My prediction on the Neil Glazer civil lawsuit:
Bronfmans have the upper hand.
1) Because this case is LIGHT YEARS from being decided, the ONLY way it gets settled quickly is on Bronfman terms (no admissions of guilt and a chump change settlement).
2) Since most plaintiffs probably won’t wanna wait many years to go to trial and then litigate Bronfman trusts, I’m guessing they’ll cave-in and fold like cheap suits. 🙂
3) To add insult to injury… Because federal income taxes generally apply to lawsuit judgments that can’t show ‘physical injuries’ (federal taxes also apply to punitive damages), I’m guessing that plaintiffs will likely have to pay taxes on their chump change settlements, thus adding even more insult to injury.
Here’s how I see it going…
1) After some back and forth, I see the defendants offering no more than $7 million for a ‘quick’ settlement.
2) After some posturing and attempts at playing hardball, I see the plaintiffs FOLDING like a cheap lawn chair. 🙂
3) Here’s how I see the judgment being cut up:
Likely judgment IMO: $7,000,000
Lawyer’s likely cut: $2,300,000 (1/3)
Plaintiff’s likely cut: $4,700,000
Divide that loot by 80 plaintiffs…
Likely payout to each plaintiff = $59k (Chump change, lol)
Likely net payout (after federal taxes) = $44k (assuming a 25% rate)*
That’s chump change!
*Even if federal taxes didn’t have to be paid, $59k would still be a JOKE settlement from NXIVM.
That’s barely enough money to buy a USED Mercedes —– with just enough left over for a ping pong table, a steak dinner and maybe some potato chips. What a JOKE.
In my opinion, Dani deserves a LOT more than the other plaintiffs.
It’s a shame she’s letting her own tragic story benefit the other plaintiffs equally. Why spread that loot equally among lesser deserving plaintiffs? IMO that’s just not fair.
Just my own opinion, of course.
Have a nice day. 🙂
Hi Frank – There was no reply option to this post of yours below so replying up here
February 20, 2020 at 10:18 am
“I may post her statement I am considering it since I now believe that her statement is false. If I post it it will be with the disclaimer that I believe it is false.”
What! That seems backwards. Why would you post something you think is FALSE unless you are giving up on trying to build up or maintain any credibility you’ve earned. Also that just seems like a recipe for encouraging people to send you all kinds of made up crap. If this person’s statement was bout India, Bonnie, Charmel, or Nik would you be considering repeating their lies or using your site to help spread rumors and defame them? Even if you post a statement with a disclaimer trying to shield yourself by saying you believe it is false, are you really legally protected anymore considering your posting history, won’t this just be more proof of your ongoing smear campaign?
You never answered the question as to if the lady has gone to the police, and if not why not? Did she try pitching her story to any of the publications like Vice or TimesUnion or did she just come to you because she thought you would be the easiest to fool and would readily publish her tale given her target?
Now if you have confirmed that the lady gave you her real name, maybe I can see you MAYBE posting her statement if you use her real name as a way of deterring people in the future from sending you false stories. You can let it be known that you will continue to protect the identities of people who tell you the TRUTH, but if someone tries to use you to defame someone, tries to insult your intelligence and reputation by using you to spread their lies, you will post their real name and picture.
The person accusing Kristin did not go to the police.
Sorry for all of the questions that follow, but I find how you go about verifying or debunking these types of things really interesting so —– did you advise them to go to the FBI? Did you confirm via their driver’s license or some government issued iD their date of birth and whether they would have been a teen when they claim this took place? When did this supposedly take place? Do they have any pics of themselves with any of the key people they are accusing? Any pics of themselves in Albany? Since we know KR loved to document and keep photos and pics of his conquests, wouldn’t the FBI have found images of her along with those of Cami? Unterreiner and Keefe were so entrenched in Albany with KR and all his illegal activities, were they even able to confirm that this gal was around?
Unlike the above, I don’t think you should post the statement if you believe or know it is fake. That would just reward bad behaviour. Even if you say you know it is false, it would still give the liar the satisfaction of seeing their fake story published. As an acclaimed journalist, you want to publish the stories you know or at least believe through vetting and trusted sources to be true.
Thank you for your time, Frank, and any responses you provide.
I did not go as far as proving the source’s identity. When her claim that Raniere molested her when she was 14 in Vancouver did not hold up, I stopped working on it.
In short, I asked her where she was molested. She said Vancouver. I asked Kristin Keeffe, Susan Dones and Sarah Edmondson if Raniere ever went to Vancouver and all three of them said no, he never did. I asked the source for additional proof and was refused. So, I dropped it.
