If Clare Bronfman Flees to Fiji, She Must Do It Before Sentencing!

Clare may be leaving on a jet plane to Fiji.

From the moment she was indicted, the worriment about Clare Webb Bronfman, 40, fleeing the US pre-trial was serious enough to set her bail at a staggering $100 million.

She was also subject to home arrest with an ankle monitor. Since late July 2018 – for almost a year and a half – she has been allowed outside her luxury Manhattan apartment on a schedule of two times a week for 90 minutes – and 120 minutes once per week.

In April 2018, she signed a plea deal. It suggested she would get a sentence in the range of 21-27 months for two felonies she pleaded guilty to committing plus a $6 million fine.

It is a great lesson on law and the federal system: Her plea deal is worthless.

Just like almost any plea deal in the federal system.

She thought she was getting a plea deal with a two year sentence [21-27 months] – and last month she found out that was out the window.

The judge said he is considering a higher sentence – not based on the two crimes she pleaded guilty to but based on her Pre-Sentencing Report which re-calculated her sentencing range using higher sentencing guidelines.

In part, that may have been because of the large number of alleged victims who came forward to complain about Bronfman brutality.

These alleged victims complained about alleged crimes that had nothing to do with the two felony crimes she pleaded guilty to.

In a sense, it is shocking. We all know Clare is a monster. An evil sadistic beast.  But if people can come forward and level allegations at a defendant – – without any of it being tested in court – and this can effect her sentence – without a trial – where is due process?

What is the value of a plea bargain?

Clare made a pretty stupid plea deal.

As Joe O’Hara proved in his federal case in El Paso – unless the sentence is fixed in writing – it is not a contract, it is merely a suggestion. It has no force of law.

Clare Bronfman hired the most expensive lawyer in the US – celebrity lawyer Mark Geragos. He fashioned for her what everybody thought was a super sweetheart deal. Everybody thought it was going to be a two year sentence and a fine of $6 million.

Clare Bronfman leaves court with Mark Geragos about an hour after fainting in court

The only things that were fixed were her pleading guilty – and her having to pony up the $6 million.

The heiress did not buy down her sentence after all.

What she pleaded to is not what she will be sentenced for, it appears.

Yes, this is America and it only goes to show you that you cannot trust deals made with the feds that contain any expectations outside the four walls of the agreement.

Clare’s lawyer fumbled. He did not lock down the sentence. The language of the plea deal is that the sentence is only a suggestion based on estimates made by the prosecution – and clearly states the judge was not bound to following the suggestion at all.

In short, the plea deal said nothing. Not legally. Nothing at all.

Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis

In fairness to the good Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis – a hero to many of the readers of Frank Report – he fairly warned Clare at the time of her pleading guilty on Good Friday, April 19, 2019.

She pleaded guilty to conspiracy to conceal and harbor illegal aliens for financial gain and fraudulent use of identification and he warned her that the 21-27 months suggested in the plea deal was not something he was bound to follow.

Let’s go back and recall a little of that hearing.

THE COURT:  Have you discussed that charge with your attorneys?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, Your Honor, I have.


THE COURT: Okay. And, Mr. Geragos, in your view, does your client understand these charges that have been brought against your client in the superseding information?

MR. GERAGOS: Yes, Your Honor, we discussed it. Outside counsel discussed it. Expert counsel discussed it. It’s been a very thorough — and we’ve discussed it with the government. It’s been a very thorough back and forth.

All these experts did was come up with a worthless plea deal. The sentence is expected to be a lot longer than what they thought she was going to get.


THE COURT: Miss Bronfman, are you satisfied with the assistance your attorneys have given you thus far in this matter?

THE DEFENDANT: I am, extremely.

She has always been a fool, putting her trust in morons and Vanguards and Prefects and faith that her money could buy outcomes.


The judge went over the charges with Clare. He asked the government to set forth the elements of each crime that the government would have to prove to a jury unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt in order to convict her of both Counts if she decided to go to trial.

Moira Penza for the DOJ explained it at length. She explained how there was an agreement between Bronfman and others to conceal or harbor an illegal alien [Sylvie] for financial gain.

Sylvie was in the USA on a work visa that had been procured through false statements by Clare Bronfman. And Bronfman harbored Sylvie and obtained her labor and services without paying her.


THE COURT: Miss Bronfman, do you understand the elements of the crime that the government would have to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, and unanimously in order to convict you of the crime charged in Count One of the superseding information?

THE DEFENDANT: I do, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Let’s move on to Count Two. Count Two alleges fraudulent use of identification…

The judge explained that Bronfman with others used the identification of Jane Doe 7 [Pamela Cafritz] in violation of federal law.

