In a surprise move, Nxivm convict, Clare Webb Bronfman, has replaced celebrity lawyer, Mark Geragos, with well known Black lawyer Ronald S. Sullivan Jr.
Geragos, whose tenure with Bronfman came late in the game, negotiated a plea deal for Bronfman about a month before she was scheduled to go to trial.
At the time it seemed to be a sweetheart deal for the sinister heiress. She had been represented by Susan Necheles as lead attorney when she was arrested in July 2018. Geragos took over as lead counsel in 2019.
Bronfman was the top henchwoman for Nxivm leader Keith Alan Raniere and spent well over $100 million at Raniere’s direction, much of if used to pay for lawyers to sue civilly and to advance perjurious criminal complaints meant to indict enemies of Raniere and herself.
She seemed to have escaped more serious charges and the supposed sweetheart deal, crafted by Geragos, appeared to be a mere slap on the wrist. She agreed to pay a $6 million fine [about 3 percent of her net worth] and in return, or so it seemed, she would get about two years in prison.
The 21-27 month sentencing guideline estimated by the prosecution, however, turned out to be worthless. That may be because an estimated 100 victims came forward after her plea deal and wrote shocking victim impact statements, which were included in her presentencing report, describing, in horrifying detail, how Clare Bronfman destroyed their lives.
A sober assessment by Judge Nicholas Garaufis seems to have led him to announce late last year that he was thinking of making an upward departure in Clare’s sentencing. Some observers took that to mean he might give her anywhere from 4-7 years.
People wondered what the hell good did the millions she paid to Geragos do for her? Since when can’t justice be purchased at the Department of Justice?
The late innings hiring of Sullivan comes, in a sense, courtesy of the pandemic. She would have been sentenced by now – it was scheduled for April. But Bronfman refused to be sentenced via Zoom.
Her plea deal was not what she thought it would be. At the time, Geragos negotiated her plea deal, he was up to his eyeballs with his own legal problems. He had partnered up with shyster lawyer Michael Avenatti to extort Nike out of some $20 million. To date, Geragos has not been charged but has been identified as an unindicted coconspirator in the Nike case.
According to Wikipedia, Ronald Sullivan is 54, a law professor at Harvard Law School, who was elected President of the Black Law Students Association while he was a student there. He served as an editor of the Harvard Black Letter Law Journal, now known as the Harvard Journal on Racial and Ethnic Justice.
Prior to joining Harvard, Sullivan was the Director of the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia and worked at the D.C. law firms of Baach Robinson & Lewis and Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom. Sullivan worked on high-profile cases, including those involving President Clinton.
At Harvard, Sullivan teaches criminal law and upper-level criminal procedure. He is the director of the Criminal Justice Institute. He writes on criminal law, criminal procedure, democracy, and race. He also serves as the official faculty advisor for Harvard Law School’s chapter of the Black Law Students Association.
Sullivan has appeared on CNN, C-SPAN, and Fox News Channel as a legal analyst. He takes on pro bono cases, across the nation, in addition to cases he oversees as part of the Criminal Justice Institute.
However, his representation of the Seagram’s heiress Bronfman is not likely to one of his pro bono cases.
Among his high profile cases, he represented one of the Jena Six defendants and was part of the legal defense team for ex-NFL New England Patriots player Aaron Hernandez in a double murder case. While Hernandez was serving a prison sentence for another murder, of which he had been convicted, he was found not guilty in the double murder case.
Last year, Sullivan joined the legal defense team of Harvey Weinstein, a movie mogul facing multiple charges of rape and sexual assault.
Sullivan’s decision to represent Weinstein met with criticism from Harvard University students, faculty, and administrators, including an online petition by students seeking the removal of Sullivan as Faculty Dean of Winthrop House.
The Dean of Harvard College, Rakesh Khurana, announced on May 11, 2019, that he would not renew the appointment of Sullivan as Faculty Dean when his appointment expired.
