Editor’s Note by Frank Parlato: To ensure readers are not confused: I am not on the side of Keith Raniere. I believe he is a criminal. We are adversaries. I had a hand in his being prosecuted. However, I also believe that every citizen – even those that may have committed heinous crimes – is entitled to due process. Raniere’s supporters have collected evidence they say proves prosecutorial misconduct – and I have agreed to publish that evidence. I am certainly not saying he is innocent of the charges of which he was convicted. With Raniere’s sentencing date a week from tomorrow, there can be no harm in this examination of possible prosecutorial misconduct.
Here is the latest argument by Raniere’s supporters: [See also NEWS EXCLUSIVE: Raniere Supporters Release ‘First Evidence’ of Alleged Misconduct — ‘Raniere Bail Denied Through Lies’]
***
The well-hidden but massive lie the prosecution told the
Court in order to charge Raniere with sex trafficking
By Marc Elliot
For Make Justice Blind
Sex trafficking is an egregious crime. According to the National Criminal Justice Service, more than 17,500 U.S. citizens are trafficked within the country each year. Sex trafficking is a felony with up to a life sentence in prison as punishment. It is a charge that should not be taken lightly, both by the perpetrators and by the people who prosecute them.
The testimony of a woman named “Nicole” was the centerpiece of the sex trafficking charge at Keith Raniere’s trial.
Nicole was an actress involved in NXIVM courses and the NXIVM community, and she knew Raniere for many months prior. Raniere was charged with and convicted of sex trafficking based solely on a sex act that happened with Nicole.
This single sex act with Nicole was the basis for the entire federal sex trafficking charge levied against Raniere – without this one sex act happening, Raniere could not have been charged with sex trafficking. During the act, Nicole was blindfolded and received oral sex from another woman. Of note, Raniere did not have sex with Nicole in this sex act. For this act, he was convicted of sex trafficking and now faces life in prison.
Below, we will show how the prosecution lied both to get jurisdiction to press charges and to try to convict Raniere of sex trafficking.
Lies A1 and A2 below lay the groundwork to show the most blatant lie, Lie B.
This seemingly subtle lie had far-reaching implications and takes a very discerning eye to catch and comprehend. It appears almost meaningless: it’s a small lie about the date Nicole traveled. However, the prosecution misrepresented this minor detail because, had they not, their entire federal sex trafficking charge would have no legal basis.
Context for how the prosecution lied to charge Raniere with sex trafficking
Jurisdiction:
For someone to be charged with a federal crime, the prosecutors must prove that they have the jurisdiction to pursue an indictment. Federal jurisdiction is established by alleging that a crime affected interstate commerce. As we will show below in Lies A and B, the prosecutors lied to the Court about what evidence they actually showed to prove that interstate commerce was affected. The implications for this technicality are not small – without interstate commerce being affected, the Eastern District of New York would not have gotten jurisdiction for the sex trafficking charge in the first place.
Elements of a crime:
Every crime has several defined elements outlined in law. The prosecution must prove that every element of a crime was present in order to find someone guilty. For a federal sex trafficking case, prosecutors must show that interstate commerce was affected, otherwise, a defendant should be found “not guilty.” In Raniere’s case, the prosecution had to prove that Nicole’s travel to Albany occurred for the purpose of committing a sex crime; otherwise, there would be no sex trafficking…it would have just been normal travel to Albany, and then sex happening there.
In Lies A and B below, the prosecution tried to falsely establish that interstate travel happened in order to commit a crime. The basis of their entire sex trafficking charge was a lie, hidden deep within 5,000 pages of testimony. We challenge the reader to find it below.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Lie A: Nicole took either a bus or a train to Albany for the sex act
In their closing statements, the prosecution lied by stating they had proven that Nicole took “either Amtrak or Greyhound to and from Albany” on the day of the alleged crime (Evidence for Lie A.1.1) Also, at the onset of the case, they lied by saying that they had “exceedingly strong” evidence for their arguments (Evidence for Lie A.1.2).
Lie A.1.1: The prosecution proved Nicole took a train or bus to and from Albany the day of the alleged crime
Caption: Evidence for Lie A.1.1: The prosecution made a key lie about the day Nicole traveled to Albany. (Link to transcript)
Lie A.1.2: Sex trafficking evidence is “exceedingly strong”
Caption: Evidence for Lie A.1.2: In a motion supporting detention, filed on 3/26/18, the prosecution lies about the strength of the evidence for the sex trafficking charge.