THE COURT: So do you understand the charge that has been brought against you in Count Two?

THE DEFENDANT: I do, Your Honor.

The judge asked the government to explain the elements of the crime that would be required  to be proven in order to convict her.

Moira Penza again did the honors, explaining that Bronfman caused the use of the name and [American Express] credit card number belonging to Cafritz by facilitating Keith Raniere’s use of the credit card after Cafritz died.

It is all so foolish.

Bronfman is a woman worth $200 million plus. She cheated Sylvie out of $100,000 worth of salary. And she aided or abetted Raniere in tax evasion for what at most was $100,000 in evaded taxes.

She squandered more than $100 million on Raniere’s caprices and vendettas. And she had to cheat people and the IRS for $200,000 – one tenth of one percent of her net worth?

Penza said her motive was “part of a scheme to allow [Raniere] to falsely portray himself as a renunciate and to not pay taxes on his income and assets.”

It shows how stupid she is – much like many of the followers of Keith Alan Raniere.

THE COURT: So, Miss Bronfman, do you understand the elements of the crime….?

THE DEFENDANT: I do, Your Honor.


THE COURT: I have in front of me a plea agreement in United States of America against Clare Bronfman, 18-CR-204-S3. It’s marked as Court’s Exhibit Number 1. It’s dated today, April 19th, 2019, and it consists of 11 pages…  [it could have been 11 sheets of toilet paper for all the value it had].

THE COURT: Miss Bronfman, have you read this document?

THE DEFENDANT: I have, Your Honor.

THE COURT: And have you discussed it with your attorneys?

THE DEFENDANT: I have, Your Honor.


THE COURT: Now, I’m going to go over the statutory penalties associated with pleading guilty to these crimes. The statutory penalties are set forth in paragraph 1 of the plea agreement.

As to Count One, conspiracy to conceal and harbor aliens for financial gain, the maximum term of imprisonment is ten years…. there is no minimum term of imprisonment. The maximum supervised release term is three years, which would follow any term of imprisonment…. There’s a maximum fine of $250,000.

Restitution. With regard to restitution, the parties agree that restitution in the amount of $96,605.25 payable to … Jane Doe 12… should be ordered by the Court…

Do you understand the statutory penalties associated with pleading guilty to Count One?

THE DEFENDANT: I do, Your Honor.

THE COURT: With regard to Count Two, fraudulent use of identification, the maximum term of imprisonment is 15 years. There’s no minimum term of imprisonment. The maximum supervised release term is three years, which would follow any term of imprisonment…. The maximum fine is the greater of $250,000, or twice the gross gain, or twice the gross loss. Restitution is mandatory in the full amount of each victim’s losses as determined by the Court….

Sentence is imposed … on the two counts can run consecutively or concurrently. You understand the statutory penalties associated with pleading guilty to Count Two of the superseding information?

THE DEFENDANT: I do, Your Honor.

Right here the honorable judge is telling her that he can sentence her to the max on both counts and the sentences on each can run consecutively – meaning she can get as much as 25 years.

She said she understood that. But her attorneys, her experts, were telling her not to worry. Nothing like that was going to happen.

THE COURT: At this point, I’m going to discuss the sentencing process with you, Miss Bronfman. Mr. Geragos, have you discussed sentencing with your client?

MR. GERAGOS: I have, Your Honor.

THE COURT: And in your view, does Miss Bronfman have a basic understanding about how sentencing would work in her case?

MR. GERAGOS: More than basic.

Again this understanding was worthless.

THE COURT: Okay. Miss Bronfman, have your attorneys answered all your questions about the sentencing process?

MR. GERAGOS: They have, Your Honor.

THE COURT: And do you believe you have a basic understanding, at least a basic understanding, about how sentencing would work in your case?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Well, I’m going to discuss it with you as well.


THE COURT: And if at any point you wish to consult with your attorneys, just let me know, we’ll stop, and you can have a conversation with your attorneys. We’re in no hurry.

THE DEFENDANT: Thank you. I appreciate it.

THE COURT: Now, the government has made a prediction as to the calculation of your guideline. Let me understand this, Ms. Penza. Assuming the defendant pleads guilty today and accepts responsibility, the government is predicting that the defendant will have an adjusted offense level of 16, and assuming she is in Criminal History Category I, that her guideline would be 21 to 27 months in the custody of the Attorney General. Is that your current prediction?

MR. PENZA: Yes, it is, Your Honor.