Sullivan had some tax issues. On November 19, 2019, the United States Tax Court ruled that over $1 million in unpaid taxes was owed by Sullivan, who had not filed income tax returns between 2005 and 2013.
If he still owes the money, Bronfman’s retainer may go a long way towards curing that.
What Can Sullivan Do for Clare Bronfman?
He might be able to try to undo the arguably lousy plea deal Geragos got her into.
Sullivan might argue that the 100 victim statements should have no bearing on Clare’s sentence since Clare pled guilty to only two felonies – involving only two victims – the estate of Pamela Cafritz and Sylvie, the DOS slave who Clare schemed to harbor illegally in the USA.
Due process seems to dictate that the other 98 victims should not have a say in her sentencing, for Clare never had a chance to confront them in court.
This is not to suggest that the other 98 or so victims were not brutalized by the monstrous Clare Bronfman, also known as Legatus in some Nxivm circles. But there is such a thing as due process and if they are to be victims, Clare, or any defendant, should have the opportunity to confront them and have a jury decide they were victims.
It is likely that Clare, if she knew her sentence could be impacted by allegations of crimes that she did not plead guilty to, might not have taken the plea deal Geragos served up for her.
Perhaps Sullivan may try to get her plea deal rescinded based on an argument of ineffective assistance of counsel. Geragos was undoubtedly distracted at the time, working to fend off his own felony charges in the Nike extortion case. Did this affect his representation of Clare?
Prior to the Nike case blowing up on him and Avenatti, it is believed that Geragos tried to negotiate with the feds to buy a better plea deal for Clare by providing evidence of alleged crimes of certain Nike officials. That backfired days later when Avenatti was arrested.
There is no doubt that Sullivan, a Democrat, close to Obama, and Clinton [Clinton appointed Judge Garaufis] will be taken seriously, no doubt a lot more seriously than an embattled Geragos was at the time leading up to Clare’s plea deal.
Sullivan is known as one of the leading law professors and one of the leading black lawyers in the nation. That alone will require special consideration by the court.
Bronfman may end up paying Sullivan millions for his services [on top of the millions she paid Geragos] and Sullivan may very well do what Geragos tried to do – get a sweetheart deal for the vicious heiress.
He may get a year or more knocked off her sentence and she may land where she originally tried to land – with about two years in prison.
He may even get her plea deal rescinded and start again, negotiating with the feds for an even better sweetheart deal for the unlovely heiress, who used perjury and her money to manipulate the legal system to destroy enemies of hers and her cult leader, Keith Alan Raniere.
Is Sullivan wrong to take on another client, as despicable as Weinstein?
Certainly not. In defending his role in representing Weinstein, Sullivan made an excellent point when he wrote, “It is particularly important for this category of unpopular defendant to receive the same process as everyone else – perhaps even more important. To the degree we deny unpopular defendants basic due process rights we cease to be the country we imagine ourselves to be.”
Good luck Ron, for you have now one of the most unsympathetic defendants one can readily imagine, a woman who had it all, and used her wealth in the most petty and sadistic ways to destroy other human beings.
There is a good reason why some 100 people came forward to state their lives were ruined by Clare Bronfman. What she pled guilty to was just the tip of the iceberg.
Maybe the Department of Justice will reconsider the charges they left at the table, including additional immigration fraud charges in the Northern District, and reopen the case against her.
“People wondered what the hell good did the millions she paid to Geragos do for her?”
Same for each of the lawyers…
None were efficient.
Not that it was an easy case but many things could have been brought for some of the defendants and they just let the boat sink (while receiving the checks)
It’s the same for Kathy and Allison’s lawyers…
If they brought the right point, they likely could have obtained a separate trial or acquitment…But they talked how often?
Neither side talked much.