Truth A: No evidence was shown proving Nicole took a train or bus to Albany the day of the sex act
For a charge with “exceedingly strong” evidence, the following truths revealed in Nicole’s own testimony contradict the prosecution’s statement above.
Truth A1: Nicole was coming up to Albany weekly for two months
In order to make it appear like the sex act in question was sex trafficking, the prosecution made it seem like Nicole’s travel to Albany was explicitly for the purpose of a sex crime to be committed. Nicole’s own testimony proves that this was not the case. The alleged sex act happened on or just before May 31, 2016.
Below, Nicole explains that for at least two months prior to this time, she was coming up to Albany weekly.
The truth is that Nicole’s travel to Albany was part of her regular weekly trips to Albany – there was no special trip designed to “traffic her” to commit a sex crime, as the prosecution falsely portrayed. The suggestion that one of Nicole’s routine trips to Albany (where she was taking classes and meeting with mentors) suddenly became trafficking is offensive to the types of horrific, coercive, and violent transport/smuggling acts that actual victims of sex trafficking endure.
With the logic that the prosecution used, one could make the following argument: If you go to college classes every week for two months (mostly by bus) and one day the professor tries to steal something from you – then you were trafficked to classes that day so that he could commit this crime. Such logic is a contortion of the truth, it is false, and it doesn’t belong in a court of law.
Evidence of Truth A1: Nicole’s testimony shows that her so-called “trafficking” was actually just part of her routine trips to Albany
x
Evidence for Truth A.2: Nicole explains her regular weekly trips to Albany for two months prior to the sex act happening (link to testimony)
Truth A2: Nicole did not always take a train or bus to Albany
In Nicole’s testimony, she said that she sometimes drove to Albany, and that most of the time she took a train or bus.
“Exceedingly strong” evidence for a crime that could amount to life in prison would include either sworn verbal testimony or hard evidence (such a receipt, a boarding pass, a credit card statement, etc.) confirming how and when the travel happened. The prosecution provided neither testimony nor hard evidence as proof. So, which part of their evidence was “exceedingly strong?”
How do we know Nicole took a train or bus on the day the sex act happened? It’s never said or made clear at the trial, other than in the prosecutor’s closing statements.
Nicole testified below that she occasionally drove to Albany and took a train or bus “most of the time” to get there. Here’s why this is important: If Nicole did drive to Albany when the alleged crime occurred, the entire charge would need to be dropped. Why?
For a federal sex trafficking charge to be valid, the government needs to establish interstate commerce was affected. Here, the prosecution argued that buying a ticket on a national train or bus company affects interstate commerce – the same cannot be easily said for driving in a private car.
Given the importance of her means of travel, it is curious why the prosecution didn’t ask Nicole to specifically confirm how she got to Albany when the alleged crime happened. She was the only witness for the sex trafficking charge, and the prosecution’s case for the charge rests entirely on her testimony. The prosecution presented zero conclusive proof that interstate travel (and therefore interstate commerce) occurred on the day of the crime, for the intent to commit a crime – no testimony, no hard evidence. There was no evidence, and it was a flat out lie to call this critical point supported by “exceedingly strong” evidence. It was supported by none.
Evidence of Truth A2: Nicole testifies she did not always take a train or bus to Albany
Evidence for Truth A.2: Nicole indicates that she did not always take a train or bus to Albany. She never confirmed how she traveled the day of the crime, and provided no receipt, boarding pass, etc. Her taking a train or bus is an essential point upon which the entire sex trafficking charge rests. (Link to testimony)
____________________________________________________________________________________
Lie B: Nicole traveled to Albany on the day of the sex act
This lie is difficult to follow, but it is the most egregious and important – it requires close attention to catch, which is how the prosecution got away with it. It is masterful sleight of hand.
Below, the prosecution specifically said that Nicole traveled to Albany on the day of the alleged crime (the alleged crime is referred to as “the assignment” in the transcript below). Saying Nicole traveled on the day of the crime is an outright lie. Wait until you see Nicole’s testimony.