THE COURT: You understand the government’s current prediction?

THE DEFENDANT: I do, Your Honor.

The use of the word “current” should have been a red flag. Current? That means it could change in the future. And it did.

The “current” prediction changed to the present. The Pre-Sentencing Report came up with a new, higher calculation.

THE COURT: Now, in this plea agreement letter that’s dated today, April 19th, 2019 …  there is an agreement regarding your right to appeal your sentence.

The agreement letter says, and I want to make sure you understand this, that by signing this agreement, you agree not to appeal, or in any other way challenge the sentence I impose upon you if it is 27 months or less. If I were to sentence to you more than 27 months in jail, and you believe there was a legal or other error in my doing that, you would then have the right to appeal your sentence to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Do you understand that?

THE DEFENDANT: I do, Your Honor.

These appeals have a snowball’s chance in hell. The judge –  in sentencing her – will make sure he has solid reasons for her longer sentence. He will explain in open court and on the record. He will do so with an eye towards withstanding an appeal.

The fact that Clare can appeal a sentence longer than 27 months is as meaningless as the estimated sentencing guidelines.

THE COURT: Do you understand that you have the right to appeal only if I sentence you to more than 27 months?


THE COURT: Do you understand that even if the sentence I give is you more severe than what you may be thinking or hoping you will receive, you are still going to be bound by your guilty pleas and not permitted to withdraw them, and you will not be able to challenge or appeal that sentence as long as it is 27 months or less, as we have discussed?

THE DEFENDANT: I do, Your Honor.

Yes, the judge gave her fair warning but undoubtedly her attorneys and the experts told her not to worry.

The judge told her she could get 25 years and the only thing she could do was appeal the length of the sentence.

There was never a guarantee she would get 27 months. Clare was trusting things that were not in writing.

Of course, this is poetic irony. Clare used to sucker people into deals without signing them and then sue the bejesus out of them – like she did with me. By not signing her agreements, she could pick and choose whether to hold someone to the deal or act as if there was no deal.

Now she signed the most important contract of her life – only to find out later that she had been suckered.

All the words about 21-27 months mean nothing. The only real thing is she can’t be sentenced to more than 25 years.

That’s what she signed. Period.


THE COURT: …. Are you ready to plead at this time?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. How do you plead to the charge contained in Count One of the superseding information charging you with conspiracy to conceal and harbor illegal aliens for financial gain?

THE DEFENDANT: I plead guilty, Your Honor.

THE COURT: How do you plead to the charge contained as Count Two of the superseding information charging you with fraudulent use of identification, guilty or not guilty?

THE DEFENDANT: Guilty, Your Honor.


The sentencing date is tentatively scheduled for Valentine’s Day 2020. A delay was caused because her Pre-Sentencing Report was not completed, largely because of so many alleged victims of other alleged crimes coming forward to be heard and considered as part of her sentencing.

The judge said he is considering sentencing her to more than 27 months, in part because of the Pre-Sentencing Report and the other victims.

I don’t think Moira Penza for the prosecution deliberately miscalculated sentencing guidelines.

What Clare’s attorneys failed to tell her is that her plea deal was nothing more than a suggestion based on an estimate.

They probably failed to tell her that the Pre-Sentencing Report, written by the probation department, might come up with something altogether different than the prosecution’s estimates.

They failed to impress on Clare that the judge might sentence her to a far longer sentence than 27 months – and there was nothing she could do about it other than appeal and if they were honest with her they should have told her that she likely had almost zero chance of winning that appeal.

If they had negotiated a more structured plea deal – one that read that the judge either agrees to 27 months maximum or rejects the plea deal  – Clare would know where she stands.

With a plea deal like that, the judge would have either agreed to 27 months or had the option of rejecting it and Clare would have had to go to trial.

This is what Joe O’Hara did with his plea deal. And he didn’t have a cadre of high-priced attorneys to represent him. In fact, he had a Public Defender who – not that long before he was assigned to Joe’s case – was selling used cars.

He did not leave it up to the judge to decide his sentence based on current and changeable estimates. He rejected his attorney’s advice – and wrote his own deal. It said that his maximum sentence was 3 years. Take it or leave it.

The judge had the choice to accept or reject it. If he rejected it, Joe would have to stand trial. The judge accepted it.

Regardless of what was in Joe’s Pre-Sentencing Report  – or what his alleged victim had to say – Joe knew that the judge could not sentence him to more than 3 years. And that’s exactly what he did.

The irony is not lost on me that it was Clare’s perjury and vengeance that bankrupted Joe and made him vulnerable to false federal charges against him, leaving him without funds to get proper legal representation.