It was a conversation between the prosecution and Raniere’s lawyers (who tried their best but he is so guilty that it’s mission impossible…and god, I’m glad it was. Now I hope he stays where he is for a long time (while being alive so he can suffer the same fate as his victim…a longterm mental and physical jail)
“Her plea deal was not what she thought it would be. At the time, Geragos negotiated her plea deal, he was up to his eyeballs with his own legal problems. He had partnered up with shyster lawyer Michael Avenatti to extort Nike out of some $20 million. To date, Geragos has not been charged but has been identified as an unindicted coconspirator in the Nike case.”
And that was the stupidest idea ever as he (Avenatti) was quite the target…plus negotiating is a big word while it sounds more like blackmail than anything…
It’s not a fully stupid move but a bit late I think…and I doubt that he could do much good…
“He might be able to try to undo the arguably lousy plea deal Geragos got her into.”
Difficult, she was clearly asked in front of the judge if she agreed with the plea deal…
Same is with Allison who definitely got a lousy deal (as in reality, she is guilty of collecting coercive material (under coercion) but nothing else…without the other lousy charge, it’s a max of 2 years in normal time (and since coercion is in, no time but probation).
But I doubt anyone will obtain a reroll for their plea deal.
“Is Sullivan wrong to take on another client, as despicable as Weinstein?”
Hum let’s not go too far…you have a sexual aggressor on one side and on the other side, a spoiled brat that took pleasure in suing people…
But was there physical violence? Was it as traumatic for the victim as a sexual aggression?
It’s lacking of respect for Weinstein’s victim to compare them both…
But I get what you mean.
Understand that if he gets a small, even a tiny form of victory (like reducing the sentence to the minimum) it’s a win-win for him.
No one expects him to get an acquitment…well, maybe Clare believes it, but most sane people expect him to reduce the sentence to a probation or something like that…
But one thing for sure…even if the guilty “deserve” a defense, I wouldn’t want to be in his shoes.
This news link from Trump 2020 has absolutely nothing to do with the article at hand, Frank. Why allow it? It violates your new policy and should be redacted. If you keep it, it shows a lot of hypocrisy and that you’ll break your own rules due to your allegiance to Trump. I’d like to know how this comment relates to the topic at hand in any way.
“So here are 10 rules for commenting [borrowed from the publications shown above]. Some might be redundant:
1. Make articulate, well-informed remarks that are relevant to the article.”
I’ve asked that previously and got nowhere. LOL
I don’t know which Anonymous you are. I wish the Anonymousers would use a moniker and still be anonymous. Anyway, yes, you are right. Agreed. Like what’s the point of the policy if you aren’t going to enforce it on something so blatant as this lol.
Clare is betting that Creepy Joe Biden gets elected and manages to spike the NXIVM case.
After all if Hillary Rotten Clinton had been elected in 2016 the NXIVM case would have been buried in the NDNY.
Seeing that Creepy Joe Biden is attracted to 13 year old girls just like Raniere is Clare is making a good bet.
Creepy Uncle Joe Can’t Control Himself
Talk about playing the race card.
She up and buys herself a ‘black’ professional liar to human shield herself during this BLM crises?!
If I were black, I’d be outraged at this. Although, it’s difficult to imagine being more so than I am already reading this…with a tan.
Being in the black race is not gonna help you in court the judge see right through her play/ruse. Claire is clever but she isn’t the brightest bulb.
I have pretty much stopped posting comments on this sinister site but this one takes the cake. Legatus is not evil. She helped so many of us and she needs a black attorney because blacks are taken more seriously than white guys are.
If Keith were black, he never would have been convicted. Simple as that.
“this sinister site”
Did I help make this site sinister?
“she needs a black attorney because blacks are taken more seriously than white guys are.” Pea Onyu
Like attorney Jackie Childs on “Seinfeld”
Jackie Chiles perfect attorney
hahahaha… i love that lawyer! That is outrageous!..
Seeing as you are an illegal alien, how many times do Andrew Cuomo and the Democrats have you registered to vote?
Nicki Clyne can vote.
Pea Onyu can vote.