Lie B: Nicole took a train or bus on the day of the alleged crime
Evidence for Lie B: The prosecution lied by saying that Nicole traveled to Albany the day of the alleged crime. (Link to transcript)
It was important for the prosecution to falsely say that Nicole traveled to Albany on the day the alleged crime happened. Without making this false argument above, the entire basis of their sex trafficking charge falls apart . . . it becomes just sex, with no trafficking.
Truth B: Nicole testified she came to Albany (at least) the day before the alleged crime as part of her normal travel there; she was not “trafficked” to Albany.
As you just read in Lie B above, the prosecution argued that Nicole traveled to Albany on the day of the “assignment” (a.k.a. the alleged crime). Below, Nicole’s sworn testimony reveals that she did NOT travel to Albany on the day of the alleged crime. She testified she was already in Albany the day before!
Evidence of Truth B: Nicole testifies she was already in Albany the day before the alleged crime; she did not travel to Albany the day of the crime.
Evidence of Truth B: Transcripts from Nicole’s testimony show that she did not travel to Albany when the prosecution said she did. She traveled there at least the day before. (Link to testimony).
Why is this CRITICAL?
Why would the prosecution lie about such a seemingly small detail? Because it’s a KEY POINT for the sex trafficking charge.
Based on legal tests, routine travel across state lines followed by sex does not constitute the heinous crime of “sex trafficking.”
The prosecution created the illusion that the sole reason Nicole came to Albany on that specific trip was because she was a victim who was trafficked for sex that day. The prosecution had to lie about the date of her travel to make it appear that this was the case. Had the prosecution acknowledged the truth – that Nicole was making a routine trip to Albany (Truth A2) one day, and then sex happened in Albany the next day (Truth B) – then the criminal intent of the alleged “bus or train” ride (the “trafficking”) falls apart.
The truth is clear: Nicole simply wasn’t “trafficked” for sex that day; she came to Albany at least one day before, as she normally did. She did not travel for the purpose of committing the sex act in question.
In order to make the sex trafficking charge work within the framework of the law, the prosecution had to make an outright lie to the Court about the day of Nicole’s travel. It begs the question: If the sex-trafficking case against Raniere was so “exceedingly strong,” why would the prosecution lie at all, let alone about this critical fact?
Summary:
Nicole was the prosecution’s ONLY witness for the sex trafficking charge against Raniere, and the sole evidence the government provided was her sworn testimony. Nicole’s testimony alone completely contradicted the arguments the prosecution attempted to make to show that Raniere committed sex trafficking.
Remarkably, after a 7-week trial with over 5,000 pages of testimony, the government’s case against Raniere for committing sex trafficking was so weak that the prosecution had to lie about fundamental facts from their own witness’s testimony. Had the prosecution been truthful, no federal sex trafficking indictment against Raniere would have been possible for the EDNY to pursue.
Frank Parlato 
Janine Morrison 
J.J. O'Hara 
Richard Luthmann 
Marie White 
Paul Serran
Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
[…] EXCLUSIVE: Raniere Supporters: ‘The Well-Hidden but Massive Lie the Prosecution Told the Court in … […]
This seems unbelievable. If the man’s life was not at stake, it would be hilarious. I guess it still is, but it’s sad if true. This is as crazy of a story as I’ve ever heard. What country are we in here?
OK, folks…u do realize that Mark Elliott doesn’t know these facts…This was all written by KEITH. This may be true or not… but either way..he abused, manipulated, wrongfully sued, and stalked women compulsively for most of his life. He is a dangerous addict that needs to be removed from society. That said…the other charges carry enough weight to put him away until a ripe old age…
From the Law Office of Beavis and Butthead, Esqs., “Had the prosecution acknowledged the truth – that Nicole was making a routine trip to Albany (Truth A2) one day, and then sex happened in Albany the next day (Truth B) – then the criminal intent of the alleged “bus or train” ride (the “trafficking”) falls apart.”
So why didn’t the esteemed attorney, Marc Agnifilo, counter this in his defense? Perhaps because the elements for sex trafficking do exist. He may be a celebrity attorney who loves the spotlight more than his clients do, but he ain’t no dummy either!
That folks is the unintelligent ramblings of a man who thinks this cult cured his Tourette’s Syndrome.
Damn, I admire this guy…he says to girls “lose some weight, and then I whip out the cock”. Nice man, bravo…
Let him fuck the girls, gosh
I find you highly offensive, Mitch.