Clare unjustly brought Joe to where he wound up.

And now Clare is justly headed there herself – and ironically likely to do more time than Joe.

Such is karma.

But Clare is likely going to be sentenced not only for crimes she pleaded guilty to but quite likely on what is in her presentencing report which seems to allege crimes she did not plead guilty to.

I’m not saying Clare does not deserve the harsher penalty – but I will defend her right to due process.

I think that for all crimes she did not plead guilty to, she should be tried in court – with evidence and the right to cross examine accusers.

It is outrageous that she should be sentenced to a lengthier term based on what alleged victims claim – without having those claims tested by trial.

Of course, I think Clare should be imprisoned for more than 27 months. This woman tried to destroy my life by filing a false criminal complaint against me – and then perjuring herself before the grand jury.  But she was not charged for that.

It should not impact her sentence.

I think the historic, common law principles of due process supersede one individual, Clare Webb Bronfman, monstrous though she may be. Abandoning due process is more monstrous.

Even though I sympathize with the victims of Clare Bronfman – and I am one of them – the only two victims she has pleaded guilty to victimizing are Sylvie and the estate of Pam Cafritz.

Allowing other alleged victims [and that includes me] of other crimes she was not convicted of to impact her sentencing is not due process.

This spits in the eye of due process!

Which brings me to my final point:

Clare will not likely walk out of court after she is sentenced. She will walk in freely and leave the court in handcuffs.

I believe the judge will order Clare remanded to custody at the time she is sentenced. That means they will handcuff her on the spot and lead her from court to prison.

Sometimes, judges allow a defendant a month or two to organize their affairs and report to the prison on a certain date.

I do not think the judge can take that risk with Clare Bronfman. Not even with a $100 million bail – which shows what a flight risk she was before she was convicted.

Even if she forfeits bail, she still has another $100 million plus her island in Fiji and her Los Angeles real estate which I recovered for her – worth $26 million or more – the latter two assets she neglected to put on her net worth statement for the court.

I think Clare would not flee if the sentence was 27 months – or even three or 4 years.

But at some length of sentence, I think she will consider fleeing.

What is that length?

If her sentence is 7 or 10 years, will she flee?

What if the judge decides to give her 10 years? Then she goes to a maximum security prison. If she knew that was her fate for the next decade, would she run?

2-3 years and she gets a federal camp. No bars. No hard living. But if it is 10 years, she will live a life of brutality and is not likely to be able to stand it.

So what can happen? If she is sentenced to a long sentence, I think the judge will order her remanded immediately.

Otherwise, she could leave court and head on a private plane to her island in Fiji where – with her money – she will not be extradited. There are other countries she can go to also.  She has the money to buy refugees status.

But here is the tricky part.

Clare does not know what the judge is going to do.

It seems she will be sentenced to more than 27 months. He already signaled that. And by his signalling that, it means it is likely to be substantially more than 27 months.

In other words, he has already decided to sentence her to something which she can try to appeal.  Why would he do that unless it was substantially more than 27 months?

The sentence he has in mind has to be at least four 4 years and could be a lot more, I suspect.

Clare has to guess. And if she wakes up and realizes she is going to prison for years – and not a women’s camp – but a stone-cold prison – she might decide to flee before sentencing, which may be her only chance to flee.

I would keep an eagle eye on her between now and her sentencing date.

She has the ability to escape. She could disable her ankle monitor. She has money to hire someone to do it. Harvey Weinstein disabled his repeatedly. Then she could slip off to a private plane and away we go.

She will be on the beach on her private island in Fiji in a matter of hours.

And guess what the rules are there?

Clare Bronfman purchased 80 percent of Wakaya Island in Fiji.

If a Fiji judge – usually a native making about $3,000 per year US – decides Clare was unfairly convicted or for any other reason, he can refuse extradition. He can also avoid making a decision about extradition by unilaterally ordering that she serve her sentence in Fiji – right on her island.

He can suspend sentence and there is nothing the US can do. All she has to do is get there and per$uade a judge.

The terms of the US extradition treaty with Fiji requires the US to accept the decision of the judges there .

So, when Clare’s sentence is completed in Fiji, she can legally return to the US and there is nothing the US can do to further punish her – unless, of course, they charge her with other crimes.

She will have served her sentence legally, even if the Fiji judge sentence$ her to only one day in prison.

Once any judge in Fiji decides she may $tay in Fiji, she is not a fugitive anymore.

She cannot be extradited. She is legally $erving her $entence in Fiji.

