use in its efforts to convince twelve jurors – beyond a reasonable doubt – that Frank committed 18 felonies simply because he owned 15 companies and had approximately 50 bank accounts over a 12-year period.
Those tactics include INSINUATIONS, INNUENDOS, IMPUTATIONS – and, of course, MISINFORMATION & MISSTATEMENTS.
Here’s the full comment from Anonymous:
Hey Joe — According to the Niagara Gazette, in 2010 Frank owed $1.57 million in outstanding city and county taxes on One Niagara. When did he pay all of that back?
The Gazette also said that “Parlato failed to disclose the $1 million in income on a 2008 federal income tax return. In 2013, after the federal grand jury investigation was underway, Parlato filed a 2008 income tax return, but claimed the $1 million payment from the Bronfmans was a “loan.” So are you saying this isn’t true, that the FBI and IRS are lying about this?
Also all you need to do is look at this site to know that Frank routinely disregards laws. He is constantly using copyrighted images without proper attribution and probably without permission as well. And he can’t claim ignorance either https://archives.cjr.org/behind_the_news/niagara_falls_reporter.php. Pretty hypocritical and ironic considering he made a point of noting that the “lost” and never seen Necker Island photos were copyrighted.
*****
Let’s take a look at the details of Anonymous’ comment.
RE: The Unpaid Property Taxes
Anonymous starts out by quoting from a 2010 article in The Niagara Gazette that indicates Frank owed $1.57 million in unpaid taxes on the former Occidental Building in downtown Niagara Falls – and then questions whether Frank ever paid those back taxes.
What Anonymous failed to do, however, is add the fact that shortly after acquiring control of the abandoned building, Frank had contested the assessment on it that led to those “unpaid taxes” – and that he eventually won a huge reduction in its assessed value: i.e., from $4 million down to $1 million.
What Anonymous also failed to do is mention that lots of commercial businesses routinely contest the assessed value of their properties – especially when those properties, like the Occidental Building, have suffered a serious decline in market value (Before Frank got involved, the Occidental Building had been abandoned for 4 years – and had a gaping 40’ deep hole in front of it).
Had Frank paid the disputed taxes, he quite likely would not have received any rebate even if he won his lawsuit to have the property’s assessed value reduced to its current market value.
So, acting on the advice of his attorney, Frank withheld paying the taxes until the assessed value was properly reduced. Once that happened, the taxes were paid in full.
RE: Alleged Failure to Disclose $1 Million in Income from Bronfman Sisters
Next, Anonymous adds another quote from The Niagara Gazette which indicates that Frank had failed to report as income the $1 million that he received from Clare and Sara Bronfman in 2008 – and that he subsequently claimed that the payment was actually a loan.
As Frank has indicated on several occasions – and, more importantly, as documents and records will attest – these are the relevant facts as regards this $1 million payment:
– Because he was well aware of the propensity of the Bronfman sisters to sue people that were identified as “enemies” of Keith Raniere, he was concerned about what to do with the $1 million payment. So, instead of spending it, he put the entire amount into an interest-bearing escrow account – where it remained until it was seized by the Feds in August 2015 in conjunction with its indictment of Frank.
– Frank’s concern turned out to be accurate because the Bronfman sisters sued him in 2011 to get back the entire $1 million. In that lawsuit, they alleged that the $1 million payment was, in fact, a loan – and that they were entitled to be repaid the entire amount (That lawsuit is still pending).
– While it is true that Frank was late in filing his 2008 federal taxes, it is also true that when he did file them, he had no tax liability for that year. And it’s also true that, acting upon the advice of his attorney, he included with his filing a letter explaining the issues concerning the $1 million – and the fact that he had placed all the funds into an escrow account. Interestingly enough, the IRS never contacted Frank about the $1 million.
I don’t know what the FBI and the IRS are saying about the $1 million – but I do know that Frank acted in a responsible and thoughtful manner with respect to the reporting of that payment. Had he recorded it as income and paid the estimated $300,000 on taxes on it, he would only have $700,000 left to repay the Bronfman sisters if they prevail in their pending civil lawsuit against him.
That would have been a financial disaster because getting even if he was successful in getting the IRS to repay the $300,000, that likely would have taken several years.
*****
RE: The Necker Island Pictures
Next, Anonymous caustically derides Frank for allegedly using copyrighted photos without attribution or permission. He’s particularly focused on the various photos from the NXIVM get-togethers at Richard Branson’s Necker Island resort.
Once again, let’s look at the relevant facts as regards those photos:
– They were sent to Frank from a source that wished to remain anonymous.
– Had anyone asserted ownership of those photos, Frank would have had to determine whether that claim was true or not. No one, however, has ever made any such claim.
– Many of these photos were previously published by John Tighe on his Saratoga In Decline blog – and, as such, they may be considered to be in the public domain (John was also never contacted by anyone claiming to own the pictures he published).
– Finally – and perhaps most importantly – Section 107 of the federal copyright law states as follows: “…the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright”.
*****
A Question for Anonymous
Since Anonymous seems to be enthralled with media stories about Frank, let me ask her/him a question.
Rather than relying on the 2010 article that you cited, why didn’t you point Frank Report readers to the more recent article about Frank that appeared in the December 6, 2016 edition of The Niagara Falls Reporter?
Here are some excerpts from that article – which was written by Tony Farina, along-time media investigative journalist who just last year was elected to the Buffalo Broadcasters Association Hall of Fame:
By Tony Farina
Not too many years ago, in 2004, the onetime Occidental Chemical Corp.’s namesake building, built in the early 1980s, was a shell of its former grandeur, left to deteriorate by Occidental with only a single tenant remaining, the federal Small Business Administration, which was about to leave at the expiration of its lease.
