This is Part #4 of our series on the testimony of Mark Vicente, the second witness in the trial of Keith Alan Raniere.
Mark was a green sash member of Nxivm, which made him one of the high rank of Nxivm. He ran the Los Angeles center of Nxivm.
He left the gruesome cult when he discovered that women were being branded and blackmailed and became a whistleblower. Among those he told about the sinister and illegal practices of the cult was Frank Report.
He also helped arrange the New York Times story and spoke on the record with them.
He also helped me to put together a dossier for law enforcement – detailing many of the crimes that Raniere committed. Much of this was used as a blueprint for the case against Raniere.
On top of that, Vicente worked with the FBI and the prosecutors extensively – in person and by phone – providing them with information during the investigative stage and the pre-trial stage of the case.
Among the cast of people who helped take down this scurrilous cult, Vicente ranks with the top-most.
There are carping critics who love to demean him and Sarah Edmondson – and say they made out during the years of their membership. They made a living but did not get rich.
Without them, there would have been no takedown of the cult. With so many cowards who only hid and acted the craven, these two came forward and took a huge risk aligning with Catherine Oxenberg and myself in going after Raniere.
They had no money saved [no one who worked in Nxivm had any money saved unless they inherited it] – and they were vulnerable to attack from the ugly one, Clare Bronfman, and from the beast himself, Raniere.
But they were determined to fight and stick to it – and we won.
They have my respect. For without them, Raniere might be free today branding and brutalizing women.
Part 1 Inside the Cult – Mark Vicente Explains the Various Nxivm Groups and Subgroups
Part 2 Vicente Gives Striking Details of Nxivm Intensive – Including ‘The Fall’
AUSA Mark Lesko was examining Vicente.
He had just asked him about how Nxivm members made money.
Q Did high-ranking members of the NXIVM community have access to certain financial benefits?
A Well, yes, because the higher rank you were, the more were you able to do within the system. … if you were at a certain rank and had the training, you could be a head trainer…. head trainers could make up to 30 percent of the gross intensive…. EMPs… could make a few hundred dollars an hour.
…. the higher rank you were, it was tied to more money. And basically we were told this path is an entrepreneur path. You know, we [Nxivm] want you to get to the point that you could make enormous amount of money… put some effort in, create something, build something, and then, in essence, make money off that thing, almost in a passive kind of way.
Q You mentioned that NXIVM and its related companies received payments or fees from participants. Do you recall how the company received those payments?
***
A Oh, there were different ways. There was an online system … that could take credit cards. So it was either a credit card. Some people would sometimes bring checks to intensives. And then there was also cash.
Q And did the participants in the various programs come from all over the United States?
A They did. And beyond.
Q So there were foreign participants as well?
A Correct.
Q How were payments received in the programs that took place in Mexico?
A Well, there whether two different systems is my understanding. Pre, I think, 2015, 2016, people would either use the online payment system. But in Mexico, a number of people would pay cash. So there was no way to put cash in the system. So my understanding is that cash came to Albany to be put in.
MARC AGNIFILO [Raniere’s attorney]: Your Honor, I would object unless he has personal knowledge.
Q Do you have personal knowledge that the individuals within NXIVM, within the community, actually brought cash from Mexico to Albany?
A I do. I was in an executive board meeting once where a lot of cash was handed over. I believe it was handed … to Nancy Salzman.
Q And who handed that cash over?
A It was either Emiliano Salinas or Alex Betancourt…. [My] understanding was that when they came back … to Albany, which is usually once a quarter, those monies would need to come to Albany.
Q So they would transport cash from Mexico to Albany?
A That’s my understanding.
Q Do you know if that cash was reported or deposited in the bank account?
A I have no idea.
Q Do you know if cash was held by anyone within the NXIVM community?
A I don’t know.
Q Are you familiar with the term “TLL”?
A I am.
Q What does that term or those letters refer to within the NXIVM community?
A My understanding is that TLL was a code word for cash….
Q Do … you have an understanding as to why a code name was used for cash?
A I only have an assumption. I don’t have an exact understanding.
Q Did participants in the various NXIVM programs travel to Albany from elsewhere to participant in those programs?
A They did. So as I said before, all over the U.S., from Canada from Mexico, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Europe, Australia. I’m sure there’s continents I missed.
Q And did you yourself travel, in connection with your involvement with NXIVM?
A I did, yes.
Q Did you travel by airplane?
A Exclusively, yes.
***
Q So when you communicated with the defendant, how did you typically communicate with him?