Yolanda Cortez can vote.
Gabrielle Cortez can vote.
Monte Blu can vote.
You get the idea!
In Chicago, there is a saying, “Vote Early, Vote Often!”
I hate to think that the passage of time and huge world events can have an effect on the sentencing. People not directly involved and traumatized have short memories and so much time has gone by since the trial that the outrage may have simmered. People move on. It seems so long ago and the perfect time for Clare to try and crawl her way out of a nice long sentence. I hope the judge has a long memory.
This lack of closure is brutal for the victims and their families.
I know it’s no one’s fault, mostly — no one directly involved in the NX case, I mean, but to hear that in the meantime Clare ET AL are using the lag time to avoid serving their time for just a smidgeon of the crimes they committed is bone chilling.
What about the Hillary Clinton campaign donation bundling? And it doesn’t matter who the candidate was, it happened, it was a crime that singularly puts guys like Joe O’Hara in prison for years (which Clare saw to), she already put MiCHEAL AVENETTI on Frank Parlato’s case big time (only fate and Nike intervened) — I personally suffered some of that fallout hope I live to tell — it’s a 3 ring circus horror show that took place on the streets of Thousand Oaks, CA…
In a just society, the DOJ would be adding charges already referred from the EDNY to the NDNY for prosecution but in this topsy-turvy admin Clare’s only trying to get away with more injustice.
Hope she jets off to Fiji next, then maybe the DOJ will be sufficiently embarrassed to at least charge and convict her equally to anyone else. And keep her equally wicked, brainwashed sister from perverting children through Raniere’s Rainbow Culture Garden pedophile scam transplanted to France not to mention funding military insurgencies against the U.S. in Libya…
But thank God they nailed Allison Mack (sarcasm). Now, the streets are safe again. (more sarcasm).
Welcome back Pea. Why did you stop hitting on toni natalie?
Pea, if you know Keith so well then you must know that Keith Raniere is a huge bigot — he hates Jews especially, and one of his original plans for his own self-aggrandizement was to incite racism per one of his all-time heroes Charles Manson’s “Helter Skelter” plans.
Thank It’s a timeless go-to domination strategy that worked for Hitler, too, except the Jews were more prominent scapegoats than any other ‘race’ in Europe.
Check out Keith’s (ET AL’s) early GBD (Girls By Design) posts waxing on the joys of New Orleans sex slaves accompanied by pics of black men and white men tugging at a female figure in opposite directions.
Re Clare Bronfman Vs Allison Mack and hypocrisy:
Clare Bronfman is not on the hook for the other 98 cases, but Frank, Heidi, and Nutjob (Mack’s biggest champions) believe Allison Mack should walk?
Frank, I am no fan of Clare Bronfman, but maybe you should post a photo montage of Clare Bronfman becoming anorexic like you did for Mack. Clare Bronfman would sit on the floor next to Keith’s and Nancy’s chairs at various times, like a child with their parents.
I am not obsessed (unlike others) with Mack and believe the judge’s ruling is the voice of justice. Lady Justice is blind and holding scales for a reason.
I believe Allison should do at least 6 months to a year and no more than 2 years. Allison is a victim most definitely.
What interests me is why Nutjob, Heidi, and you think Allison Mack should walk.
All four of us are in agreement on two issues: Allison Mack broke the law and collected collateral.
No biggie, Niceguy, but I don’t agree Allison Mack (or much less Lauren Salzman) should “walk” — or not be held accountable at all.
My concern is that Allison was and is “taking the fall” — the blame, just she was set-up to do, IMO — for far more dangerous ESP / NXIVM criminals who were more lightly — or not at all — charged.
It’s clear to me that Allie was thrown to the media hounds like bloody meat while NXIAN’s and ESPIAN’s guilty of much worse crimes than she are the ones strolling off scott free — or only minimally charged.
And they will likely go on to perpetrate just about any crime they fancy seeing as when they do there’ll be even more incentive for the corrupt NDNY and NYS officials suborning this travesty of justice to cover their tracks.