The landmark building next to the Rainbow Bridge was an eyesore, made even worse by a giant empty hole taking up the entire parcel along Rainbow Blvd. that according to the developers holding sway at the time was to become a giant fish tank to attract visitors from around the world to Niagara Falls. The fish tank hole never got any fish and the SBA was leaving, leaving an empty, broken down, giant eyesore behind. But then something happened.
I have been a newspaper and television reporter most of my life and along the way I have met many people. One of them was a real estate developer named Frank Parlato of Buffalo who I came to know while chasing down a story in the streets of the city I had prowled for more than 30 years.
Well, one thing led to another, and one day after a breakfast meeting in the spring of 2004 with Parlato and a businessman with knowledge of the developing eyesore in Niagara Falls, we visited the Occidental Building and I remarked to Parlato, “this is quite a place, given the tremendous view from the top and the location next to the mighty falls. Too bad it is falling apart. It would be a great location to make something happen.”
Parlato felt the same way, and with his experience in real estate saw a business opportunity. With the Hong Kong owner running out of money, Parlato found a way to acquire the property and the rest is history. Without a dime of public money, he filled the giant hole and began to fix up the property, selling coffee and trinkets to start and bringing in a tour company to give visitors a guided tour of the historic places of Niagara Falls, starting with the mighty falls itself. That was just the beginning.
It took stamina and grit to get the hole filled, scotch tape and screwdrivers to get the building habitable, and some chalk to establish parking spots on the now covered hole. Piece by piece, opposed by city inspectors every step of the way, Parlato made something out of nothing.
There were back tax issues to deal with, too, although Parlato contended the property had been overtaxed for years and he filed suit against the city and eventually, after he sold the property in 2010, the lawsuit he started was settled with the city and a large discount in taxes proved he was right all along.
The new owners, including Gordon Reger and Paul Grenga, are now doing quite well on the property that had not too long ago been headed to the scrap heap.
It is a success story that tells about the resourcefulness and commitment of Parlato when it comes to business, and he did it all the while fighting behind the scenes with an alleged representative of the former owner who, once the property had been turned around, was anxious to get more than his rightful legal share – as the 10 lawsuits against Parlato established. Parlato won all 10 lawsuits.
Parlato has moved on but his work is still there for everyone to see, a busy tourist destination visited by millions of people every year, even opening briefly every day over the winter months for those hardy enough to still go to the falls, from near and far.
Parlato now finds himself fighting a federal corruption indictment that was at least partially fueled by the disgruntled minority partner who couldn’t win in court to siphon off the profits that Parlato had earned through hard work, sweat and dedication. I remember many nights when he worked around the clock to keep his project moving, providing more than one hundred jobs for many local people who might otherwise have gone hungry. And the bus tour, restaurant and retail businesses boomed, providing profits for local business people, who Parlato favored over chains and franchises.
As he was building the businesses, he not only successfully fought his deceptive minority partner, but fought the city which tried to close the building repeatedly and choke the property with excessive taxation. He also had to fight the State Parks who clearly complained that his business was taking away their near monopoly parking revenue – they tried to prevent him from even placing signs on his own businesses. But he fought and won – even placing a giant sign on his property in defiance of the State Park – with arrows right at the entrance – pointing one way to the State Parks’ $10 parking and an arrow pointing to his parking lot – at $5.
Now Parlato is fighting the federal government, and much like the grit he showed in developing the falls property, he is refusing to admit he did anything wrong (take a plea) when he feels he did absolutely nothing wrong.
Last week I wrote that he may have been the victim of a “ham sandwich” indictment, the kind where prosecutors can make a case just because they want to, even though the evidence may not quite be what it seems to be. But what does a grand jury know? They can only consider what it presented to them, and Parlato’s legal team believes they were misled by prosecutors.
That case is pending and a trial could be months–even years–away. The ordeal has been costly in financial terms, but while most people would be reduced to stress and fear at the enormous strain of having the most powerful government in the world train its sights on you, Parlato said this battle only makes him feel stronger, quoting his favorite saying, “If the whole world stands against you, sword in hand, will you still dare to do what you think is right?”
Parlato truly feels he has been falsely cast as a villain by malicious and perhaps politically motivated prosecutors when all he did was develop a building, create lots of jobs, and make lots of people money, even one of his alleged victims, a now-deceased business partner, who never said he was defrauded.
How it will all end for Parlato remains to be seen. But the developer-turned-journalist is fighting back, in part with the pen, against what he feels is a concocted indictment.
…
*****
The ball is in your court, Anonymous… And if you’d really like to have a detailed discussion about these matters, I’m sure you know how to get in touch with me.
Frank Parlato 
Janine Morrison 
J.J. O'Hara 
Richard Luthmann 
Marie White 
Paul Serran
Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
“Heidi Hutchinson
January 10, 2020 at 8:46 pm
Wrong, Schlock or Bangkok. I didn’t rep myself. I had very good, highly esteemed legal representation.”
Heidi,
If you need legal representation in the future, might I recommend Arthur Hunnicutt, Esquire, aka Nicki Clyne.
Lol. Good to see you’re taking your Nicki Clyne troll spotting foolishness with a sense of humor, Shadow.
I was wrong, too, this time about the credibility sniper being Scott Johnson when it’s become obvious it was Flowers. Again. (Shoulda known Schlock’s not half the researcher Flowers and you are.)