However, the source told a very persuasive tale.
Could it be true? Maybe there is a chance in 100. But we can’t go forward on what I have now.
Oh. I thought you had done more confirming of the person’s story before you started posting about it. So this person could have been “Jane”? Unless your motivation is less than noble, in the future, I would hope you would do more investigating before you begin teasing us.
Well, I guess if you didn’t know it already, it’s just further proof that there are more than a few sick, obsessed celebrity stalkers on your site. If not “Jane,” do you think it could be Omar Rosales? Have you read about him lately?
I don’t believe I ever claimed I vetted the source. If I had vetted the source and could confirm it, I would have published the story.
But you did say that the (unvetted) report of what Kreuk did was worse, much worse than what Jane said about GBD.
A very damning accusation that will be remembered by many readers far longer than your retraction.
He brought up Omar Rosales. Spanky HATES Omar Rosales, because like you, he dared criticize the ‘smell the fart’ actress of Spanky’s gross wet dreams.
Spanky said “it’s just further proof that there are more than a few sick, obsessed celebrity stalkers on your site”. Yes, Spanky of all people called others “sick, obsessed celebrity stalkers”.
“Unlike the above, I don’t think you should post the statement if you believe or know it is fake. That would just reward bad behaviour. Even if you say you know it is false, it would still give the liar the satisfaction of seeing their fake story published.
Can you smell the desperation? Spanky wants you to never, EVER, post any thing from anybody, that paints Kristin Kreuk is a negative light. Spanky wants your WORD that you will never do such a treasonous blasphemous act.
“As an *acclaimed journalist*, you want to publish the stories you know or at least believe through vetting and trusted sources to be true.”
“Acclaimed journalist!” Spanky doesn’t think you are an acclaimed journalist. Spanky has placed a fatwa on you for daring to say negative things about his ‘dream spank’ and is really trying to butter you up. The way he butters up his pee-pee before another Kristin Kreuk inspired session of infatuated and unrequited self-abuse on his genitals.
Also, a question: did you ever vet “Jane”.
Yes I vetted Jane – as being a real person. I published her story with certain disclaimers. But she was a real person and she knew things about GBD that clearly showed she had a role in it.
That is a lot of uncontrolled emasculated emotion reeking through, sultan.
Clare has quite the Adam’s apple in this picture… where is Raniere’s in the thumbnail above this one EH???
Coincidence? Does anyone besides myself find it odd how anonymaker rushes to Kreuk’s defense and uses similar wording and phrases as the sultan of six and his aliases?
Are you dense? How many times has Frank said he knows Anonymaker is NOT Sultan?
It’s really true, AnonyMaker is NOT Sultan. In fact, from my conversations with AnonyMaker, I don’t think he cares about Kristin Kreuk at all. I imagine he goes days and weeks without a single thought about her.
On the other hand, the beautiful chivalrous soul of Sultan of Six is constantly on the alert to defend his exalted queen of his spirit. There is no day or hour, I am pretty sure, when Sultan is not at the ready to defend his virtuous soul mate who just does not know it.
Boy Scouts file for bankruptcy due to sex-abuse lawsuits
Before the NXIVM case is over, all or almost all of the defendants will be bankrupt.
VIVA EXECUTIVE SUCCESS!
You beat me to it. I was going to post the same thing.
In the Boy Scouts, you really had to work hard for your merit badges.
Can you imagine what went “into” making Eagle Scout?
I still think about poor Bangkok waking-up to a tank of ether in his tent and three merit badges on his pillow for bugling, water sports, and plumbing [actual legitimate merit badges; see below]. On the bright side, Bangkok can now crap while running and siphon a flooded boat bilge in 3 seconds flat.
I hate to say this but the Boy Scouts are like the Catholic Church.
To put gay pedophiles in charge of a Boy Scout Troop is like putting a heterosexual pedophile in charge of a Girl Scout Troop.
I knew about lawsuits against the Boy Scouts some thirty years ago over pedophilia.
Like with the Catholic Church, children were harmed by so-called God-fearing leaders.
“To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; To help other people at all times; To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.”…and never tell?
Men who want to hang out with other people’s children are strange. Whenever I learn about a kids sports league coach without kids….A big flag goes up with a question mark.
Ask yourself this one question if your a man…..
Would you want to hang out with someone else’s kids?
Bangkok is on the money!!!!
Do Sarah Edmondson, Mark Vicente, and Toni Natalie deserve to be a part of Daniela’s and Nicole’s Lawsuit?