Or do you think anyone’s going to ever admit they made a mistake in failing to duly charge the most guilty at this opportunity?
No, in fact, the NDNY’s and NYS failure to act previously is, IMO, a big part of the reason why they are not acting now — except as they always have to cover-up NX crimes by, in large part, attempting to silence whistleblowers.
All of which makes Allison Mack’s prosecution for her relatively petty offenses in this an embarrassing joke were it not so tragic.
Or are going to try to tell me Allison Mack is a greater threat to society than Nancy & Lauren Salzman, Ben & Michelle Myers, [redacted,] Clare Bronfman, Sara Bronfman, Emiliano Salinas, Alejandro Betancourt, Rosa Laura Junco, Edgar Boone, Ex-doctor Brandon Porter, Dr. Daniella Roberts, etc.?
She should walk because she’s pretty. See – I do like blondes.
Come on niceguy, Allison was ruined by Keith. She was/is a naive victim. And she ain’t alone. Why pick her out as the one to be punished? The only reason she’s in this position (and not somebody else) is cause Keith picked her out to take the fall.
i know, I know, queue up your weird rape points, and I’m ducking and covering as shadow comes for my jugular.
“ I do you like blondes”, NutJob. No kidding? I bet you are a Susan Somers fan too…..Did someone dream about being Jack Tripper?
Did you have a poster of Farrah Fawcett on your wall as a child?
I have to admit, I did have a Farrah Fawcett poster on my wall when I was 10. It’s the greatest selling poster of all time.
Nutjob, you are a good man, but I can’t agree with you on this one.
You and Heidi have a disagreement because she thinks Salzman should go to prison and you don’t. I’m not trying to start a fight, IJS, “drama follows me wherever I go.”.
Nothing like Chrissy Snow to get two guys on the same page. Best name ever was Greedy Gretchen.
“Clare Bronfman is not on the hook for the other 98 cases, but Frank, Heidi, and Nutjob (Mack’s biggest champions) believe Allison Mack should walk?”
Maybe because they (and I) stick with the FACTS, something you refuse to do…Where is Clare a victim? Because for Allison, you might blindfold yourself but she is.
“I am not obsessed (unlike others) with Mack”
[redacted] … I don’t see you going after Lauren or Nancy (who also have their defenders)…
Only against a VICTIM.
“I believe Allison should do at least 6 months to a year and no more than 2 years. Allison is a victim most definitely.”
I find it funny that you admit she is a victim but in the same sentence say “should do at least 6 months to a year, no more than 2 years”…
So, for you, a victim deserves jail? How much for Nicole? India, Jayes, Dani, Sylvie, and the many victims? You hear yourself? (or read, should I say).
And BTW, MORE THAN 2 YEARS of being LOCKED AWAY…it’s not enough for a victim? It would already be enough for a culprit but you think, Allison deserves another 6 months (at least) in jail…
And she is a victim…And we know how jail is helpful for anyone…Jail is for the CULPRIT, not for the victim.
“What interests me is why Nutjob, Heidi, and you think Allison Mack should walk.”
Because the facts show that Allison was exclusively a victim…Clare participated (much like Lauren and others) for 20 YEARS!!!
If you don’t understand the difference, no one can explain to you the why…
“All four of us are in agreement on two issues: Allison Mack broke the law and collected collateral.”
But you ignore the circumstances…circumstances considered for the other victims…
Allison broke the law and collected collateral UNDER COERCION… once again, circumstance used to explain the position of the other victims.
It’s can’t be ignored and it’s also definitely a fact …especially for Allison.
It’s the first victim to have a part of her collaterals revealed publicly (by the DOJ itself!!)
So it just can’t be ignored…the coercion is also witnessed by several people.
Including a journalist who had to do the FORCED interview of Allison.
She pointed clearly the circumstances and the suspicious situation.
