Former Nxivm member Ivy Nevares has taken to Twitter to challenge Marc Elliot and the Make Justice Blind group’s post on alleged prosecutorial misconduct.
Their post concerns the denial of bail at the onset of the case.
Elliot maintains Raniere was not hiding from the U.S. government when he went to Mexico in November 2017. He remained there until he was apprehended on March 26, 2018.
The government argued his traveling in Mexico and other factors were proof that he was in hiding and a flight risk.
Elliot says the government told a series of falsehoods to persuade the judge to deny bail. Elliot further claims that Raniere lived openly in Mexico. He provided Frank Report with never-before-seen pictures of Raniere out in public in Mexico.
During the time Raniere was in Mexico, Ivy was living in Clifton Park and was a member of the Nxivm community.
Make Justice Blind and Marc Elliot accuse the EDNY of lying, which is exactly what they’re doing. Allow me to correct the record: Keith Raniere DID flee the country to avoid authorities. He WAS in hiding and WAS in a concealed location.
Nancy Salzman and Clare Bronfman coordinated Keith Raniere’s hiding. Salzman told me why he left and that he was in an enclosed neighborhood in Monterrey until he was spotted and reported on. I stupidly was the one to suggest they move him to Guadalajara, and that’s when Jack Levy came in…
Keith Raniere used burner phones and #NXIVM messengers to not be detected. Between January and March 2018, Salzman flew to Mexico three times because he refused to speak with her on the phone. MULTIPLE witnesses can verify these facts.
Again, Make Justice Blind is LYING, but then what can you expect from Keith Raniere’s loyalists? They’ve burned all their bridges and failed to get the media to cover their bogus story. Resorting to Parlato just shows how desperate they are. But guess what, their time is up too.
Q: Why didn’t Keith Raniere’s lawyers fight this in court?
A: They did and it didn’t hold water.
Q: Why didn’t the media pick up the story?
A: Because it’s bogus.
Q: Why did Make Justice Blind serve the #EDNY with an “affidavit”?
A: Because it’s meaningless—just a media stunt.
Make Justice Blind Replies
Reply by Marc Elliot and Eduardo Asunsolo for Make Justice Blind:
Hi, Ivy, we asked Frank to publish this so it’s clear to everyone that we have no problem speaking publicly.
We saw your Tweets in response to us posting the evidence. Your response was simply restating the exact same line the prosecution used.
Someone saying “Keith Raniere fled the country to avoid authorities” does not then make that a reality. You need evidence. We provided evidence to show the direct opposite.
Our evidence exposing how the prosecutors lied has nothing do with the case or your feelings about Keith Raniere. We’re simply looking at what the prosecution did which I believe everyone should want to do as they are civil servants to all of us.
Even Frank, an enemy of Keith, agrees with this and is willing to put his opposition to Keith aside to support his due process rights, by first examining our evidence.
Are you willing to do the same?
In the blog post we also talked about that after the NYT article was published, Keith, his family, our community (including you I imagine)
began to receive threats. Many of those threats originated from the Frank Report (FR). The FR even reported that neighbors had spotted
Keith in Mexico and voted he needed to leave the community.
We think if anyone who had an article published about them on the front page of the NYT claiming they were torturing women, that they too would want to be private and conceal his or her location to the general public as people would want to hurt them.
We are open to any type of dialogue as more evidence comes out.
Marc Elliot and Eduardo Asunsolo
Frank Parlato Reply
Ivy, I would like to hear more from you about this. I would like to hear from the witnesses you say knew that Raniere fled the USA because he wanted to avoid the jurisdiction of U.S. courts.
According to sources who spoke to me around the time he left the country, Raniere told some of his followers that he had received death threats and needed to hide from potential stalkers.
The fallout following the NYT story was pretty heavy and much of the U.S. media was covering the story with intensity.
At the end of this story is just a partial list of links to stories published in October and November 2017, when Raniere was first in Albany and then when he chose to go to Mexico.
In all fairness, almost anyone would want to hide from the public with such a media onslaught.
However, around the time he left the USA, the FBI had just begun to investigate him. It is not known if he knew this when he departed for Mexico.
Did he leave Albany to be with his family, as he claimed in his court filings, or to escape harassment and stalking in USA, as some witnesses said? You will note that while the story was red hot in the USA, there was little coverage of it in Mexico – at that time.
Or did he, as Ivy says, vamoose, thinking Mexico could shield him from US authorities?
The key to the mystery may be with one of his lawyers.
In his court filings, Raniere said he retained attorney Michael Sullivan and asked him to check into whether he was under investigation.
I believe that Sullivan, if Raniere would release the attorney-client privilege, could shed some valuable light on this.
If Raniere instructed Sullivan to make the US Attorney in Albany aware of Raniere’s location and pledge cooperation with authorities in the US in the event of an investigation, that is a lot different than merely making a call to the US Attorney in Albany asking if there was an investigation while doing nothing to reveal Raniere’s location or indicate that he was ready to cooperate at all times.