I hope the NXIVM 5 have something better than this, but I think they already shot their wad, and it was quite flaccid at the time. LOL
I’m not a lawyer, and apparently none of them are either, but I don’t believe the victim has to be aware they are being sex trafficked and there isn’t a 24 hour time limit on travel and sex. LOL
Can we discuss something much more interesting, such as Amway and other MLM scams, which are still ongoing? LOL
No smoking gun here. The prosecution will argue it’s all part of Vanguard’s grooming and manipulation, and if I were on the jury, I’d agree.
Guilty.
Next
A guy tells girls to lose weight so they can fuck, what’s he guilty of?
Traveling by Amtrak or commercial bus are only two of the many, many, many ways something can affect interstate or foreign commerce. It’s such an easy standard to meet. If she drove to Albany, she used gasoline to do so, which affects interstate or foreign commerce. I’d call the argument frivolous if I didn’t think the merits were secondary to the main point, which is for Billy Flynn to give ’em the old razzle-dazzle.
Marc, please stop. You are debasing yourself. However petty the arguments that you presented, they fail to disprove sex trafficking:
– A1: Normally Nicole travelled to Albany for courses and meetings. However, on this occasion she was sex trafficked. Your argument implies that a person cannot be sex trafficked if she had previously travelled to the general location where the crime occurred… and that is nonsense.
– A2: Whether Nicole took a bus, a train, a dirigible balloon or drove herself doesn’t negate the argument that ‘interstate commerce was affected’. This concept is deliberately broad and there are an unlimited number of ways that someone travelling interstate can affect commerce. It is not limited to purchasing a bus or train ticket.
– B: The sex act does not have to occur the day of travel to be considered sex trafficking. Keith didn’t sexually assault her the day that she travelled, he did it the next day. Imagine, if rapists were allowed to go free if they just waited 24 hours before assaulting their victims. Again, nonsense argument.
I am also curious whether these issues were brought forward to the Court by Mr. Raniere’s defense team or whether they were considered to be without merit?
Most importantly Marc, you need to take step back and reflect on your values. Imagine if the victim was not Nicole but your mother or sister or a loved friend. Would you than defend these heinous actions with arguments such as ‘she had travelled there before’ or ‘perhaps she drove there’ or ‘the assault happened the following day?’ If the perpetrator was anyone other than Raniere, would you still leave your decency at the door?
Frank,
Two things:
1. I believe you should address the accusations made in the series of Tweets made on Ivy’s Twitter feed.
https://twitter.com/DarlyneDolap/status/1317911926941233154?s=20
*************
2. Frank, the reason I was fairly upset earlier is that immediately when came back to the Frank Report website this afternoon, my Google account opened up (connected) and my email was fed in with my Gmail account.
If Paul did not do it, then you were hacked.
Did Paul make a mistake or add-on any new software to your server? No need to
answer.
Epstein did not get bail either and went to straight to the MDC. Both had resources such as access to private airplanes and an army of people to help them so they could escape. There are clear similarities and consistencies in denying them both bail. Of course, shit didn’t work out too well for Jeffrey, but that’s another story.
Not convinced by this. My own experience of a guru grooming a follower into a sex act was that the grooming was a slow process of many weeks and its entirely possible, nay I would say likely, that these repeated visits were a part of that process.
Jeez, look at what you are having to ignore in order to defend this guy.
With mind-blowing evidence like this, It’s hard to imagine why the press didn’t take your calls.
Ingenious.
Frank Parlato by providing the Nxivm 5 a public outlet to tell their tale, of prosecutorial misconduct, is allowing them to illuminate their delusional and perverse perspective of reality. The Nxivm 5 are divorced from reality.
Re Nicole’s Travel and How It Relates to Sex Trafficking:
—Nicole was the prosecution’s ONLY witness for the sex trafficking charge against Raniere, and the sole evidence the government provided was her sworn testimony. Nicole’s testimony alone completely contradicted the arguments the prosecution attempted to make to show that Raniere committed sex trafficking.
How Nicole traveled is immaterial. She was coerced into having sex by the collateral that Vanguard had collected on her. The NXIVM 5 need to remember that the collateral consisted of not only X rated pictures but digital video of fabricated criminal confessions.
The Nxivm 5 need to come up with better prosecutorial misconduct if they want to
over turn the jury’s verdict.