“Why don’t Frank and Claviger care?”
That’s what Bangkok is really asking. Bangkok is trying to say “Hey dumb f*cks why are you dropping the ball?”
Dani is the truest victim in every sense of the word. How come nobody has tried to advise her or let her know she is getting screwed!!!!
Daniela and Nicole suffered. Daniela suffered more than any other victim of NXIVM.
Claviger has been mainly silent except for his metaphor in poor taste referring to the plaintiffs(victims) as a herd of cats (pussies) Neil Glazer has to corral. Nice double entendre Claviger. Classy joke!
Hey, Clavie do you even know who the lead plaintiff is in the Neil Glazer class action lawsuit? Or have you been too wrapped up in the Jessie Smollet & butt brothers butt-bingo scandal?
I guess the “pussy herd” is not nearly as interesting to you, as three hot gay guys of color pretending to beat each other up. Mmh?
I bid you good night! 😉
Does anyone know who the lead plaintiff is in the Neil Glazer lawsuit?
“I have a new source, who I am vetting just now, who has told me some stories about Kristin Kreuk’s role in Nxivm that supports all of our worst suspicions about her and Girls By Design. It has to be vetted but Kreuk defenders such as Sultan of Six might be on alert for if and when this story comes out, Sultan especially will have to be ready to defend his lady fair.”
What is going on with this story or stories about Kristin Kreuk and Girls By Design Frank? Have you vetted the source yet? Updates?
I have a complete statement from a person who claims she was victimized by Kreuk. However, I have not been able to independently corroborate it. I am trying. The person may have made up the story and Kristin may be completely innocent.
I wouldn’t put it past the Kreuk-hating nuts here to feed you a false story in order to bolster their narrative – culty true believers of various sorts will justify fabricating evidence when necessary, like NXIVM did in producing their theory about Snyder’s disappearance. Plus I also think there’s reason to suspect that one of the guiltier former NXians like Grace Park is stoking the flames in order to distract from themselves, or that someone with some deeper agenda regarding smearing Kreuk is at work.
The only thing I’ve ever seen that GBD actually accomplished in its brief life before failing completely, was to take a bunch of girls on a spa trip to California – not upstate New York. I don’t doubt that it was part of Raniere’s grand plan to funnel young women to him, but those involved seemed to have thought it was the sort of innocuous girly thing it was posed as.
I’m no fan of Kreuk and see her at best as a vacuous figure who all too easily fell for a cult, in part because she lacked the insight to realize what was really going on. In line with that, I could see her having been part of something stupid or awful if she were manipulated into it, which might not take much in her case.
This could be interesting. Did the gal ever go to the police? How are you trying to corroborate her statement? Is it that Edmondson, Vicente, Bowden, Hildreth, Unterreiner, Keefe, Oxenberg, Isbelle, McIntyre, Piesse, et al have never heard of her, know of her and have refuted her claims, or are they just not responding to your requests for help?
Considering how deeply and how long all these others were involved, I’m curious if you receive the number of titalating / accusatory stories about them? The CBC Uncover podcast mentioned someone accusing Edmondson of some crap and I read comments elsewhere accusing Vicente of some stuff I won’t mention, but since you are the go to site, it seems you would be getting lots.
I spoke to most of the people who you mention. None of them could corroborate the woman’s story. Still that does not mean it did not happen. Keith was good at keeping secrets, such as molesting a 14 year old girl.
Thank you for replying. Have you heard the accusations about Vicente and have you received similar batshit stories about Edmondson? While Keith may have been good about keeping secrets from most, it seems there were always at least a few who knew or at least suspected the truth. Like you have said, you knew Keith was sleeping with multiple women shortly after you started working with the cult, even if those outside his inner circle believed the bullcrap about him being celibate.
I have not heard any crazy stories about Mark Vicente or Sarah Edmondson, other than she was branded and she and her husband did something about it. As far as knowing about Keith sleeping with women, I did know that. But the women I knew about – in 2007 – were all in the 30s or older. I knew of no one under the age of consent
In what context does this person claim to be victimized? In GBD, harem, DOS or by Kreuk in some other activity?
She “claims” and I emphasize the word “claims” that Kreuk recruited her as a teen to be with Keith Raniere. It seems to be related to GBD. There are some problems with her story.
Putting aside rumors about Kreuk, do you get many unsolicited “claims” about Nx or its leaders that seem bizarre but still important enough that you have to spend time verifying or refuting?
So, what’s going to happen, Frank?