I just wish Frank would at least bury these off-topic comments about ME on such a critical thread — not bc I feel humiliated at all, I did what I had to do for our disabled son — and, in fact, it humiliates my ex-husband whose narcissism, thefts and abusiveness toward me and our son already cost him his film career after Al Pacino and other real industry power players witnessed the actions that led to these lawsuits — but bc it hurts Frank’s cause to have this Flower manure sitting on top of the more supportive, on-topic comments.
Fucking Sicilians, man. What are gonna do?
Quit gaslighting everyone, Heidi. Frank is aware I didn’t write those comments, as I’m sure he can tell by the IP address where the comments were sent from.
And now I’m kinda curious what Al Pacino has to do with anything….though I’m not sure if I really want to know 🙄
Heidi doesn’t care about IP addresses or easily provable facts, since her ability to claim that you’re harassing her on FR would be greatly diminished if she asked her pal Frank to confirm that you’re telling the truth. She needs an arch-enemy to pummel on FR in order to retain her own SuperHero status, at least in her own mind.
[…since her ability to claim that you’re harassing her on FR would be greatly diminished if she asked her pal Frank to confirm that you’re telling the truth…]
This is true, Legal Defence, but since I’ve been dealing with this type of thing since 2014, I’ve stopped being surprised at the behaviour.
I’m still wondering if anyone can shed some light on the type of “conversion” Heidi refers to in one of the lawsuits.
He blacklisted my ex-husband from the movie industry, Flowers, that’s what. I don’t know him well or anything — only met him a time or two — but one day at the Park with my kid when the shit was going down a total stranger came up to me and said Al Pacino wants to meet you. I just laughed him off. Yeah right, I thought. Then he said you know the stuff you’re going through with Jeff, you’re gonna come out of it smelling like a rose kiddo. then at the premiere of The Recruit, I was introduced to Al Pacino. And he gave me this big hug and a slug on the arm and he left me in the eye and said Jeff Apple will never work in this town again. And that’s not something I really was enthusiastic about because with a disabled child to care for I was kind of dependent on Jeff for some support. But guess what? 15 years later, since the Recruit, Jeff Apple has not worked again in this town. So if you wanna know how the man who got sole producer credit for producing one of the top 100 grossing films of all time never works in Hollywood again, I’ll tell you. You fuck over the dedicated mother of your disabled child and business partner in front of Al Pacino. That’s how. Pacino’s got eyes and ears all over this town, all over the planet. And he’s coming for you next, Flowers.
I think he may be coming for Paltrow and her candle.
Holly Shit!! HEIDI RULES ALL!!!
Sad to say I owe Flowers an apology. The Heidi humiliator wasn’t her, this time. He hails from California and his name is Jeff Apple. And despite his duplicitous solicitations to settle our current dispute in our son’s best interests — which was brought by him, not by me as he falsely claims — he persists in his ludicrous attempts to convince strangers of wrongdoings on my part when everyone who knows us knows otherwise. Jeff is —most obviously — taking advantage of this situation to again attempt to rob our disabled son of the resources I won for him as his Guardian ad Litem in a medical malpractice claim. And he not only expects to gain control of those funds but to continue to swindle Dylan out of any public benefits he is entitled to, as well. Jeff already diverted those to himself and the Aurealia program he “founded” with his wife, Kym Karath. Although Jeff was recently removed from Aurealia’s board of Directors — he was its “Treasurer” — talk about a fox in the chicken house — he continues to posit himself as an authority who can advance the careers of program “coaches” — not only within the program but in Hollywood — who abet him in his campaign against me.
NXIVM may well be helping Jeff just as they did in our divorce 15 years ago. I am doing my utmost to protect our son and his resources, in part by staying my hand, but you see like most malignant narcissists, Jeff is so compelled to destroy me that he is unconcerned with what else, including himself, he destroys in his compulsion.
Al Pacino? I can address that issue for anybody buying into that story.
It’s easy to accuse your ex husband of things when he’s not here to defend himself. He wasn’t the one recently barred from contacting the trust administrator, was he? It was you, wasn’t it?
I’m more interested in why no court of law has ever sided with any of your accusations, especially if you had a heavyweight witness like Al Pacino testifying on your behalf? Let me guess, is the court system conspiring against you too?
Engaging in ‘name dropping’ (like Al Pacino) doesn’t really help your case and only makes you sound desperate. If you had anything to prove your case which Mr. Pacino personally witnessed, you’d have won your court case after he testified on your behalf. But you didn’t win, you lost. Name dropping big names (like Al Pacino) only makes you sound desperate, especially in light of your history of losing pretty much every case you file.
Your most recent case, filed just a few months ago I believe, will likely end in disaster too since it’s clear that you’re repping yourself again. It sounds to me like your ex husband is the victim of a Clare Bronfman style “lawsuit harassment strategy”, except instead of facing a competent legal firm he’s only facing a self repped, incompetent legal neophyte. Ball’s in your court. Had enough yet?
I’m hearing a couple of different voices (my alleged “paranoid delusions” notwithstanding 🤣) in these ‘Heidi Humiliations’ posts.
Would this one, goading me to secure legal counsel to go in for a court battle round paid for by Dylan Apple from funds reserved for his medical needs, be that of Tony Ellrod aka “Smellrod,” Esquire, legal counsel for the Aurealia program and husband of Kym Karath’s bestie Linda Ellrod?
Tony, btw, showed up the next day at a motel where the heroic Ryan & Beth Dorn gave me a lift to and paid for when I was hastily escorted from my son’s home by the Thousand Oaks police after Jeff obtained restraining orders under despicably false, perjurous pretexts without notice to me.
