As predicted by the Frank Report, Keith Alan Raniere is requesting a new trial based on what his lead attorney, Marc Agnifilo, has described as “…threats and intimidation by the prosecution, including the abuse or threatened abuse of legal process…” against Michele Hatchette and Nicole Clyne.
According to Agnifilo, Hatchette and Clyne will “provide testimony…that would have challenged material elements of the prosecution’s case and exculpated the defendant…of the most serious charges against him.”
Agnifilo has also requested that U.S. District Court Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis schedule oral arguments regarding the newly-filed Rule 33 motion for a new trial.
Given that only 10-days remain before Raniere is scheduled to be sentenced, the timeframes regarding this motion are extremely tight. Whether to schedule oral arguments is completely at the discretion of Judge Garaufis.
The prosecution is scheduled to submit its response to the motion for a new trial by 5:00 PM on Thursday, October 22nd.
Thus, unless he postpones Raniere’s scheduled sentencing on Tuesday, October 27th, Judge Garaufis will have to review today’s filings and the prosecution’s response – and then perhaps hold a hearing – all within a very limited timeframe.
*****
Options For Judge Garaufis
Judge Garaufis could deny the motion for a new trial because the testimony of Hatchette and Clyne does not constitute “new evidence” as that term is defined in Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
That’s because Agnifilo already knew about the testimony that Hatchette and Clyne could provide well before Raniere’s trial ended in him being convicted on all charges back in June 2019.
Agnifilo’s response to this possibility is that “…because as a result of the Government’s threats, coercion and intimidation, set forth in the attached affidavits, these witnesses were not willing to testify at the trial, nor were they willing to come forward and provide the accounts contained in the attached affidavits.”
Agnifilo further argues that “…the Government should not be permitted to intimidate and coerce defense witnesses out of testifying and then later successfully argue that the defendant is without a post-trial remedy because the witnesses they intimidated should have testified or otherwise come forward.”
According to Agnifilo, the affidavits of Hatchette and Clyne “…show that the prosecution engaged in a systemic effort to intimidate potential defense witnesses, to create a threatening atmosphere to potential witnesses who wished to testify in support of Raniere in Court and to misuse the Grand Jury process in the days leading up to trial with the specific purpose of frustrating the defendant’s ability and constitutional right to call witnesses on the defense’s direct case. As a result of the Government’s actions, as set forth in detail below, Keith Raniere was deprived of material and exculpatory evidence that could only be secured through the truthful testimony of these witnesses.”
Judge Garaufis could also decide the matter without holding any hearing (Judges decide such matters all the time without holding oral arguments).
Or Judge Garaufis could go ahead and schedule oral arguments for Friday, October 23rd, or Monday, October 26th – and fully dispose of the matter before he sentences Raniere on October 27th.
*****
Dangers Abound For Hatchette & Clyne
Hatchette and Clyne have thrust themselves onto a stage they may wish they never set foot on.
If their respective affidavits contain any statements that they know to be false – which is most likely not the case – they could be charged with perjury.
The same will be true if Judge Garaufis decides to hold a hearing on the matter and they are sworn in as witnesses because anything they say under oath that the government perceives to be a lie would also subject them to charges of perjury.
But once they have been sworn in as witnesses at the hearing, their biggest danger may occur if the prosecution is allowed to ask them about other criminal matters they may have been involved in – or heard about – while they were part of NXIVM or DOS.
Say, for example, whatever happened to the “collateral” they collected from the women in their respective slave pods.
Or their assigning one or more of their slaves to have sex with Keith Raniere (At one point, the prosecution indicated that all of the first-line masters could have been charged with crimes).
If this request results in a lot more work for the prosecutors, they may decide to re-open the investigation that resulted in Raniere’s conviction – and in guilty pleas being agreed to by his five co-defendants: Clare Bronfman, Allison Mack, Lauren Salzman, Nancy Salzman, and Keith Russell.
If that happens, then Hatchette and Clyne will almost surely be indicted themselves.
And they won’t be the only ones…
*****
Excerpts From Hatchette’s Affidavit
In her 20-page affidavit, Hatchette made numerous statements that, if true, could be damming for the prosecution. Some examples of those are as follows:
“…I was threatened by the prosecution and feared an unfounded indictment if I did testify” on behalf of Keith Raniere.
“Nicole’s testimony that she was told of the master/slave relationship within DOS only after joining is, I believe, false. I was enrolled into DOS before Nicole and as just mentioned above, was informed prior to joining that the relationship would have this ‘master/slave’ dynamic.”