The Nxivm 5 are lay people that have watched to many episodes of Law and Order.
Who gives a shit
Hes guilty and belongs in prison
Help someone innocent, Frank.
Totally agree.
So they just want to let us forget about any branding of the master’s mark and the fact they actually had collateral on this young woman. It seems the minor points matter the most but also the whole trafficking thing didn’t matter at all it seems.
However, I do recall that the same master give her quite a bit of cash for rent or something as she was using all her money traveling back and forth. So, to then ask for a receipt knowing that she probably had paid for her travel using the aforementioned cash is akin to someone already banking on knowing the answer. Who then keeps train or bus tickets paid in cash once they are used for future evidence?
I thought you were going to handle like I don’t know proof that he is a great person. What about the pictures, Camilla, Daniela, Sylvie, Rhiannon, etc., etc. I mean ok forget about these what about those? I hope that there’s another trial, for all these cases to have another opportunity of meeting the public eye. Well, the sentencing is going to be next week, right? And the last episode of The Vow has already been shown if I am correct. I mean Nxivm has so many connections to Pizza Gate, and there’s a strong group of people that are learning more and more about these things by the minute. I pray to god for more media about these, so everyone can see you defending a pedophile and posible killer with these shit stupid arguments. Barbara Bouchey, Tony Natalie, etc. had to defend themselves for years. And they didn’t defend a pedophile they participate in a cult without knowing. So, yeah, you can bend the Justice or make it blind as you want to, you have the worst name picking by the way, Girls by Design? The emperor has no clothes? Yikes. Keep defending him, I hope that you are getting something from these because society will judge you as such, and frankly you know it and still do the horrible things you are doing. It’s pretty obvious for people that investigate these cases the true nature of Nxivm and is vile, Luciferian, bad, horrible. And the BEST part is that you no longer have any excuse for not knowing these things. I don’t know why Frank deals with these imbeciles. He could just not pay attention. But hey, I’m sure that there is a great plan on his side (like showing the level of imbeciles the fateful Nexians are).
“ The truth is that Nicole’s travel to Albany was part of her regular weekly trips to Albany – there was no special trip designed to “traffic her” to commit a sex crime, as the prosecution falsely portrayed. The suggestion that one of Nicole’s routine trips to Albany (where she was taking classes and meeting with mentors) suddenly became trafficking is offensive to the types of horrific, coercive, and violent transport/smuggling acts that actual victims of sex trafficking endure.”
This is grooming, Keith has a long well established history of grooming which each of the witnesses. Grooming takes patience, manipulation and conspiratorial accessories that helped, by his design.
Women and girls are lured sight unseen by men on the internet, to travel on their own to a destination that was intended for their abuse and exploitation. Guess what, that’s still sex trafficking.
If only the Le Baron girls could have testified.
Imagine these idiots running around amongst us, void of moral judgement and applying blame to everyone but themselves.
Ayn Rand died alone collecting welfare benefits. Her most loyal acolyte crashed the US economy in 08, based on her ideology. That’s where I see these vacuous nulls of cognition. Groveling demons serving the void.
This is the very definition of frantically pulling at straws.
This is the type of nitpicking innocence fraudsters use to get guilty murderers convictions thrown out on a technicality. Then call them “exonerated” and sue the state for millions. Has been a good racket for them since most people don’t know the details, just that a mistrial happened. The ignorant public believe’s the innocence fraudsters. After that they can call the whole system corrupt. Clever criminals using Clare Bronfman’s vexatious ways to attack a just verdict.
Looks like Knox + Flom & Co. will get that $30,000 prize from Clare for this
Well stated.
Agree.
Precedent says you do not have to travel the day of the crime for it to be sex trafficking. The victim (I know, their are no victims in NXidiot world) does not have to be aware that a sexual encounter will happen at the final destination they are travelling to like Mr. Elliot is implying she must be aware for it to be sex trafficking.
As well, the travel does not have to be strictly by 3rd party. So long as some money was spent during travel or resource was consumed during travel is good enough. As well a resource does not have to be paid for during travel.
Fuel, food, water purchased a few days before, is acceptable. Even stopping to use the bathroom somewhere along the way is considered using a resource. Listening to the radio as well. Finally just because someone travels multiple times to the same place does not disqualify the one time the sex trafficking happened. Furthermore, resources and money spent on previous trips qualify as interstate commerce if it concludes in sex trafficking at a later date, presumably because the previous trips were used to bait the victim.