Or would this crook, anxious to delve further into those “medical” funds at cost to not only Dylan but County tax payers, be Richard Solomon, hastily court appointed counsel for Dylan Apple, who has already stolen a cool $5K for but a few hours of lying?
Interestingly, Solomon claimed he just happened to be sitting at the back of the courtroom where Jeff Apple appeared ex-parte and volunteered himself to represent Dylan from the PVP panel when, in fact, Solomon first went to the wrong courtroom — a different one than where Jeff appeared — the day after Jeff’s appearance — to have himself appointed AFTER the honorable Judge Lippet made orders reappointing Jeff Shuwager, the Bet Tzedek attorney I worked with to establish Dylan’s conservatorship, as Dylan’s counsel in the perjurous matter Jeff brought?
Among Jeff’s false allegations are that my “delusions” include a belief that “the NXIVM cult, along with the FBI and the CIA” is after me and I apparently intend to shoot Dennis Burke and/or Keith Raniere.
In fact, it was the Secret Service I believe Jeff contacted to help justify Sullivan’s (former head of the Secret Service) court appearance on behalf of Keith Raniere offering armed guard services to protect him and bolster Raniere’s claim that he fled the Country not to evade justice but to dodge my sharpshooter bullet when I have never owned or operated a gun, never so much as thought about harming anyone let alone ever threatened anyone.
I wasn’t arbitrarily attacking Heidi, as certain people have speculated.
I was making a larger point about Heidi’s propensity towards starting a pseudo-brand of news reporting “cultism”, where anybody who questions the cult leader (Heidi) gets accused of attacking her and gets piled on by her many lackeys.
That’s what Keith’s many lackeys did to anybody who questioned Keith’s paranoid delusions. Heidi is very similar to Keith in that regard, in that she can’t stand criticism and won’t tolerate dissent in her ranks. Heidi has a “friend or enemy” mentality, very similar to Clare Bronfman’s personality. Yet Frank treats her as an impartial person in this saga.
The web site of Martin Horwitz showed dozens of paranoid “accusations” that Heidi made towards her ex husband, his parents, and other people. She accused him of all kinds of delusional stuff. Yet the court found every single one of those accusations untrue and dismissed her lawsuits as being petty and delusional.
And while I consider her sister’s death to be tragic, it was nonetheless a tragic “suicide” despite her paranoid accusations about “murder”. Just like with her ex husband, Heidi turns everything into a “conspiracy” against her. Even Frank is giving credibility to Heidi’s accusations without much proof beyond hearsay and imaginative thinking. Just because Keith’s lackeys may have urged her sister to commit suicide, that’s just not even close to “murder”. If Gina could be talked into suicide so easily then she was obviously very depressed to begin with. That’s a mental issue, not an issue of murder.
And while certainly tragic, Heidi deserves no more sympathy than my own friends (and many others worldwide) who know somebody who’s committed suicide. Why should Heidi get more sympathy than everybody else with a loved one who committed suicide? Why should pointing out these facts result in Frank deeming these posts attacks? That’s my point.
Flowers, you’re like a toddler blaming the dog for the kitchen mess with flour all over your face.
As I said earlier, those troll comments are not mine. While I may be doing a little research, the topics I’m looking at should not involve you, Heidi.
Also, my dog is always the guilty party when it comes to kitchen messes, (except for the occasional cat burglary).
Btw, Humiliator, ‘twere not I who labeled Gina’s highly assisted “suicide” as “murder,” per se, and I’m not here seeking the sympathy you so callously begrudge me but truth, justice, closure and an end to the sufferings of NXIVM’s many past and potential future victims — all of which it appears you fear.
Heidi should stop talking trash here, since according to the web site of Martin Horwitz, she’s pretty much been shut out (humiliated) in every lawsuit attempted against her ex hubby over the years.
Heidi likes to talk about her successful history of suing people and using the court system on her own. She’s got half the people on this site convinced that she’s a successful, self-repped litigant who knows how to use the court system favorably.
However, according to the web site of Martin Horwitz, she’s pretty much had most of her lawsuits tossed in the early stages, likely due to incompetence and having a fool for a client (likely herself, as I’m sure she repped herself in those embarrassing defeats).
Heidi should stick to what she knows best, which is feigning victimhood while simultaneously trying to shut down the speech of her detractors at every opportunity, via appealing to her pal Frank. I have no doubt she’ll want this post shut down too, even though she claims to love free speech in this very thread.
Please Heidi, tell us the details about your embarrassing legal defeats to ex hubby. Can you even show us “one” single victory in court. Or are they all losses?
Info is here:
http://attorneyscounsel.com/verdicts-settlements/heidi-hutchinson-apple-v-jeffrey-apple-emergent-media/
I am sure there is another side to this story. Perhaps Heidi will tell it.
That number will be much less than half after they read that article. Welcome to the enlighted side.
Correction: enlightened.
Yes…I found that site long ago when horns were being tooted. The race for retrieving the son — incidentally, the child has a large trust fund attached to him. To her credit, Heidi has been speaking coherently lately, so perhaps her preferred substances have been put aside. I don’t, however, appreciate her bashing the Clifton Park area. The dirt is now gone and Clifton Park is a great community.