A Typically, it was phone call, or it might be WhatsApp. … We used a lot of different systems… WhatsApp, Telegram. They’re all-high encrypted methods of communication.
***
Q Let’s talk a moment about ethical breaches, all right? Who determined when an ethical breach was fixed?
A That is a little bit of a mystery. I can tell you in the discussions with Nancy Salzman, she would say to me sometimes, “Well, haven’t you healed yet?”
I would talk to Raniere sometimes about certain people and he would say there’s still outstanding issues, you know, with the breach. I never knew what they were. And, again, I would ask questions, but at a certain point I got the impression that I shouldn’t be asking these questions, so I would train myself to stop.
Q During the time you were involved in NXIVM, do you recall anyone committing an ethical breach?
A Yeah, well, I was told that people had committed an ethical breach. I was told that by … Raniere that, you know, Ben Myers had committed some kind of breach. I wasn’t sure what it was. Because I was going back for Ben Myers on something and he would say, “Well, there’s an outstanding breach still some issues.” ….
Q Let’s focus on Mr. Myers for a moment. Did you ask the defendant what Ben Myers’ ethical breach was?
A I think I started to, and … it wasn’t going anywhere, so I got the message, you know, don’t go there. Ben Myers wanted to start a company and I was all for it. And I was — “let’s let him go for it. This is what we do. We build entrepreneurs. Why not?”
And the way he [Raniere] was with me, in terms of saying there was a breach, and everything, this is something I clearly don’t know about, so I stopped.
Q Did anyone else commit an ethical breach, to the best of your knowledge?
A I was told by Nancy Salzman that Siobhan {Hotaling]] had committed an ethical breach. I was unclear as to exactly what it was. It had something to do, I was told with — not completing an editing project. … she had been…. put in a room and she had to keep going until she finished, and something about her not doing that was a big problem….
Q Did you learn that someone named Ivy [Nevares] had committed an ethical breach?
A Yes, I was there when — basically Ivy went from actually being the go-between for a while between myself and Raniere, and then at a certain point, suddenly she wasn’t any more. I was told by Nancy Salzman that she committed a breach of some kind. Raniere said she had as well.
So our communications stopped for many years because, loosely speaking, I used to use the term “you’re in a dog box”. You know, they’ve done something bad, a breach, but I was never clear, while I was in there, exactly what the nature of this terrible thing was.
A I don’t think so. The thing is there wasn’t really a formal thing in place. It was when you were told by …. by Raniere or [Nancy] Salzman-
THE COURT [Judge Nicholas Garaufis]: I’m sorry.
AGNIFILO: I object.
THE COURT: Sustained.
Q Did you have a specific understanding as to anyone having rehabilitated themselves after committing an ethical breach?
A I had no understanding that anybody had healed it.
Q Within NXIVM, do you recall if people were accused of pride?
A That happened a lot.
Q Why would that happen?
A Usually, if they were not… giving tribute, if they weren’t giving appropriate tributes, they would be told, you know, you’re prideful. This is your issue.
That happened to me a number of times. It happened to other people as well…. [we were] accused of pride… Understand, many of us became very, very careful with the words we used because we knew — it was sort of like walking into a land mine. If you said something that triggered the land mine, then you would be told it’s your pride again. You know, this tribute problem you’re having. I myself went through that a lot.
Q So this tribute pride issue, was that different than an ethical breach?
A Well, it may be related, but it may not. In other words, I was told I was very prideful. I was told, you know, that I lacked the understanding of tribute. I wasn’t told that I committed an ethical breach.
Q Were you yourself accused of improper tribute or pride?
A Oh, yes.
Q When did that happen?
A Well, I think the most significant time is when I was working on this Mexican documentary, Encender EL Cocorazon, in which I was in Mexico from around 2009 telling the story of some event that happened in Albany; and then also when I was documenting in Mexico, I was doing various iterations of the cuts, of the edits.
And at one point, people were very upset, including Clare Bronfman, saying, “You know, you are minimizing Raniere.” And I said, “No, I’m not, this is the story I’m following that started.”
And she would, at one point, really exploded at me saying, “It’s unbelievable that given everything you’ve been given by this man [Raniere], you can’t — you know, you can’t give him tribute.”
And so that went on for years. And eventually, the entire executive board was getting involved where I would basically sit in a room with all of them as they began to pick apart my personality issues and my inability to recognize, you know, the greatness of Raniere. And that I was somehow minimizing him. So I was pushed constantly to make a bigger and bigger deal of him in the film to, in essence, lionize him in the film. So, yeah, I was accused of that for years.