“My testimony regarding the enrollment process into DOS would have stood in stark contrast to the government’s theory, supported by Nicole’s referenced statement, that women were somehow misinformed and deceived into joining the group. Again, my experience was that I was presented with all the necessary information to evaluate whether or not I wanted to join DOS before making the decision and I made sure to communicate these same critical points to women I later invited into the group so they too had this information.”
“At trial, Nicole testified that her relationship with India was used against her to make Allison “happy” for the “benefit” of Mr. Raniere… I would have been able to offer a critical perspective on Nicole’s claim, as it was not my experience that Ms. Mack “used” the women against each other as Nicole described.”
“Nicole’s testimony gave, in my opinion, a false and misrepresented perspective of what DOS was like for all the women who were mentored by Ms. Mack because her description of several events and the nature of DOS in general, do not match my experience. I believe this was undoubtedly influenced by the government, which advanced a theory that the women who Ms. Mack mentored, in particular, were there only to serve as “sex slaves” for Mr. Raniere.”
“In sum, my trial testimony would have seriously undermined the testimony of Nicole, and would have been wholly inconsistent with the government’s core premise of the Forced Labor and the Sex Trafficking charges.”
“When I refused to adopt the government’s view of my experience with Mr. Raniere and my time in DOS, the government continued to press me to change my account of events by showing me communications that Mr. Raniere appeared to have with another person. The prosecutor said there was something they wanted me to see because they thought it might “help” me and stated ‘this isn’t something we normally do’. The government then brought into the interview room a number of pages of written communications purportedly between Mr. Raniere and Camila.”
“In particular, the government asked me to read the passages where Mr. Raniere makes reference to a ‘fuck toy’. As directed, I read the portions of these passages. It is worth highlighting that these communications had nothing to do with me, and that the government had no purpose in showing me these communications other than to, I believe, to compel me to change my mind. I believe the only purpose the government had in showing these communications to me was to cause me to view Mr. Raniere in an unfavorable light and my interactions with him to have been crimes committed against me without my consent.”
“When my attorney told Ms. Penza it was unlikely that I would meet with them again, Ms. Penza told Mr. Greenblum [her attorney] that they were interested in having me prep with them for trial because they were planning to call me as one of their witnesses and were prepared to subpoena me to testify if I declined their request.”
*****
Excerpts From Clyne’s Affidavit
In her much shorter – and much less bombastic – 5-page affidavit, Clyne made some statements that, if true, might be somewhat problematic for the prosecution. Some examples of these are as follows:
“Two days later, and with less than a month until Mr. Raniere’s trial, I received a Grand Jury subpoena. Jury selection had already begun, so my attorney and I reasonably assumed the investigation for his trial had concluded. According to Mr. Sapone, when he called Ms. Penza regarding the subpoena immediately after receiving it, she made the following chilling statement: ‘First, we are going to cut the head of the snake off and then we’re coming for the body. This is not going away for her’. At this point, although I desired to testify, due to what I perceived as a retaliatory threat, coupled with their Grand Jury subpoena, my lawyer advised me not to testify and I complied.”
“It is my belief that the Government knew I would testify in a manner wholly inconsistent with their core premise that DOS was created and existed for the purpose of sex trafficking and forced labor. More specifically, I would have testified that women chose to participate in DOS voluntarily and benefitted greatly from its practices. When I observed women want to and inevitably leave DOS, I never witnessed any threats or negatives consequences enacted upon them by Mr. Raniere or other women in DOS; and I am most certainly not aware of anyone’s collateral being released. I would have testified that DOS had a notable and worthy purpose that many sincere, law-abiding women, such as myself, were participating in. I would have testified that I represented DOS accurately and consistently when I invited someone, most particularly relating to Mr. Raniere’s involvement or lack of involvement. Additionally, I would have testified that I was never asked by Mr. Raniere to commit criminal acts, nor did I witness any crimes such as sex trafficking, forced labor, or others.”
“Had I given testimony, I would have provided the jury and the Court with an entirely different perspective about NXIVM, DOS and Keith Raniere than what was presented by the prosecution and its witnesses, namely Nicole, Jay, Sylvie, Lauren Salzman and Mark Vicente.”
“I have deep sympathy for Ms. [Lauren] Salzman and the dilemma she faced before entering into a cooperation agreement with the Government. Once she did, I imagine she felt tremendous pressure to offer beneficial testimony that would secure the prosecution’s recommendation for leniency in her sentence. I also imagine she learned a number of difficult, personal things from the Government during the time leading up to the trial that left her distraught, and may have contributed to the dramatic difference in her testimony to how I perceived her the last fifteen years.”