The “dirt” is now gone from the Clifton Park community? ROFLMAO. Forgive me but David P. Soares is still your District Attorney, Roger Kirsopp is still on the beat, I believe — last seen, however, wandering barefoot around Thousand Oaks, California handing out homeless flyers and showing off 1st position ballerina, turnout moves in a mad search for alleged computer trespassers (he knows exactly what I’m talking about), so maybe he was let off the police force there — Mr. Coffee (aka “The Man”) is still steaming over Marc Agnifilo’s well-wishes for his infamous client’s victims while billing his soon-to-be imprisoned clients and, I dare say, your prior assistant US Attorney who, under his former boss, permitted NXIVM to overtake your fine community, and far beyond, was promoted with no apparent plans to clean up the NXIVM filth that remains.
If and when anyone does begin to trowel the “dirt” that yet pervades the swampland known as Clifton Park, NY, I suspect a few lifeless bodies, including that of the late Pam Caffritz, will turn up.
The only substance I prefer, btw, is the truth. And if my creative process confuses you, don’t read it. Though I will say, and this can and will be proved if necessary, I had just a wee bit of technical difficulty going on with my router and all my “devices” or “spy gear” — as my ex-husband likes refer to those in his Le femme Nikita fantasy projections, wherein I also own a gun (never touched one) and have surely set out to shoot someone (WTF?) — according to what Jeff told our local law enforcement who, btw, never once found our son anywhere close to any state of alleged neglect by me or by the caregivers working full-time in our household at the time such accusations were made by him, and by him alone. Apart from some anonymous calls to child services, etc. instigated by him or possibly NXIVM but, again, investigated and found to be entirely false.
Humiliating,
Are you Scott Retard Johnson or are you the Crazy Cat Lady of Canada? Because you two are the only lowlife commenters, who would attack the Snyder and Hutchinson families. Kim and Heidi both horrifically lost their sisters…..
…..And you attack them?
I’ve never attacked either of them, Niceguy. Where are these “attack” comments you claim I have written? I have said that I don’t think Heidi’s sister was murdered (my opinion was based on the evidence provided on FR), but that is not an attack; it’s an opinion.
Flowers – from the beginning of you and Heidi being on FR together, you have repeatedly called her a liar. You ask where my issue with you comes from? A lot comes from how you have treated Heidi.
Frank Report needs more people with first-hand experience who are willing to share. Scott and Flowers chasing these people away by yapping at their heels hurts FR. Luckily, Heidi isn’t scared of a little yapping.
Not agreeing with everything someone says is not the same as attacking, Niceguy. Are you saying that no one should ever be allowed to question anyone? It’s hard to make sense of a story without all the facts…
The only comments I’ve written on this thread were all under the usual name I use. I didnt write any comments as anonymous or as “Dirt”. I’m also a little suspicious about “Dirt” really being the twitter account the commenter claimed to be. I think it’s more likely that it’s the same person who previously trolled here as Bangkok.
Niceguy, please be careful when you claim that Flowers is on the same low-life level as Scott. Do your homework versus speculating. Asshole.
I use my real name. I’m even “brave” enough to call into my own show. LOL
Sorry friend, wrong guess.
I’ve taken the liberty of answering your accusation with a new post at the top of the page.
Wrong, Schlock or Bangkok. I didn’t rep myself. I had very good, highly esteemed legal representation.
This attorney’s inflated and rather mysogynostic advertisement is misleading. The cases were spin-offs from what should have been a simple divorce complicated by my ex-husband’s efforts to transfer all of our assets including our son’s medical funds and our intellectual properties to himself. It was all eventually rolled into and settled in our family law matter.
OMG, the psychosis on this blog could fill a library. Oh, yeah, I keep forgetting it already has. What was it, 42 library floors in terabyte data?
Thank God, Frank has all your VPN’s and in Flowers and Schlock’s and Bangkok’s very severe cases, your emergency rescue data.
….Heidi backs slowly out of the room, crossing herself thinking it really may be time to just let Gina go.
Those cases may not have been dismissed because the judge found them to be delusional. There could be other reasons why they were dismissed, and I’m sure the lawyer who posted that info was not unbiased, since he was the lawyer for the opposing side.
I am curious, though, about one of the claims that Heidi makes for “intentional infliction of emotional distress and conversion”. I wonder what she meant by “conversion”?
The trolls and trollups have been on FR from the start — some accidental, some purposeful — remember when they were posting grotesque pics of diseased male parts?
They’ve become far more sophisticated in their means of manipulation, of course.
It’s a minor miracle FR has lasted this long. Bolsters my faith in the American way of free speech but I’ll never understand why Frank & Joe don’t just block ‘em all?
Shadow, puh-lease stop discrediting yourself by giving all this troll credit to Nicki Clyne. What are you her literary agent?
Stick to Allison Mack. She’s got the ultimate book & movie deal in this, I’d wager. Oh, wait, Allison’s not allowed online.
In fact, Allison will prolly be gag ordered not to write or speak her peace ever.
Anyone else find it interesting Allison was the ONLY defendant, btw, ordered offline while Lauren can just whip out her cell phone in public at Starfucks any time?
Guess Alejandro Betancourt’s fear that Allie was already “singing like a canary” — or a canary tree — was heard and heeded by the powers that be.
IDK where Shadow’s gonna put all that sexual frustration next. Kathy Russell could use some attention.
Let’s not pile on poor Kathy. I’ve always thought shadow and Flowers would hit it off. Imagine if we could help Scott book Flowers as a guest on his buddy’s podcast AND get shadow a date with Flowers?
Flowers – can we get a double thumbs-up?
Podcast yes, setting up a date with Mr. Shadow, no.
Sorry, dude. Flowers also shot you down. See way below. And she slapped my hand in the process. She mean.
I’m also gonna let shadow flounder on his own while he searches for true love. My attempts at helping others are not appreciated here.