That’s how it works.

As everyone who has studied it knows, the judiciary in Fiji is for sale. It is consistently ranked as one of the most corrupt in the world.

I think this is why Keith Raniere chose Fiji for Clare.

Clare has more than enough money to buy a judge to declare she can serve her sentence in Fiji.

All she has to do is get there.

When her sentence was only going to be two years in a women’s camp –  it was easier to do the time and be free again in the USA.

But now the equation has changed.

It has changed enough that were she my responsibility, I would keep an eye on her now.

Wakaya Island


Soaring cliffs overlook the ocean


Typical prison cell in federal prison


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 challenge all females on this site to answer these 5 questions about Clare’s lawyer, Billy Savino:

    1) If any woman here decided to fuck Billy Savino, do you honestly think that your kids would break the 5-foot mark? Please explain your answer for us.

    2) Do you think that AnonyMaker wishes to bed Billy Savino and carry his offspring midgets? Maybe that’s why she’s so offended at Joe’s comments about his height.

    3) What would it take for you to swallow your pride and copulate with Billy Savino?

    4) If you decided to ’69’ with Billy Savino, do you think it would be possible not to be sucking on his toes? Please explain your answer for us, as 69’ing might be difficult due to his midget-like height.

    5) If you ever decided to sleep with Billy Savino, would you ever tell your friends about it? Or would you be too ashamed to have fornicated with a virtual midget?

  • Thank you for putting this all together. Could more charges be waiting in the wings for Clare Bronfman from NDNY? While I can see a couple of tactics which Bronfman could use to try to mitigate her current circumstances, mum’s the word. After all, Clare Bronfman appears to be in a “leadership” position with whatever is left now, after her 17 years in Nxivm.

    Over last summer, a contingent of Mexican Nxivm chowderheads visited her in her Manhattan apartment, since their names weren’t included amongst the Nxivm people with whom she wasn’t allowed to communicate. This would indicate that Bronfman still considers herself above the law. Sneaky Pete.

    How furious might Clare be with Nancy Salzman? Could she ever stomach Allison Mack? What can Clare think of Lauren Salzman now? Also, now that Clare got her tenth grade education level moved up by acquiring a GED, perhaps she realizes that everytime the Judge asked her if she understood what was happening during her plea deal, Clare should have said, “no, Your Honor.”

    Also still going unmentioned, beyond that Clare Bronfman might be forced to contend with more federal charges, is that the Fashion Police will be after her forevermore. As shown in the photo of her leaving court, what the hell was she wearing?

    Her two attorneys are dressed in business attire and high heels. Clare tolerated having the plainer female attorney walk alongside her. But it looks as though Clare preferred the Foxy Lady attorney to be out of her sight, “back of the bus.”

    It looks as if Raniere singed off whatever was left of Bronfman’s femininity into a state anti-sexuality. Not just asexuality, anti-sexuality. There Clare is in front of the Courthouse looking like an elderly golf caddy from Vermont. Raniere demolished Clare with abuse, shame and some kinds of emotional, mental and sexualized torment.

    Jesus Christ, Clare, as the old Pantene ad explained, “don’t hate ‘me’ because I’m beautiful.” At least, do try not to be so obvious. Maybe Nicki Klein could give Clare some tips? Nicki could at least help Clare Bronfman move on up to becoming ordinary-looking. And since Clare sent many $16,000 donations to Hillary Clinton, maybe Hillary will give Clare a good run for her money.

    Mr. Ed, the talking horse, might’ve helped Clare too, but Ed has never had time for bad conversationalists, and Clare looks to have passed through her life, minus charm or any sense of humor.

    • Nicki Clyne. Whoops, Allison Mack’s hubby. And ” It looks as if Raniere singed off… into a state OF anti-sexuality.” As Billie Holiday put it, “Don’t explain.” However, I shall be happy to discuss poor Clare’s antisexuality later. Also, perhaps Clare can recoup some of her financial losses, over in Fiji , but those ideas too, are best left unmentioned. She still has money, but her personal energetics are looking a lot like old birdshot upon the window of a 1958 Edsel.

  • Clare:

    If you do flee to Fiji before you depart could you please have your 39 plus lawyers return all of the Blackmail material that you, Allison Mack, Lauren Salzman and Keith Raniere collected on the NXIVM DOS women?
    Just have your army of lawyers hand the salacious videos and photos plus the documents to the FBI agents in charge of the case.