Q Do you recall other examples of people being accused of not paying proper tribute or being prideful?
A I know of other…. there was … Mark Hildreth [who] was accused of … being very prideful, and he was put on a special program where a number of the three, in essence, one proctor, and two senior proctors overseeing the attempt to what’s called “bust his pride.”
Q Was Edgar Boone accused of pride?
A He was.
Q What happened to Edgar Boone?
A He was accused of pride and of having a major tribute issue. He was writing a number of poetry books, and I was told — and also that I read the book and we had discussions and basically what was told to me by [Nancy?] Salzman is the issue that Edgar is writing things in the book that come from Raniere.
And then I would say, “Well, actually these things predate the birth of Raniere. Some of these things are thousands of years old.” We’d have these debates about this.
But basically Edgar was seen as somebody who was just prideful…. I was told he was very disconnected. There were entire intensives that were created specifically to help him wake up or to break his pride.
Q Within the ranking structure at NXIVM what, if anything, could happen to a person if they were accused of being prideful?
A Well, they could have their position held back. I know in the case of Siobhan Hotaling, she was not allowed to train any more for a while. I think that possibly her pay was docked. I have clear recall of that. But there could be consequences to one’s growth of the stripe path and one’s earning capacity.
Q And how would one who was accused of being prideful address that issue?
A Well, by agreeing to get on a special program. In essence, a program was suggested, you know, if you were a person that was very… prideful do the things that, in essence, would humiliate you.
Humiliation and humility was seen as a potential, you know, antidote to this pride problem. If you could really just break down your insistence on, you know, your position, what you believe, then maybe you could, you know, deal with your pride as well.
Q Were EMs used as part of that process?
A A great deal.
Q Was feedback used?
A A lot of feedback.
Q Are you familiar with the term “penances”?
A Yes.
Q What are penances?
A So penances were — I believe they were introduced with the human pain curriculum, and then very strongly in Ethicist and then Society of Protection as well.
Basically, a penance was a consequence of pain that you would take upon yourself. So if you had done, you know, let’s say, you know, you might not be angry and you say something angry to somebody, you know, you’d say I’m going to go to do that consequence now. Take that cold shower for two minutes to allow myself to feel the pain because I wasn’t willing to feel it when I was yelling at the person.
So penance was that originally, and then it turned into as well — so it was creating a consequence for behavior that was in some way aberrant from the way you were supposed to behave.
And then penances were also part of conscious groups, you know, where few of us together, and if anyone failed, we all did a consequence or a penance.
And then Raniere would explain that, you know, if somebody else is doing something that’s a problem, and then you take on the penance for them, you don’t necessarily tell them, but you take it on.
So if somebody’s doing some behavior that’s a problem, you know, maybe I’ll walk out the room and I’ll go do 30 pushups to, you know, experience the pain that they’re not experiencing.
That one confused me. I wasn’t clear how that would work. But I went along with it for a while.
Q You mentioned feedback. Could you explain what “feedback” was within NXIVM?
A Well, feedback was basically being told something that was believed you didn’t know or didn’t want to know. So either you were unaware of this thing that’s a problem, or you’re aware of it but you’re being defiant or you’re being resistant. So the idea was give the person feedback, keep putting this thing in their face until one day they realize that they’re being this kind of person, or that kind of person and they’re doing this behavior that’s a problem.
So feedback was basically telling a person what you saw, or it may be you were sent feedback. You know, we would be tasked, especially with high ranks; you know, please give this person feedback about something. Which maybe we weren’t even privy to the things they had done, but the idea was go and tell this person that that thing they did was a real big problem, and … it doesn’t match their rank what they just did. That was generally how feedback was used.
Q Was feedback a part of progressing through the stripe path?
A It was. Because as you moved up the stripe path, you were required to be more and more open to feedback. So, for instance, one of the things I learned when I became a green [sash] is that you had to be… 100 percent open to feedback from anybody.
It didn’t matter who it was, didn’t matter what they were saying, in essence, you took it in and if you argued, that was a huge problem.
We were told, you know, all feedback is true. If you argue, it’s a sign of … your resistance and a sign of your pride. Like you’re trying to hold on to this image of yourself, and that’s why you’re doing this, which is if you eradicate pride completely, you would be open to people saying anything about you.
Q At some point on the stripe path, were people required to identify their life issues?
A Yes. So in the yellow rank, which is coach, there were a bunch of different requirements; you know, enrollment, you know, taking education. But then there was also identifying your life issue.