Or else, why would she have said “Allison didn’t want to do the interview until Raniere and Lauren took her aside to talk”
This is the difference between a Lauren, a Clare and Allison…
Circumstance and the time spend committing crimes.
Allison: collecting collateral between beginning 2016 and June 2017. All under coercion (collecting for her started around 2014 until 2015)
Clare and Lauren: participating in crimes (including collecting collaterals) for 20 years (and more for Lauren)…participating in the abuse of the judicial system, fraud, id theft, harassment, amongst the other “activities” of Nxivm…
If Lauren and Clare might have a few collaterals, they are relatively recent, so it means that they committed crime BEFORE coercion.
Circumstances are extremely different
Sullivan says he’s helped over 6,000 wrongfully incarcerated people. Might be why she hired him.
I am glad that deleted [redacted].
Sounds like Wilt Chamberlain, the NBA All basketball Star, when he claimed he slept with 20,000 women.
I know for a fact that K.R. Claviger has freed 8,000 criminals and slept with 30,000 women.
According to Scott Johnson, Scott has helped thousands of people avoid Amway scams and has been personally thanked by dozens.
It could be 10s or 100s of thousands that Scott has helped. LOL
But with 4-5 million people turning 18 years old every year in the U.S. alone, it’s a drop in the bucket. LOL
You are awesome and an inspiration!!!!
—It could be 10s or 100s of thousands that Scott has helped. LOL
You are too modest and so matter-of-fact; your gallant efforts against Amway are the stuff of legends.
Not many men would sign on to a class-action lawsuit, where the attorneys take care of everything, and one does not have to worry about out of pocket expenses. The mighty pen (actually a signature) is greater than the sword!
Oh, the bards will tell your epic tale in hymns for eons to come.
“There is a good reason why some 100 people came forward to state their lives were ruined by Clare Bronfman. What she pled guilty to was just the tip of the iceberg.” Frank Parlato
That is true of all the defendants with the possible exception of Kathy Russell.
Allison Mack claimed that NXIVM DOS had over 100 women in it.
Perhaps as many as 150 women.
Each of those women can claim to be a victim.
Much of the blackmail material (the so-called collateral) consisted of false allegations of criminal conduct such as child molestation against the relatives of the NXIVM women.
The targets of those false allegations are victims of Allison Mack, Lauren Salzman, Nancy Salzman, Clare Bronfman, Keith Raniere and NXIVM.
According to Attorney Neil Glazer in his complaint filed in January, there have been requests to these defendants to return the blackmail material.
None have complied.
Until that material is returned to the victims to be destroyed, NXIVM is an ongoing crime.
Quotes from the complaint filed by Neil Glazer
1.) Eventually, the shame and humiliation of The Vow was more than she could bear,
and Jane Doe 7 repudiated her Vow and requested the return of her collateral, which was refused.
Paralyzed by the dual fears of the release of her collateral and NXIVM’s infamous
abusive litigation tactics, Jane Doe 7 left the NXIVM community and kept silent
2.) At some point, Jane Doe 8 asked Clyne to release her from The Vow, and Clyne
refused. Eventually, the shame and humiliation of what she had to do as part of The Vow was
more than Jane Doe 8 could bear, and she informed Defendant Clyne that she was repudiating
her Vow and requested the return of her collateral, which Clyne refused. Paralyzed by the dual
fears of release of her collateral and NXIVM’s infamous abusive litigation tactics, Jane Doe 8
left the NXIVM community and kept silent about her experience.
3.) 151. Eventually, the shame and humiliation of what she had to do as part of The Vow
was more than she could bear, and Jane Doe 10 requested the return of her collateral from
Defendants Alison Mack and Raniere, which she never received. Paralyzed by the dual fears of
release of her collateral and NXIVM’s infamous abusive litigation tactics, Jane Doe 10 severed
her ties to the NXIVM community and kept silent about her experience.