    • Lauren Salzman testified, and it’s printed in this blog, that when she was approached by Keith to join DOS and to cultivate new members she asked about Clare Bronfman. She testified Keith didn’t want Clare to be connected to DOS. It has not yet been established that Clare knew of or saw the collateral, or that she was aware of what it contained except some innocuous fraternity level confessions.

      Perhaps you could illumine me.

    • Shadow, why do you keep saying that Nx should return the blackmail material?
      You have said, correctly:
      That such material is easy to copy
      and you do not trust them.
      So how could you think they returned it all? Makes no sense

  • Sorry Frank, you’re simply wrong on all counts.

    1) Clare Bear cannot simply fly to Fiji and live her life normally, cuz she’d not only have to give up the $100M bail she put up, but her remaining ‘trust’ (valued at another $100M) would also be off limits to her if she becomes a fugitive, according to the trust administrator’s testimony in court. She’d have to give up most of what she has if she runs away, since her other assets (held in trust) cannot be given to her if she becomes a fugitive.

    2) Clare ain’t gonna live on that tiny shithole island infested with mosquitoes for the rest of her life. She’d go stir crazy. It’s a vacation spot, not a place to LIVE THE REST OF YOUR LIFE. It’s much better to serve 4-5 years in a US prison and then to live the rest of her life in luxury, instead of living on that tiny island with most of her fortune and assets cut off from her, with mosquitoes everywhere and no decent restaurants.

    3) Due process is NOT being violated here. Why? Cuz Clare already knew that the judge could go above the guidelines by considering ‘unindicted’ behavior, yet she agreed anyway. That means nothing nefarious is happening. She could have went to trial but chose not to. If a person has hurt a lot of people (via unindicted crimes for which they were never charged) then they should be scared about facing additional jail time. That’s called justice. That’s not a lack of due process. Letting her skate with a 2 year sentence for tons of unindicted behavior would be a lack of justice. The judge is not relying on hearsay or gossip, he’s relying on official statements from real witnesses that he finds credible. It’s not as if he’s just adding years to her sentence from gossip.

    4) You and Claviger are advocating liberal judicial policies here. You’re simply not thinking this thru carefully. Claviger is a shitty attorney and it took him 6 tries to pass the BAR exam.

  • I think Clare should defy the judge he broke her plea deal and our Legatus should set up a new Nxivm kingdom in Fiji. When our glorious Vanguard wins his release through his appeal he can join her there. And damn you Prefect.

    • Legatus Pro Tempore, aka Nicki Clyne:
      Since when are blackmail and extortion acceptable behavior in the business world?

      Allison Mack, Lauren Salzman, Clare Bronfman and Keith Raniere had absolutely no business collecting blackmail material to coerce others’ behavior.

  • Seems to me, if I was Clare, I would gather all the articles about me on the Frank Report and print them out and have them bound and then bring them to court to demonstrate extreme animus of an ex-public relations agent who is trained and skilled at swaying large numbers of people and public opinion. I would point out the ongoing influence of a readership of over how many million (?) and then I would have each and every person who complained to the judge testify about how many times they read Frank Report.

    On and on;

    Until I proved the possibility that the owner of Frank Report was attempting, as a past and present litigant with Ms. Bronfman, to influence and sway the court’s opinion towards her sentencing. Does the judge really want another trial brought down from the supreme court because he allowed himself to by swayed by public reaction to one of Ms. Bronfmans ex-employees, (Frank) and who has demonstrated extreme animus towards her?


    If I was the worthy judge, I would objectively stick with the deal because while she might have to initially tolerate an increased sentence, the Frank Report, and its multi-million readership created by a professional Public Relations Agent has definitely incited additional opinion about Ms. Bronfman since the trial. and could thereby accidentally prejudice the worthy judge’s opinion by extension. It is a cause to hang an appeal on.

    Unless the judge has a benchmark demonstrating that his opinion at the time of conviction was (X) how can he prove he hasn’t been influenced and become biased by Frank Report? Because even if he does not read Frank Report, he will be dealing with complainants who do.

    People’s’ opinions change over time and circumstances.

    I cautioned FR a couple of months ago when you changed direction that it worked against you.

    • Last checked FR was at 5.8 million. I think public opinion on the Bronfman cunt is valid. IMO she’s the dumbest rich person on the planet. She deserves to rot in the hell she created. She and her master deserve to be treated like prison slaves dinning in the finest nutraloaf. Frank elevated them into their own teachings. Everyone is winning

      • I’m way more compassionate than you because I understand the thrall that was cast upon the women. The techniques were scientific and esoteric, and the seduction slow and incremental. Much greater people have been devoured by the same methods.

        Show some compassion.