And the life issue was simply what is this formula that you keep doing in your life that’s kind of screwing stuff up? You know, what’s that thing you just keep doing again and again and again, and how does it relate to fears and your insecurities and, you know, your inefficiency; what are the things you try to do to feel better. It’s sort of a formula that defines your problematic behavior.
And then as you move further up the yellow, you have to then come up with a plan to overcome it. So this thing that you keep doing, what will do to overcome it.
So, for instance, in my case, you know, I would tend to — you know, when I was shooting a movie, I was interacting with people, but the minute I was done, I wouldn’t want to be with people at all. And I was told one of the issues I had is I isolated from people.
So the thing I did for my life issue, you know, plan, was I moved into a house with a whole bunch of people so I would have, you know, constant people around me all the time. And then I would have to deal with my struggles I had with never being alone.
Q Were members of the NXIVM community allowed to talk with nonmembers about NXIVM issues?
A No, that was strictly forbidden. No.
Q I think you previously discussed the concept of shunning. What was shunning?
A Shunning was, in essence, there was shunning and there was boycott. Shunning was basically you don’t talk to the person anymore, you don’t do business with them. You don’t do business with people that do business with them. Shunning and boycott were used together sometimes. But, in essence, you don’t acknowledge them and you do not support them in any fashion.
The idea being, you know, this person said something bad, you know, whoever, so if you even talked to them, you know, in any kind of way you’re supporting this terrible thing that they have done.
Q Can you provide an example or examples of when NXIVM members shunned people?
A Well, in the case of, for instance, Barbara Bouchey. Barbara Bouchey was shunned, we were told not to engage with her, not to talk with her. I remember at one point, Ed Kinum was shunned. He was a Proctor. He apparently had done something that wasn’t supportive. I am currently still being shunned.
Q Was anyone related to Lauren Salzman being shunned?
A Her father was being shunned by her and I believe her sister. And I don’t recall if it was Nancy Salzman as well.
Q Her family members could be shunned?
A Oh, absolutely.
END
****
Speaking of shunning, how many readers would shun their own father if someone told you to do so? I would sooner kill the man that told me that, rather than obey that sickness.
Raniere had to find the kind of people that would support his demonic tendencies. And he hit the jackpot when he found the Salzman trio. He had others who would do his demonic deeds too. Creatures [they are not actually human] like Clare Bronfman, Sara Bronfman, Pamela Cafritz, and Esther Chiappone Carlson.
And he had to find weak-willed followers. Mark Hildreth allowed himself to be triple-teamed – to bust his pride. And he stuck with the rascal. I would have knocked Raniere on his judo ass.
Or Ed Kinum, who was shunned because he innocently told the truth about the crazed Raniere litigation. Or Siobhan who had to connive her way out of Raniere’s demand of her choosing him to be the sperm donor for her child.
But they stuck with the pig.
Or Ivy Nevares who was told not to cut her hair and it grew so long that it went beyond her feet. Or silly Edgar Boone, He dared write poetry, calling up his own inner creativity and the accumulated wisdom of the ages, and Raniere was offended because he did not give him credit for his every creative thought.
And they stuck. Raniere needed these types and he found them. And he used one against the other to keep them all in line.
From studying Raniere and Nxivm, we can learn a lot about cults. Very rarely do we get such a true inside view of cult behavior and a cult’s inner workings.
Readers are getting an excellent view of the personalities and the dynamics of a classic cult. I think some readers, many of whom never met the principle characters of Nxivm, might feel they know these shady and weak-willed characters and their demented leader.
Frank, you write things like this:
“Raniere had to find the kind of people that would support his demonic tendencies. And he hit the jackpot when he found the Salzman trio. He had others who would do his demonic deeds too. Creatures [they are not actually human] . . . .
And he had to find weak-willed followers. . .
But they stuck with the pig. . . .
Readers are getting an excellent view of the personalities and the dynamics of a classic cult. I think some readers, many of whom never met the principle characters of Nxivm, might feel they know these shady and weak-willed characters and their demented leader. ”
And then are surprised that, “There are carping critics who love to demean him [ Mark Vicente] and Sarah Edmondson”? Vicente and Edmondson also “stuck with the pig” for 12 years, and not only supported and promoted Raniere’s “demonic tendencies,” but owned centers and did more to recruit for Raniere than any others. While they may be the main reason the cult was finally destroyed, they were instrumental in the cult’s growth and success and when you gloss over that fact, and ignore people like Karen Unterreiner and Kristin Keefe, it makes your reporting on the cult questionable.