4.) 158. However, the shame and humiliation of what she had to do as part of The Vow
was more than she could bear, and Jane Doe 11 requested that Mack return her collateral, which
she refused. Paralyzed by the dual fears of release of her collateral and NXIVM’s infamous
abusive litigation tactics, Jane Doe 11 left the NXIVM community and kept silent about her
5.) 455. At some point, Jane Doe 50 asked Lauren Salzman to release her from The Vow,
and Lauren Salzman refused. Eventually, the shame and humiliation of what she had to do as
part of The Vow was more than she could bear, and Jane Doe 50 informed Defendant Lauren
Salzman that she was repudiating her Vow and requested the return of her collateral, which
Lauren Salzman refused. Jane Doe 50 then wrote to NXIVM leaders, including Defendants
Clare Bronfman and Karen Unterreiner, informing them that she had been recruited into The
Vow through lies and manipulation and that she had been coerced into giving extremely
humiliating and potentially damaging collateral, which she described in her letter. Jane Doe 50
asked them to direct the return or destruction of her collateral, which they refused to do.
Paralyzed by the dual fears of release of her collateral and NXIVM’s infamous abusive litigation
tactics, Jane Doe 50 left the NXIVM community and kept silent about her experience
6.) Many DOS defectors began writing to Defendants,
including Allison Mack, Lauren Salzman, Nancy Salzman, and Clare Bronfman, pleading for
their collateral to be returned or destroyed. Lauren Salzman testified at the Raniere trial that she
would pass such pleas along to Defendant Clare Bronfman. No collateral was ever returned or
792. In fact, at least one DOS member’s collateral was released in retaliation for her
speaking out against Defendants, NXIVM and DOS. That collateral had been edited by Lauren
Salzman and Allison Mack, at Raniere’s direction, to make it appear as if the DOS “slave” had
asked to be branded. Indeed, Raniere directed the branding ceremony to include the recitation of
a statement that Raniere told Defendant Mack would create the appearance that the brandings
From this complaint, it doesn’t appear to me that Allison Mack and Lauren Salzman are victims.
As for you, Nicki Clyne, aka Mrs. Allison Mack, aka Pea Onyu, aka Yolanda Cortez, aka Gabrielle Cortez, aka Legatus Pro Tempore, what have you to say about the specifics of this complaint?
Does the cat have your tongue?
For those interested during this COVID crisis, Mr. Glazer’s law offices at Kohn Swift and Graf are open to hear from other victims of NXIVM.
If only the first few lines were not that false and twisted… I might have given some interest to answer further but I’ll just say: STICK TO THE FACTS…
Not one thing of what you say is true…and this within the first 5 lines!!!
Can’t you, for once, stay in the real world instead of your fantasy world? Just once?
I am not redacting your comment at all because I want to use it to illustrate something.
You always have to be rude to other commenters. If you won’t abide by my request, I am simply going to delete all your comments going forward. It is not worth the time to redact your insulting comments to others. Please, I ask you for the last time, make your points – disagree with the comments – but stop calling others names.
What name did Anonymous call Mr. Shadow? LOL
I can agree Anonymous indirectly called Mr. Shadow a liar, but all that was done directly was to say that Mr. Shadow is wrong and twisting things around and Anonymous should have stated the specific points that Mr. Shadow was incorrect about and the things he distorted. LOL
I didn’t realize we turned the clock back to 1984. LOL
That’s actually pretty funny. [redacted]
I’d have a stash of my prior works that I could copy and paste from so I wouldn’t get called out for not using “specific points”.
The heart of my comment came from the complaint filed in January by attorney Neil Glazer.
I cut and pasted from the complaint that Mr. Glazer filed to make certain that I did not make any allegation that Mr. Glazer and his clients made.
I assume that Glazer has ample evidence to prove his allegations.
As for the line that there were at least 100 women in NXIIVM DOS, that came from Allison Mack’s statement in the New York Times in early 2018.