        I guarantee she is experiencing gut-wrenching self doubt, recrimination, justification and confusion.
        She’s probably still trying to figure out “how the hell this happened!?” while serving humanity by following the teachings of a man she thought was constructive and ethical.

        I mean seriously, talk about a farce. A girl with a half billion dollars is suckered into paying Raniere’s child’s expenses with the credit card given to her by Raniere, because he was afraid to use the card himself and now she could do 2 to 5 for it? Man she must feel really bad when what he did to her really sinks in….

        Show some compassion.

    • Anonymous, I suppose that’s a tactic which Clare’s attorneys may use. For instance, no doubt Harvey Weinstein’s attorneys will blame Ronan Farrow. They may say that Farrow’s family history made him feel extreme animus toward Weinstein. They may allege that Farrow incited additional opinion on Weinstein.

      I guess that’s a risk for investigative journalists, and it’s why such journalists must take pains to report accurately. So far, Frank’s reporting has proved to be factual.

      • And incendiary.

        He has created a persona of Clare which may or may not have anything to do with reality.

        And then used that persona, like a boogie man, to subtly incite animosity.

        I noticed it, and let it go.

        I have no dog in the fight.

        But you can be absolutely sure her attorneys are vacuuming up every word!

        I believe what is really at stake is the $100 mil she put up as collateral. Possibly some people don’t want her to get it back.

        But this blog has definitely changed public opinion against Clare for the worse.

        And as such is now culpable for its effect on her sentencing 8 months later; either directly by influencing the opinions of court officials, probation officers, etc.or by “beating the bushes” and outing potential claimants who see the possibility of a payoff by claiming victim status.

        There is no question FR will undoubtedly find its way into transcripts sometime in the future.

        Which means you’ve attained immortality Frank…at least your words have.

    • She should also tell the Judge that she was previously caught lying under oath in court against Frank Parlato.

    • To Anonymous:
      Are you accusing Frank Parlato of being a Propagandist?
      The same way that CNN, MSNBC,the CBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, NPR, Carlos Slim’s New York Times, the Washington Post, and Rose Laura Junco and Keith Raniere’s Knife Media are packed with propagandists who denigrate President Trump at every opportunity?

      I would remind you that the best form of propaganda is based on the truth.
      Where is all of that blackmail material that Allison Mack, Lauren Salzman, Keith Raniere and Clare Bonfman collected on the women in NXIVM DOS?

  • Can’t say for certain, but one has to assume as part of her original release on bail, and court ordered electronically monitoring, she was also forced to surrender her US and any other passports she held. Even using private aircraft for travel, it’s highly unlikely any “escape” could be executed without a very high level of complexity.

  • I can just see her paying millions to someone to sort out an escape plan and then getting busted, losing the millions and ending up in jail for double the time! The story of her life continues with throwing more millions away. It would be fun to see another chapter of the debacle

  • Thanks for a really interesting and enlightening article. I see your point about due process. And that was an interesting point about Fiji being a deliberate choice – is that confirmed that Raniere had a hand in “helping” Clare choose that location? It is mind boggling what a complete and utter manipulative bastard he is. Is there anyone in his acquaintance that he didn’t plan on screwing over? Not that I think he truly cared about anyone in a human sense, but do you have the impression there was anyone useful enough to him that he wouldn’t deliberately harm them?

  • I suppose it’s always fun to speculate.

    I don’t think she’s smart enough to engineer an escape – though I suppose that someone clever who thought they stood to benefit, could engineer it for her.

    The other question is, if she fled would she even have any money? From what I remember seeing, all her liquid assets and trusts over which she has some discretion – at least what remains after all she spent on, and lost to, Raniere – are tied up, but I’ve seen references which suggest that there may be some tightly-held old trusts that could continue to provide her significant income even if she was a fugitive. I’ve never seen a clear explanation of it all, though one would think it would have been accounted for when she made arrangements for bond.

    If she escaped, it would be a virtually unprecedented scandal, so I assume the government is on top of things, perhaps particularly in the run-up to her sentencing.

    • Don’t sweat it, Slick. She won’t be leaving the country. You can unbunch your panties. She may, however, be suicided, and of course, you will believe it and defend it until it becomes irrefutable that she was probably murdered and then you’ll claim you agreed with the conspiracy kooks all along. But because you are enlightened by Allah, it won’t be a conspiracy.