While Edmondson may not have committed any crimes, (not being invited into the inner circle or on the executive board or living in Albany, I think sets her apart from Vicente), Vicente admitted to doing so on behalf of Raniere, as you reported last year:
“As Vicente explained it, the process for altering the videotapes was quite involved – and definitely amounted to the falsification of evidence:
“The first stage was that the people in legal — legal department were to determine what needed to be removed. We were then – the video department was then given a list of, you know, remove these things here from this number to this number. We would then use various processes to remove it and then processes to create glitches to make it look like it was natural, that nothing was actually removed.
“Then a final master copy was made, that was then duplicated a number of times to give it the appearance of being older, multiple generations, then labels were put on that would age the — there was some scuffing that occurred to make things look older, then that was handed off to — back to the legal department and then went wherever it went”.
All in all, more than ten videotapes were altered to remove problematic content before they were turned over to Rick Ross’ attorneys as part of the discovery in that case.
the prosecution was able to produce several email strings that show exactly what went on with the falsification of the videotapes – and which people were aware of that activity.
Those people include Vicente, Chris Mumford, Megan Mumford, Keith Raniere, Nancy Salzman, Kristin Keeffe, Dan Brotman, and Clare Bronfman.”
https://frankreport.com/2019/05/12/mark-vicente-in-depth-review-part-iv/
As Scott has said many times before, there are no angels in the NXIVM saga.
However, there are some who are more evil than others, and lower level criminals are often given deals to ensure the head of the organization is punished.
Since you are one of many ghosts of Scott, you should know these things. LOL
https://www.markvicente.com/whistleblower/2020/5/3/wtf-is-on-my-mind-episode-1-abusing-our-existential-crisis
#thetruetruth about Mark Vicente linked above. Vicente reaching out to forewarn and educate others about cults with nary a boast about himself.
I can most definitely relate to Mr. Vicente’s troubles over not venerating Keith to his (or Clare & Nancy’s) satisfaction on celluloid.
As I’ve discussed previously, it wasn’t long after my ex-husband and I completed a very successful Hollywood film that Keith began clamoring for me and my ex to produce a movie about him, using Gina and her ESP ‘wolf pack’ pals to put pressure on me to make that happen including financing the film upfront.
Sometimes, when I’m feeling especially sad and self-incriminating over Gina’s demise, I think Gina might still be alive had I at least pretended to pitch Keith’s pathetic project in Hollywood instead of laughing it off — to his face. I told him and one of his minions sent to exert pressure on me that, basically, if I were to ever script a story about Keith he would be the villain of the farce.
Some troll here on FR (possibly even Keith himself but more likely Kristin Keeffe) once echoed a threat that came after I rejected Keith’s project, not to mention his diseased dick, that “Keith is a man to be reckoned with.” What followed was years of online and other harassment before, during and after Gina’s death.
Although I’ve made fun of Mr. Vicente’s film trailer apparently featuring Keith as a gringo Cesar Chavez, I now realize how he must have struggled to maintain his creative integrity while being hellishly manipulated in every way possible to do otherwise.
Props to Frank, again, for sharing some of the limelight on the NXIVM ‘takedown’ with Vicente and the others who not only came forward but worked arduously with Frank and Catherine to set out the case.
The “#Truth about Mark Vicente” — something that flashed across my computer screen a time or two when, unbeknownst to me, Vicente was working with the FBI before Keith’s arrest — is finally emerging and shows he and his wife, Bonnie Piesse, as ultimate heroes who have my utmost respect and appreciation.
Vicente is the greatest fool of all. Vanguard was grooming him to be the next Vanguard. What a dope. He is the Judas Iscariot of the ages.
He will be remembered for the crucifixion of our blessed Lord.
Raniere’s entire life is an ethical breach. Now he can be literally jailed for the rest of his life for the figurative jails he created in and for others.
There was no breach. He set the standard. He was the ethicist for our community.
Your community has a terrible set of ethics because you chose a terrible example of them. It abused ethics to turn originally good people into some of the most smug, exclusive, selfish, all talk and do-nothing people in line with your standard. Some escaped, but some unfortunately didn’t because they are still buying the mental prison bullshit, like you, while their pizza eating, tribute grubbing, sex addicted, grifting, control freak sits in an actual prison waiting for the well-deserved long sentence that his standard brought him.
Don’t you have have at least some ethics in order to breach them? LOL