Not being a member of NXIVM I have no idea of how many were in the “Sorority” called the Vow except what Ms. Mack said publicly.
If it is a lie then it is Allison Mack’s lie.
Wow. Why would he take this case? Not particularly righteous for someone of his background. If he fleeces Clare so that he can take on more Pro Bono cases that deserve such representation, then I am a little more ok with it.
Or perhaps Clare has info that indeed more charges might be coming and she needs better representation this time around?
The understatement of the year, “Sullivan had some tax issues…who had not filed income tax returns between 2005 and 2013.” If the judge is supposed to take into account all of Sullivan’s good points, why not this bad one as well? LOL
What great timing Bronfman has, dumping the white guy for the Black guy in the midst of the country’s racial dustup. Good on Bronfman for helping an oppressed Black man in his time of need, true virtue signalling. LOL
At least Sullivan is a proven loser in his court cases, but his Cheshire Cat smile says it all, defending the rich evil losers is very profitable for himself. LOL
No doubt Sullivan will try every trick in the book to “help” Bronfman, it’s called billable hours. Cha-CHING! LOL
Well written. I am wondering if any of these defendants will get “time served” for the time in house arrest.
Although federal judges can pretty much do whatever they want when it comes to sentencing, I doubt that Judge Garaufis will grant any “time served” credit for any of the defendants that have been under “house arrest” since the day they pleaded guilty (Raniere, however, will get credit for every day that he has been in custody from the day he was arrested at the Mexican border). That’s because the U.S. criminal justice system never allows such credit to be granted in these circumstances.
But Judge Garaufis does have the power to reduce their sentences below what the “sentencing guidelines” recommend without ever explaining why he was doing so. So, in effect, he can do what you’re suggesting – he just can’t acknowledge that he’s doing it.
I hope the judge remembers how she lied about not knowing about Avenetti and then disrupted the court room with her fainting performance.
Peaches – Have you ever pretended to faint? Just curious. My guess is no, cause you weren’t born in the 19th century. But if yes, why?
“I doubt that Judge Garaufis will grant any “time served” credit for any of the defendants that have been under “house arrest” since the day they pleaded guilty ”
[redacted] this is something i already clearly stated…
You haven’t followed this case, did you?
The judge stated back in 2018 (around september) that for him , home arrest is as bad as prison…It’s his decision that matter on the subject…
He can choose to ignore the home arrest or account it.
And in term of judicial system, they were locked for 2 years (and plus for Allison), it’s starting to be a bit illegal to ignore this…
He would either have had to take a decision right after the trial or account the time spent in home arrest.
[redacted] you should know that…
Plus ignoring the home arrest time open the possibility of an appeal for each of the plea deal…
You may want to read what I previously wrote – and take notes this time before you respond.
As I previously stated, Judge Garaufis will not grant any “time served” credit for any of the defendants that have been under “house arrest” because the U.S. criminal justice system does not allow for credit to be granted in these circumstances. And there is certainly nothing “illegal” about him not doing so.
Nor does he need to render a sentence “right after the trial or account the time spent in home arrest”. As numerous courts have ruled, defendants have a right to a speedy trial but convicted defendants do not have a right to speedy sentencing.
But, as I also stated, if the judge wants to take into consideration such things as the lengthy home confinement – or for that matter, any other factor he deems relevant – he can do by simply imposing a lesser sentence. It just won’t be something he puts on the record.
This is what happens when we try to be “nice” instead of just calling somebody what they are, [redacted]
K.R. Claviger should have added [FEDERAL]
…because the U.S. [FEDERAL]
criminal justice system does not allow for credit to be granted in these circumstances.
Sometimes lay people don’t get the gist.
KRC I think this is the sixth or seventh time you’ve had to explain this…..
I’m waiting for someone to declare “all the defendants will get out early because they’ll be paroled”. 😉
It doesn’t matter how many times it is explained, if a new person comes along, they may have the same question. LOL
Thank you, Scott, for pointing it out!