        • The Epstein estate has a huge financial interest in fending off suits by victims, by posing his death as a murder, rather than an attempt to avoid responsibility for his crimes right after transferring assets to offshore trusts – now there’s a conspiracy of sorts for you. And Baden is a rather notorious, and controversial, expert-for-hire who has helped defend people like O. J. Simpson, and had a checkered record as a medical examiner, having twice been fired from positions for things like “sloppy record keeping, poor judgment, and a lack of cooperation”:

          Why You Might Not Want to Believe Michael Baden, Celebrity Pathologist, on Epstein’s Death

          While Baden has taken the position that the signs “suggest” or “point much more to” strangulation, he can’t rule out suicide by hanging, either.

          But the video evidence from the jail on the night of his death – not the night of his first suicide attempt, which was infamously lost – shows that Baden is almost certainly wrong:

          “The 20-page indictment lays out for the first time what happened inside the jail the night Epstein died; video footage showed no one entered the wing between 10:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. the following morning.

          Epstein’s cell was about 15 feet away from the guards’ desk, where investigators concluded the pair were browsing the internet and sleeping, and they only discovered he was dead “with a noose around his neck” when they went to give him breakfast around 6:30 a.m.”


          “By 10 p.m., “all inmates in the MCC were locked in their cells for the night” — and while Noel and another, unidentified guard were supposed to conduct an inmate count at that time, surveillance video shows they didn’t do it, according to the indictment.

          At 10: 30 p.m., video allegedly shows Noel “briefly walked up to, then walked back from, the door to the tier in which Epstein was housed.”

          “As confirmed by the video obtained from the MCC’s internal video system, this was the last time anyone, including any correctional officer, walked up to, let alone entered, the only entrance to the tier” until Epstein was found hanging eight hours later, the indictment says.

          Noel, who began working a double shift at 4 p.m., and Thomas, who began working an overtime shift at midnight, were allegedly caught on surveillance video seated at their desk for about two hours “without moving,” with court papers saying they “appeared to have been asleep.””


      • Kid, don’t get your panties in a bind over my being blase’ regarding theorizing about what sensational things Bronfman might possibly do.

        And, again, show me a case of someone who was actually “irrefutably” suicided – you almost certainly can’t, because those sorts of things almost never happen except in the fertile minds of conspiracy theorists.

        Once more, you need to learn to pay close attention – in the military, they call it attention to detail. While there’s been all sorts of fuss in the media about the lost video of Epstein’s first suicide attempt, also lost has been the un-sensational but critical detail that video of the unit from the night he died shows no one going, and two negligent guards have been indicted, who would sing like canaries to avoid going to prison themselves (quite possibly a death sentence, as former corrections officers don’t do well inside) if there were anything to know.

        It’s you and your fellow travelers who think they are so much smarter than the “sheeple” in having figured out that it’s really the shape-shifting reptilian aliens behind everything, or whatever. The belief in “special knowledge” like that is a common characteristic of both conspiracy theorists, and cultists. And it’s related to the Dunning-Kruger effect, commonly seen for instance among members of Scientology who believe they have increased their IQs and can travel outside of their bodies, but who mostly get by doing unskilled work and can never actually demonstrate their powers (and of course believe they’re up against an inter-galactic conspiracy theory).

        What Is the Dunning-Kruger Effect?
        ‘The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people wrongly overestimate their knowledge or ability in a specific area. This tends to occur because a lack of self-awareness prevents them from accurately assessing their skills.

        The concept is based on a 1999 paper by Cornell University psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger. The pair tested participants on their logic, grammar, and sense of humor, and found that those who performed in the bottom quartile rated their skills far above average. For example, those in the 12th percentile self-rated their expertise to be, on average, in the 62nd percentile.

        The researchers attributed the trend to a problem of metacognition—the ability to analyze one’s own thoughts or performance. “Those with limited knowledge in a domain suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach mistaken conclusions and make regrettable errors, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it,” they wrote.’


        You can’t get out of that rut of the bottom 12th percentile until you learn to start to do things like question your own beliefs, and give serious consideration to the possibility that you could be wrong – and that others could be be right.

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.” Parlato was also credited in the Starz docuseries "Seduced" for saving 'slave' women from being branded and escaping the sex-slave cult known as DOS.

Additionally, Parlato’s coverage of the group OneTaste, starting in 2018, helped spark an FBI investigation, which led to indictments of two of its leaders in 2023.

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 premiered on May 22, 2022. Most recently, he consulted and appeared on Tubi's "Branded and Brainwashed: Inside NXIVM," which aired January, 2023.

IMDb — Frank Parlato

Contact Frank with tips or for help.
Phone / Text: (305) 783-7083
Email: frankparlato@gmail.com