I couldn’t care less whether Flowers or anyone else doesn’t want to come on my show. I know there are lots of scrared and/or stupid people who don’t want to come on my show.
IDK where Shadow’s gonna put all that sexual frustration next. Kathy Russell could use some attention
LOL problem is Kathy is not a TV celebrity that shadow has been spanking his tiny monkey to all his adult life. Believe me Mack and Clyne are not the only TV celebrities he beats it to. What bothers shadow the most is that they were fucking Raniere among other things and Shadow and Raniere bear an incredible resemblance to each other. Also close in age. Shadow’s NXIVM motto was I coulda been a contenda
And Nicki Clyne could have been a criminal defendant if the US DOJ had cracked down on her.
How many new sex slaves has Nicki recruited the last few months in Brooklyn?
If Nicki keeps it up she can be in the next wave of indictments.
Heidi:
I find it touching how on Gina’s birthday you would defend Allison Mack, the woman who sang out her love for Keith Raniere.
The woman who would unquestioningly brand women like cattle.
The woman who would eagerly blackmail other women.
The woman who would joyously pimp out other women.
The woman who would gladly fabricate the false story that her nephews had been sexually molested.
A real hero does not need an FBI investigation to avoid sex trafficking.
Thanks Superman!
… much more Clark…
More like Jimmy Olsen!!!
I never claimed to be Superman.
How many dunces in NXIVM believed Keith Raniere to be Superman?
They even called Raniere “Thor” as if the chubby scam artist were some kind of Nordic God.
Shadow,
“They even called Raniere “Thor” the chubby…..”
Wait!!!!!
…..Maybe you should be Thor.
“…..Maybe you should be Thor.”
LOL
Nice Guy, I’m just happy being myself and not trying to be a comic book character.
Because contrary to you, Shadow, she is acknowledging the fact instead of continuously believing in a fantasy…
“unquestioningly brand women”…debunked
“eagerly blackmail”…debunked 100%: the only victim pointed out very clearly who blackmailed but nevermind, keep saying that and maybe someone will be dumb enough to believe you!
“joyously pimp”…not even a charge that was considered serious, it’s dropped and debunked (Allison never asked to her to have sexual relations…it’s Raniere and let’s make it clear, once again, if this whole case is considered as a prostitution case, federal law would protect Allison as she was victim of the same thing…you idiot!
” gladly fabricate the fa…. well you got the idea, it’s shadow” … well she may have done it but so did all the other victims…you idiot
It’s the final coercive material she gave (after being heavily coerced, starved and probably drugged to obtain it)
BTW, funny you dare to talk about fabricating stories as a crime because that’s what you do on a daily basis, ignoring all the facts that have been revealed at trial.
You are the biggest idiot one can find in this whole world…
How many Victim Impact Statements will be filed against Allison Mack?
Why do you think Allison Mack is forbidden to communicate over the internet?
Because the Court fears she might try to stifle people from filing allegations against her.
It’s a sad day for Allison Mack when the kindest thing you can say for her is that she is either a dunce or she is crazy.
I hate to do this, but I must come to Shadow’s defense.
Sorry, but anyone who paid good money, or alienated friends and family, or gave up a legitimate career while seeking “enlightenment” from Nancy Salzman and the hairy, cross-eyed Sham-man, are far more idiotic than Shadow.
I just have one question regarding this comment:
[Because he was well aware of the propensity of the Bronfman sisters to sue people that were identified as “enemies” of Keith Raniere, he was concerned about what to do with the $1 million payment.]
At the time this deal occurred and Frank received this payment, did he believe, at that time, that he would become an enemy of Keith’s at some point in the future?
Shortly after he was hired by NXIVM, Frank was asked to undertake a smear campaign against me that included billboards, newspaper articles, etc. (After we met and discussed what he had been told about me, he refused the assignment). One of the things that I told him is that Nancy Salman and Keith Raniere had never signed the “Letter-of-Agreement” that I had negotiated them before I started working for them. The same was true with respect to several agreements that the Bronfman sisters had agreed to enter into with me.
One of his next assignments was to straighten out what had been described as dishonest conduct on the part of Yuri Plyam, the developer in charge of the Bronfman-funded real estate project in Los Angeles. When he went out to Los Angeles to meet with him, Frank discovered that Yuri had been trying to get a written agreement signed since the project had begun (That’s why Yuri was so quick to sign the agreement that Frank proffered to him).
So, yeah…I think Frank had a pretty good sense that things could wrong in a hurry with NXIVM and/or the Bronfman sisters.
Does this mean it was Frank’s plan to let any statute of limitations to expire before he spent any of the money?
Thanks Joe.
I have another question now- why did you agree to enter into a number of contracts where the other parties refused to sign? It seems a bit unusual , IMO, especially with you being a lawyer.
And I also have an observation (actually a criticism) regarding Keith’s smear campaign assignment. While it was good of Frank to refuse such an assignment, I don’t understand why Frank would even consider taking on this type of assignment in the first place.
Besides the moral question this raises (as Frank was being asked to destroy the reputation of a presumably innocent person whom he never had any personal issues against…), there might have also been a chance of Frank being accused of libel or slander for carrying out Keith’s dirty work. Is any job assignment worth that type of stress?
I will answer the question directly related to me – You write, “I don’t understand why Frank would even consider taking on this type of assignment in the first place. Besides the moral question this raises (as Frank was being asked to destroy the reputation of a presumably innocent person whom he never had any personal issues against…)”
Both Keith Raniere and Kristin Keeffe went to great lengths to assure me that Joe was guilty I agreed to investigate and expose anything sinister – provided it was true. It turns out in Joe’s case it wasn’t true. He was not guilty of any wrongdoing. So I turned down the assignment.