What are the problems with her story?
You posted two articles about “Jane”, the GBD DOS slave. Will you do the same with this source?
Did you have anyone verify Jane was a part of DOS?
Can you prove if this new source was a part of GBD?
Has she proven to you who she is, pictures, etc?
Have you been in contact with Jane, the DOS slave, since your last article on her? You could ask her if she knows this person.
Will you post her statement?
There was a post on Frank Report, a while ago, about Kreuk doing a podcast with another “Smallville” actor and when he asked her about GBD, she very quickly and obviously changed the subject. To readers of Frank Report, it would have been so obvious.
I may post her statement. I am considering it since I now believe that her statement is false. If I post it, it will be with the disclaimer that I believe it is false.
Bangkok’s numbers are off.
It will not be 7 million dollars divided 80 ways.
It will be one million dollars per sex trafficking plaintiff in compensatory damages plus an equal amount in punitive damages.
Here is the document I’m using pages 24 and 25.
E. Significant Damages Awards in
Jury and Bench Verdicts
The TVPRA permits both compensatory and punitive
The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals echoed this
holding in 2013. In Francisco v. Susano, the Tenth
Circuit held that “the TVPA addresses tortious
conduct—indeed, conduct so reprehensible
Congress made it criminal even
before adding the civil remedy in
2003.”87 Under settled principles
of tort law, “‘punitive damages
are…specifically warranted for
conduct involving some element
of outrage similar to that
usually found in crime.
the case ended in a default judgment
in the amount of $1,237,058.60,
including $1,220,000 in punitive
(The NXIVM defendants engaged in CRIMINAL AND OUTRAGEOUS CONDUCT. Shadow State)
Ross v. Jenkins, a forced labor case
involving the abuse of a child in a cult, established
the highest verdict in a single victim case, $8,000,000,
including nearly $4,000,000 in punitive damages.
(Because several of the defendants are quite wealthy the plaintiffs might be less willing to settle.)
Are those the only cases you found, or the only cases which supported your point? A seven year old Tenth Circuit case? Dare I ask if you Shepardized the case? Ross v Jenkins? What court? What year? The folks at those two midwestern pillars of legal education, Thomas Cooley and John Marshall, are rather disappointed.
You are getting a little out of your league here, best stick to commenting on B- actresses and Claire Bronfman’s lack of sexual activity.
This case, if it ever comes to trial, will be distinguished in two ways: there will be a record number of motions to dismiss and Sarah Edmondson will regret ever having agreed to be a plaintiff. Just my opinion
These NXIVM defendants will not walk away from Glazer’s lawsuit without taking a considerable hit in their wallets.
And their criminal and outrageous conduct merit severe punishment.
You keep throwing the word “criminal” around, but even a marginally competent attorney might ask the question “if criminal, where are the indictments?”
Five indicted NXIVM criminals. 80 defendants in Glazerpalooza. If the civil defendants’ actions were criminal, where are the indictments?
Congress deliberately provided for civil lawsuits to supplement the criminal process in sex trafficking and human trafficking cases.
That way Sex Traffickers can be punished by private lawsuits without the Government hiring more prosecutors.
Congress expanded the right of victims to sue Sex Traffickers in 2003 and 2008.
All of Them Witches, can you read beyond a Third Grade Level?
Read the following document which provides a legislative history of the issue.
And from here on out the fact that Allison Pimp Mack has been sued by numerous plaintiffs for sex trafficking demonstrates that she is clearly a SEX TRAFFICKER.
15 Years of the Private Right of Action
All of them Witches:
Get Your Head Out of Allison Mack’s Butt.
Small Typo on my part. Should read:
Here’s how I see the ‘settlement’ being cut up:
Likely ‘settlement’ IMO: $7,000,000
(not ‘judgement’) 🙂
Don’t worry; the dipshits will figure it out. 😉
So, Shadowstate, you are saying it is better to give civil remedies to victims of sex trafficking (a hollow remedy if the defendant is without resources) than it is to investigate, indict, prosecute and punish sex traffickers. Really? The civil remedy will have the same deterrent effect as imprisonment? Really?
As to A. Pimp Mack, I had never heard of her until her name appeared on the Frank Report. We all know about your obsession with her, you’ve done very little to hide it, and it would be funny if it wasn’t so fricking sad.
Have a great day monitoring the Frank Report. Waiting for your follow up on the great California NXIVM license plate caper.
” The civil remedy will have the same deterrent effect as imprisonment? Really?”
The remedies are not mutually exclusive.