“In sum, if I had been able to testify, I would have shared my personal experience, and offered additional supporting evidence in my testimony. I believe I would have given the Court and the jury a vastly different perspective on DOS and the complex and nuanced relationships that were the focus of Mr. Raniere’s trial. The salacious media attention surrounding the NXIVM community, fueled by the Frank Report, created an environment conducive to an atmosphere of false perception, and much of this was echoed by the Government’s claims. These perceptions wholly contradicted my own direct experience and the knowledge I have about Mr. Raniere, NXVIM and DOS over the last decade. Had I not been frightened by the threat of retaliatory action by the Government, I would have chosen to testify.”
*****
What Lies Ahead?
While there is zero chance that Judge Garaufis will grant a new trial based on the affidavits submitted by Michele Hatchette and Nicki Clyne, it is less certain whether he will hold a hearing on the matter.
If that happens, then the entire NXIVM investigation could get re-opened – and lots more people pulled into the web that has, thus far, resulted in five plea deals and one conviction.
Unfortunately for Michele and Nicki, their willingness to be part of this last-minute attempt to further postpone Keith Raniere being held accountable for his part in establishing – and heading up – the NXIVM criminal enterprise, may come back and cause them great harm.
It’s no surprise that Keith Raniere would be willing to let these two women sacrifice themselves in an attempt to save him from his fast-approaching day-of-reckoning.
But it is surprising that a criminal defense attorney with Marc Agnifilo’s credentials would resort to such tactics on behalf of a client that he knows to be guilty of the crimes of which he was convicted – and so much more.
It’s also surprising that Agnifilo failed to address the gaping hole in his theory of why Raniere is entitled to a new trial: there is no evidence whatsoever that he attempted to call Michele or Nicki as defense witnesses – and that they declined to do so because of their stated fears about what the prosecution might do to them in retaliation. Had that actually happened, there would surely have been an affidavit to that effect from him or one of Raniere’s other attorneys.
But there isn’t any such affidavit to be found in today’s filing…
Frank Parlato 
Janine Morrison 
J.J. O'Hara 
Richard Luthmann 
Marie White 
Paul Serran
Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
[…] FrankReport’s coverage of the defense’s motion for a new trial, which contained sworn affidavits from Nicki Clyne and Michele Hatchette, potential defense […]
It seems to me that the victims in this case, like my ONLY sister Kristin, and our family, along with the other victims families, are being drug through the mud, and made to suffer.
What Raniere is doing now, is disgusting. He knows that he is guilty, and he needs to take his lumps and deal with it.
He raped and got my sister pregnant, and now at the 11th hour, he screams for a new trial. It should be “denied”. He is a killer- go straight to jail and do NOT pass go!
So why wait 17 months to make this motion? It reads more like an 11th-hour pitch to commute a prisoner on death row.
Very good article as usual and a good point at the end- had KR wanted to call them originally and there was an email back from them saying – we daren’t as the prosecution has done XYZ pressure on us it would have been included but clearly is no such evidence.
Again, I don’t see any major wrongs being set out here. Showing her an email where KR referred to a fuck toy, etc. and everything else described does not amount to enough for a new trial. I agree that the issue of whether the DOS women gave real consent or not has always been difficult but those branded etc. who have spoken out seem clear it was not a clear informed consent at the time.
“I would have testified that DOS had a notable and worthy purpose that many sincere, law-abiding women, such as myself,…” Nicki was not law-abiding. She was in a sham marriage to avoid immigration law. While not the worst criminal act one can commit, it certainly is not ‘law-abiding’. The DOJ knew this and was likely using this fact as leverage against her.
Good point and it is a fairly serious offence actually if true – immigration fraud etc.
Nicki Clyne:
“My lawyer advised me not to testify, and I’ve done enough. “= this is usually the tactic used by the perpetrators of crime.
“If I had not been afraid of the threat of retaliating by the government, I would have decided to testify.” = a way out of accountability.
Nicki says something and she doesn’t, and she doesn’t testify. In this case, you can’t stand “in the middle” and end up “bowing.” Or is it? Was Vanguard’s goal to detonate the bomb at the last minute before his second-degree trial with two of his witnesses, whom he had so far used as “sleep agents”?
These two confessions seem a little like word salad to me. I look forward to the decision of the competent on this matter.