Frank
I’m glad you decided to turn down that assignment.. obviously Keith is an extremely vindictive person. I guess he continued to go after Joe after that anyways, and had a hand in Joe’s later legal problems.
That is absolutely correct. He did not stop his pursuit of Joe despite my arguing that Joe was not guilty of anything.
As I always did – and as I still do when taking on new clients – I prepared a Letter-of-Agreement (LOA) detailing exactly what I was being hired to do (and, just as importantly, what I was not being hired to do) on behalf of NXIVM. That same document also detailed NXIVM’s obligations in terms of providing access to certain people and documents as well as its financial obligations.
Because several of the tasks that I was hired to do were extremely time-sensitive, I started working on them even before the fully-signed LOA came back to me. And since NXIVM had paid for the first three months of my service in advance, I wasn’t too concerned about the fact that Nancy had not yet returned the fully-signed LOA.
In cases like this, having the other party’s signature becomes a non-issue the longer the relationship goes on. If both parties are performing in accordance with a document like the LOA – and not violating any of its terms – a court will generally impute that they are bound to the terms set forth in that document even if one of them didn’t execute it.
That was the situation in terms of me being hired by NXIVM. Except for one issue, they never disputed that I was working for them per the terms of the LOA (They did falsely claim that I had been hired to provide “legal services” – which were specifically excluded in the LOA).
In Frank’s case, the Bronfman sisters are disputing whether they are bound by the terms of a written agreement they didn’t sign. Given that they acted in accordance with the terms of that document – and given that Clare even testified, under oath, that they had signed it – I think Frank will likely prevail in that case.
Thanks, Joe
So the situation was that they neglected or forgot about signing, but there was no dispute regarding the terms of the contracts. And from the information I could find on this topic (I had looked this up before when Frank had mentioned Clare’s lawsuit), generally a contract will be considered binding even if one party neglects to sign it.
Since NXIVM seemed to regularly conduct business in unconventional and often fraudulent ways, that should help Frank’s case, at least in regards to the questions surrounding this contract.
Keep doing what is right Frank. You’re an inspiration.
Joe,
Our brave Anonymous is probably Nicki Clyne, aka Mrs. Allison Mack.
Nicki uses lots of pseudonyms but usually gets caught.
Nicki is also friends with Clare and Sara Bronfman.
Some points for Anonymous (Nicki Clyne) to consider:
1.) Real Estate taxes are not on the owner.
Real Estate taxes are levied against the real estate itself.
If the owner fails to pay the real estate tax, the remedy is very simple.
The taxing authority puts a lien on the property and auctions it off for back taxes.
Technically speaking, Frank Parlato did not owe the taxes, the property owed the taxes.
Furthermore, vacant property is taxed at a lower rate than occupied property.
The local authorities failed to take the vacancy into account and Frank Parlato appealed and ultimately won the appeal.
These kinds of cases happen all of the time.
2.) Because there was a dispute over the million dollars the Bronfmans owed Frank Parlato, Frank put the money in escrow until the dispute was settled.
For income to be taxed, it must be “realized.”
The ownership of that money must not be in dispute.
Money that is in escrow is frozen and is not yet realized.
Hence, money in escrow is not yet taxable.
Income must be realized before it is taxable.
It is touching how the members of NXIVM are so eager to enforce the law.
I wonder if Nicki Clyne’s spouse, Allison Mack, and Nicki’s friend, Clare Bronfman, will be eager to obey any court orders of Restitution to their many, many victims.
This is perfectly said. Shadow you are a very intelligent person. You ought to be a lawyer
Thank you.
Let’s just say that in my life I have gotten around.
And both my brother and I have tried to rehab older buildings with mixed success.
My sympathy goes out to anyone who endeavors to fix up older properties.
It is often a thankless job but Frank did not deserve to be harassed by the rapacious Shmuel Shmueli and the ghoulish Bronfman sisters.
Your sarcasm will be lost on shadowboy, Nicki. Oh the irony
Donna: Not to worry. After reading Shadowstate’s endless regurgitations of dicta on The Frank Report over the past three years, recruiters at two of the Midwest’s top law schools: Thomas Cooley Law School in Lansing MI and John Marshall Law School right in Shadow’s hometown, are preparing full scholarships for Shadow.
The thinking is that if Shadow can study law for eight of the 16 hours per day he currently spends on the Frank Report he has tremendous potential.
Shadow says in his life he has “gotten around”, which I am hoping is not a tongue in cheek reference to Brian Wilson. If in your life you have “gotten around”, but “ended up” haplessly obsessed with a not overly attractive nor talented actress/pimp/misogynist/sadist, well that is a story I think would play well on Scotty’s radio show.
All of Them Witches:
And you are a proud graduate of the Vanguard Law School where the school motto is “Pass the Vaseline.”
At least “Anonymous” doesn’t have to be embarrassed about his comment. Being wrong while being anonymous carries no penalty. Too bad O’Hara won’t put his front-zipper pants on and come on my radio show, while he has no problem playing the tough-guy character defending Frrank.
Scott – I think you’ll find Joe is plenty tough. Consider he was in a maximum-security place – MDC — and unlike Raniere – he managed to handle himself very well while he was there. On top of that, he was a lawyer, the commissioner of health and human services of the state of Missouri, owner of several sports teams, and operated numerous successful businesses. No, Joe is a standup guy. The one mistake he made – and he paid plenty for it – was going to work as a consultant for Nxivm. I made the same mistake.