A cursory Google search would have shown Mr. Elliot all this, but we know the majority of NXidiots don’t know how to use Google because they would have never gotten roped in by this huckster in the first place had they done so.
Good points! What does Elliot say to this?
Elliot…?
I don’t think these brain dead cult followers are doing this on their own. I think they are getting help behind the scenes. How else would they know about the law?
What all of the rigamarole sounds like is a waste of so-called intellect, never mind heart or soul. Blah blah blah blah blah.
Here are possessed minds who fester with psychologically laundered, twisted and empty rearrangements of what were all false narratives at the onset. Crap is what these people bought through and through.
Push the phony honesty like heroin dealers. Go right ahead. Dishonor the self. Do it ’til you are never, ever satisfied. Fine and dandy. Swallow your rotten spittle and expect congratulations for being so devout.
Everything in Nxivm/DOS was designed to conceal who Keith Raniere really is and what he wanted the most. Who do these poor squatters think is being taken in by their cleanup job?
Picking at details with such a singlepointed, fictionally bent focus. And ho-hum. More floods of blah blah. These people try to make Raniere’s sexual abuse of N. sound as though Raniere is just misunderstood.
You know what? Fuck that.
These reps for Raniere are supporting harmfulness, trickery, lies and evilness, any which way that they dream might work for their ends.
There aren’t enough hours or days of joy or simple pleasure that any of these monkeybutts can offer to even begin to compensate for the harm which Raniere so “charitably” doled out to those who were vulnerable to him and to his slavish clique of crackerbrains.
This is a flea circus, Frank. It was funny at first.
Don’t condemn Keith Raniere and then go out and vote for Joe Biden.
Biden’s son Hunter Biden had a computer packed with child porn.
Hunter even made videos of himself torturing female children.
Federal Crimes Uncovered In Biden Hard Drive | Rudy Giuliani
“On July 22, 2009, Judge Garufis ruled against the City of New York for using selection tests that discriminated against black and Hispanic applicants to the Fire Department.”
“On February 13, 2018, Judge Garaufis issued a preliminary injunction temporarily blocking the Trump administration’s order ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program created by the Obama administration.”
https://ballotpedia.org/Nicholas_Garaufis
I saw let Keith fuck all the girls he wants, and obviously love it… he’s having a good time
The prosecution attributed Raniere’s intent in bringing Nicole and many other women to Albany as, primarily, to satisfy himself sexually – that’s sex trafficking. He tells lies and uses other people to accomplish that (there’s the conspiracy to commit sex trafficking) and sometimes, he tells the truth … like he did to SOP when he said he just wanted to fuck all those women. Never mind what they wanted, whether they were satisfied, he just wanted to fuck them. He’s a psychopath and it’s a big game to him that he has been able to do this under NXIVM noses all these years. And he’s still jerking their leashes making them jump through hoops to help him find a wiggle out.
Followers still under Raniere’s influence attribute his primary intent as “helping” with people’s issues. Even if he did develop methods that worked in alleviating some issues for people, it doesn’t guarantee that his intent was pure. Like I said, he told you himself – all he wanted to do was fuck them. And there’s a lot of psychopathic joy there when all his lies and manipulation led to being able to shout out that truth and have it accepted as pearls of wisdom from the mouth of the master.
If these are valid instances of prosecutorial misconduct, then what the hell were the all those expensive lawyers doing? Me, I believe the prosecutors take on Raniere’s intent – I shared my experience of his intent with them. My experience was long before ESP was even a thought, and it was horrendous having to face how much I had allowed myself to be hoodwinked. He wasn’t trying to help me (or any of you stalwart NXians) find my own joy, he was taking joy in making me dance to his tune.
Let’s just suppose — hypothetically speaking, at the risk of appearing ignorant of NXIVM’s impeccable ethical standards and being sued, but first followed, framed and fucked in every way conceivable — that they’re fibbing and this whole shitshow presentation, although recently premiered exclusively here on FR, has been in the works since well prior to Raniere’s arrest.
Ivy has, bless her soul, disclosed that indeed that was and is the case and the Feds heard it all but with the advantage of witnesses who know exactly what Nancy, Clare and Raniere did to make this mockery happen.