It is also interesting why lawyer Agnifilo – if he was aware of any possible threats against defense witnesses – did he not indicate it in his pleadings. That would have put the water on their own.
https://www.elle.com/culture/movies-tv/a34372716/india-oxenberg-nxivm-interview/
I thought Raniere wasn’t allowed to ask for a new trial until after sentencing. LOL
This request was fashioned as a Rule 33 motion – which is allowed to be heard before sentencing. Why Agnifilo waited 17 months after Raniere was convicted before he filed this motion is a mystery to me. Similarly, I don’t understand why Agnifilo didn’t include his own affidavit – or an affidavit from one of Raniere’s other attorneys – indicating that they had asked Michele and Nicki to testify as defense witnesses and were turned down (If that didn’t actually happen, then there is absolutely no basis for this motion).
It seems obvious to me that there was no inkling of any request for either Michele or Nicki to testify for the defense — on the contrary, the details they provide in these affidavits make it obvious they were dissuaded and prevented from appearing as witnesses for the prosecution.
Now that I read this — thanks, Clav — it’s obvious, as you say, that there’s no basis for this motion at all.
Question: Could Clare or Sara sue Michelle and Nicki’s or her own or Keith’s attorneys for failing to invite these lovely slaves to testify in Raniere’s defense?
Now, I’m sure that whatever they REALLY told investigators and prosecutors in their witness interviews must have caused Clare’s attorneys enough alarm sufficient to advise the ‘witnesses’ not to take the stand regardless of what billable hours they might have charged Clare for it.
Maybe Michele misinterpreted that “incredulous” look she thought she saw on Moira Penza’s face — the only act of Govt. ‘coercion’ Michele cites, btw. Maybe Penza was ‘incredulous’ over the horror of the evil Michele was describing to them in response to the pictures she was shown?
What disgusts me most is how Michele and Nicki are and continue to allow themselves to be used and made fools of by NXIVM. What else could be expected after decades of programming? And now they’re made more desperate in their slavery and ‘joyful’ spectacle.
“DOS no longer exists,” but Nic ki and Michele are living proof that it does.
Now, these staunch non-victims proclaiming they are, indeed, victims of the entire DOJ — all over an “incredulous look” — are also being manipulated out of any victims’ compensation they are due, their rights to that — not to mention, I give them maybe 3 mos. before they are duly deported if not charged with immigration fraud first. Do hope they’ve already filmed them for Season 2 of “The Vow.”
Whoever is financing, propagating this perpetual shitshow needs to be locked up. But I know that’s prolly not gonna happen until the last dollar is squeezed from Clare’s trust fund.
Still doing my part keeping her goons busy and well-paid.
[redacted]
Claviger,
Evidently, Nice Guy is right; some of the NXIVM 5 are willing to perjure themselves. [redacted]
Let’s all pray (to everyone’s corresponding Lord or Raniere), that the judge grants their baby brains request, seats ‘n swears (in) Michelle & Nicki, gets them to attest to their affidavits, the State, still swoll on splatting NXIVM, calls witnesses who prove, overwhelmingly, Michelle & Nicki perjured themselves, the judge consents and immediately has them taken into custody!
And while they’re all frantic-bawling-bewildered, looking towards Keith to “HELP! TAKE CARE OF THIS,” after ‘Doing Exactly What He Asked’ and ‘Swore We’d Never Regret Doing This For Him…??’
Keith’ll just shrug them off, aloof and lamenting, ‘Maybe If You Weren’t Such Proud, Selfish W O M E N, you’d have the foresight not sabotage yourself? It’s not my fault you’re being detained! This is just another one of your Tantrum(s) for Attention; Thereby putting you in [county lockup] the predicament you currently find yourself…’
K.R’s parting-gratitude for his (now) Perjured Slaves: ‘If your parents still want to help you, get them to take out a payday loan or re-mortgage their property (to cover your bail); but REMEMBER! You still Can’t benefit from their Suppressive resources; So Make sure they relay those newly acquired funds to the Make Justice Blind fund!’
And since there are no victims, they all must have wanted to be locked up ultimately!!!!
That totally makes sense if ur a crazy person
It’s almost as if Hatchette and Clyne are being threatened by the DOJ with collateral. LOL
This comment truly made me LOL. Thank you for that.
Frank, are you going to give your comments on the evidence from the Nxivm- kiddos, or is there more from the Raniere camp coming before you comment on their evidence?
Putting aside due process for KAR, I would be most interested in your thoughts about what has been presented.
I am still reviewing the information. Remember I am not judging the issue of whether he is guilty or not – I am merely interested in if his due process rights were properly safeguarded. Right now, I have no opinion. I am just trying to be a journalist presenting the other side of the story.