Finally, I would like to add – that I appeared on Scott Johnson’s radio show and Scott was a superb host and I thought the show was terribly interesting – not just because of my role – but through the intelligent comments and questions of Scott and his co-host.
All the more reason for O’Hara to come on the show.
Frank,
Can you explain the dichotomy between Scott Johnson the commenter and Scott the “radio” personality?
***
O’Hara is an Irish man from Worcester MA, Even the nerds in Worcester from Joe’s era were tough.
I can only say that Scott was a gentleman to me when I appeared on the show.
Frank,
Fair enough.
Thank you for the reply!
Scott:
Joe O’Hara joins the list of people who truly fought against Raniere and NXIVM when the whole world was against them.
People like John Tighe, Frank Parlato, Susan Dones and others fought against a legion of lawyers paid for with Bronfman money.
For a long time, these people were lone voices in a wilderness full of NXIVM wolves.
Wolves who had the legal machinery of the entire State of New York arrayed against them.
Joe O’Hara has my full respect.
Read the PDF text of O’Hara vs. Raniere to see what a monolithic machine NXIVM was.
https://ia800908.us.archive.org/11/items/292927-ohara-v-raniere/292927-ohara-v-raniere.pdf
All the more reason for O’Hara to come on the show. I’ve read the lawsuit before, it isn’t very well written, and the judge who threw it out of O’Hara’s bankruptcy proceedings agreed. O’Hara wanted to keep it to help with his bankruptcy, the judge saw it as throwing good money after bad money, and decided to not allow O’Hara to dig himself a deeper hole.
Scott – I disagree with you for once. I think the lawsuit was well written and was a blueprint of crimes the Bronfman-Raniere syndicate were doing. I rather suspect that the judge did not give it a fair hearing and it got tossed out. Joe should have had his day in court.
We don’t need to agree on everything. I agree with the judge, the lawsuit was essentially a list of accusations and names, with very little evidence. O’Hara should refile the lawsuit if it is so good.
I agree and as I read it thought how helpful a resource it could be for further charges of money laundering tax evasion and fraud!
Scott, why do you find the lawsuit to be not very well written? You mention in another comment that he doesnt provide evidence, but the evidence should not be included with this document, right? The lawsuit states that he has evidence of crimes such as computer hacking and email theft, and other various types of harassment.
While not every single piece of evidence needs to be in a lawsuit, there needs to be enough to show foundation for the accusations. Merely listing crimes and names isn’t enough. The judge who dismissed the lawsuit agrees with this, and opposing lawyers often get lawsuits thrown out for lack of specific evidence regarding the accusations. So yes, at least some of the evidence should be included in this document. If he had the evidence, he should have at least described the nature of the evidence, if not put some of in the lawsuit to show that it wasn’t a mere frivolous/SLAPP lawsuit or what people call a “fishing expedition,” where the lawsuit doesn’t have any, or hardly any basis, and the plaintiff is primarily looking to get discovery to find evidence of the crime.
Thanks for answering .
One of the things that puzzles me in this (or in a similar) type of lawsuit is how the accuser can legally obtain evidence without discovery, because there is no way to obtain computer info, phone records, or other private information otherwise.
Often police will not investigate because they claim it’s a civil matter, and also many police departments are lacking the resources to deal with cybercrimes, which is surprising since criminals are increasing utilizing the internet.
If Scott had a pair, he would have the sultan on his show. But, I think he is afraid to. Cluck cluck…
And if he cared about getting double digit listeners.
He should also make a run at Flowers. I promise to listen if Flowers is on. Think of all the Twitter chatter they could have.
See above. I’ve been banned from Twitter, so it wouldn’t be much chatter.
Nutjob
Isn’t Scott’s show dedicated to exposing MLM scans? I have very little experience with MLM scams (though several of my close family members did get involved in this type of scam about 25 years ago, and ended up loosing large amounts of money…) so I think Scott’s show is likely to prevent others from making that type of mistake.
Thanks, Flowers. That’s awesome of you to offer. Scott and his listener would love to hear all about the experiences of your family members. Sat evening around dinner time work for you?
To change the topic a little bit… Would you ever consider dating someone who uses libraries for warmth, walks with a cane, enjoys playing super hero dress-up, is infatuated with the brilliance of wikipedia, has racist & misogynistic moments, froths at the mouth over a minor celebrity, and will treat you like the lady you deserve to be treated?
I wasn’t offering, Nutjob. I thought my comment was self-explanatory, but I guess I was wrong. What I meant was since I have no personal experience with MLM scams, why would Scott want to interview me?
If Scott is interested in the story I referred to, that information is available in old news articles. Not only did many people lose money in this scam, but the guys operating the scam were later arrested, convicted, and went to prison. One of their children later committed suicide, likely due to the repercussions. It’s a sad story, where everyone ended up losing….which is to be expected when someone starts out trying to take advantage of others.
But maybe you could go on Scott’s show and explain why you’re so interested in trolling me? Is the trolling part of an MLM? I’m aware that groups of organized trolls do target people for harassment (and there IS research to prove this) so I’m only half kidding about this.
😄
Nutjob,
Mmmh, “someone who uses libraries for warmth, walks with a cane, enjoys playing super hero dress-up, is infatuated with the brilliance of wikipedia, has racist & misogynistic moments, and gets hard over minor celebrities”, I wonder to whom you are referring to Nutjob?
A man who lurks in the shadows, I suspect…
Anybody except Hutchinson is welcome to be on my show, you just have to step forward.
If Someone had a pair, she would come on my show. But, I think she is afraid to. Cluck cluck…