It won’t help them. They can try but it’s not relevant and to say people with nothing to gain deliberately lied just makes it look like KR protesteth too much. Also all these cases, – FLDS and many others – there are always loads of victims and the authorities find it very hard to find specific crimes even though there are crimes a plenty and the fact there is only the one case they went for does not mean there were not lots of others. It is complex and expensive and you need a co-operative witness so they tend to pick one, The fact onl8y that one was used does not mean there were not others.
Trafficking – it seems like most of the time she did take the bus not the car so very likely that element is satisfied.
Weren’t a group of fundamentalist mormon girls brought up from Mexico from the le baron group or something like that I probably read on the Frank R, probably some under age and they were so spooked out by KR or what Nexivm was like up there they got their fathers to take them home? I don’t know what happened with that but it would not surprise me if there were lots of girls and the case brought was just the tip of an iceberg. It is very hard to find precise offences against those who suck people into cults and we almost need a new law against them so there has to be a kind of square peg into round hole exercise done to make sure heinous crimes do not go unpunished. If it is rough and ready it is better than nothing.
Didn’t they traffic someone into the USA through Canada? That’s trafficking too.
While the discrepancies are interesting to note, the overall conclusion is not supported by your evidence. Have you ever travelled the day before so you would be rested and not tired the next day? Consultants do that all the time, when they travel for work. They always travel the day before, and they are traveling for work. What you are saying is essentially implies that if someone travels the day before the date of the scheduled work, then that travel doesn’t count as work travel. That’s not how it works.
What you could do is to request evidence of her travel, whether it was on that day or the day before. But you cannot draw the conclusion that she did not travel for “sex work” based on her traveling the day before.
And just like that, they think we’ll all think Keith is a great guy!!!
These are really LAME ARGUMENTS by hare-brained nincompoops.
To begin, ‘affects interstate commerce’ isn’t literal. The crime does not have to shift the trade balance between states. The phrase means that a crime was committed across or through state lines. Moreover, courts have interpreted the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, in varying ways throughout the years.
Instead of reading VanLimpy’s Manifesto, maybe his peeps should do something productive – like read a book.
Personally, I have no doubt that the prosecution lied. The question here is to why? Who wins with all this montage? What is the end that the rotten judicial system seeks? This ugly business has its roots very deep and it takes a lot of scratching to begin to see the truth of the matter.
There’s no reason for the prosecution to lie in this case. Maybe they weren’t as careful in the documentation process as they could have been. Chalk that up to slight incompetence or mistakes of government officials of which there is plenty across the board in all jurisdictions: state, local, and federal. None of these minor details affects the case one bit. Raniere was a huge flight risk due to the resources he had access to. Any dummy could see this. This prosecutorial misconduct “charge” is just a red herring by his remaining kool-aid drinking followers from the fact that “the smartest man in the world” simply pissed off too many people and committed so many stupidities he dug his own grave.
One would think that the “smartest man in the world” would have avoided all that. I guess that means he’s not the smartest man in the world. Bummer. Plus, there’s probably a smarter woman in the world than KAR. I bet that would shock him. He might be the smartest man in SuperMax, however. Maybe he can carve his words of wisdom on the prison cell’s walls for posterity. A “KAR lived here” would also be appropriate.
So, if some girl gets off a bus, I meet her, a friend blindfolds her and my wife sucks her clit, I can be charged with sex trafficking and spend life if prison!?
That shits crazy! If that’s a crime, I’ve spent my whole life as a criminal and …1/2 half the population could do life with Raniere.
nah – but if you are holding blackmail (oops – collateral!) on her so she won’t refuse, that’s a different story. Especially if you and your wife make a habit of that with many of the women you pick up off the bus.
Bullet Theory
The NXIVM 5 left out the part about DOS getting said girl to admit on video to fabricated horrific crimes as well as accusing family members of child molestation and abuse. It’s called coercion and blackmail.
You can count me in the other half. LOL
Just what kind of life are you leading SBT?
This is an incredible grasp at straws, Frank, and for you not to call it out as such is cowardice
They have the right to present their side of it. I am reviewing their allegations. After I have done that – I will give my opinion. I do not see this as an attack on Nicole. Her name is being protected. No one is disputing what happened to her. They are only questioning whether it meets the elements of sex trafficking
This sounds like so much sophistry.