There are all these articles now on the FR about several different outcomes concerning the defendants but it is all bullcrap.
Nothing is going to change. The Feds are a tough mother F-ing group. Keith will go away for at least 15. Clare is toast.
The Feds have all the power. Debate it all you want, the feds will get what they want. All these defendants are going down, down down.. Keith can bitch on phone calls all he wants … Too much drama …
The die is cast…get used to it.
Correction:
“the die is cast…”
Compulsive shameless lying is what you do within Raniere’s circle, for “ethical” purposes. Michelle Hatchette lied to Abby Rockefeller, to gain her support. She publicly proved she’s a liar, on top of all the other lies to recruit women.
They should be in jail, all of them. They are conspirators, perpetrators and they are wholly complicit. Let them dig their own graves, they don’t exist without someone telling them what to think and how to think.
This seems strange. Whatever the truth of this might or might not be, I suspect the defense could have called dozens of witnesses to support KAR at trial, yet no defense was presented. Why not call on one or more of the other NXIVM 5’s?
It’s very hard to get out of my head the image of these two gyrating and sex-simulating (Nicki, a** in the air and pumping) in front of MDC. I mean, seriously, how does that jive with their sudden efforts at long-delayed justice? Victims of intimidation?
What am I missing?
💩
Hatchette: “The government then brought into the interview room a number of pages of written communications purportedly between Mr. Raniere and Camila. In particular, the government asked me to read the passages where Mr. Raniere makes reference to a ‘fuck toy’. As directed, I read the portions of these passages. It is worth highlighting that these communications had nothing to do with me, and that the government had no purpose in showing me these communications other than to, I believe, to compel me to change my mind.”
Well, if you read those transcripts and you still support Raniere’s behaviour (or you still think that this guy is a genius)… well, to be polite, there is something strange in your mind.
I could add that this is the same with Albany Union’s paper on Raniere published in 2012. After reading this, if you still support Raniere, you support a sexual predador who repeatly had sex with underrage girls who were manipulated and abused. Then, you voluntary blind yourself and start to be intellectually complice of serious criminal acts,
Is Clare still paying for Keith’s attorneys? Is she paying for Nicki’s and Michelle’s attorneys? That might explain their affidavits.
Did I miss any “bombshell allegations” in either of these affidavits?
Basically Hatchette disagrees with the master/slave characterization of DOS and Clyne wanted to testify about her positive experiences. These are both subjective (not to mention questionable) personal views. There is no offer of any hard evidence from Hatchette that Nicole has been dishonest and she cannot demonstrably deny someone else’s experiences anyway.
Also, while Clyne feels that she benefited from DOS, it doesn’t negate the evidence that the other slaves and members brought against Raniere. I’m not even sure what the point of this article was? They are trying to establish prosecutorial foul play, and haven’t offered any evidence of it. Prosecutor Penza used a snake allegory at some point and that is “chilling”? Penza showed the text messages between Cami and Raniere and now that is unlawful in an investigation somehow?
So far this offer to help Raniere prove foul play in his trial is super lame and disappointing.
I agree. All I have read of this new material is nothing much at all – a clutching at straws.
Is there anyone who’s raised the issue of why Frank’s doing this? Not for a living, probably. Then it’s out of conviction. It’s authentic from here on out. He has no interest in busting the guilty unless he’s viscerally mindful of the truth.
Does it matter? We all get into things for all kinds of reasons.
If he had sex with 100 women and he only raped or sex trafficked 2 or 3 or them… he still committed the crime. The good experience of some of these women does not negate the criminal behavior against and the bad experience of some other women. Your consent does not imply the same consent in another.
And if you had done nothing wrong, would you be afraid to testify for someone so dear to you? A threat of indictment doesn’t hold much weight if you know you are blameless. Especially when you know you have the Bank of Clare to back any potential legal fees. And especially if DOS made you such bad ass bitches.
If the prosecution needed witnesses to refute these ladies take on Raniere’s character, they had potential witnesses stretching back for years before DOS. He’s been a psychopathic bastard for a long time – sometimes it takes a while to realize it. And sometimes, you die before you find the insight to free yourself from him. good luck to these two ladies.
Nicki, Nicki, Nicki
I am warning you that prosecutors can play hard ball.
There is nothing preventing the US DOJ bringing charges in the NDNY where many of the NXIVM crimes occurred.
Don’t play with fire.
Maybe Nicki and Allison will be reunited in the same prison. Who wants to object?
Except for Lauren Salzman and her Mom, I doubt very much that the Bureau of Prisons will place any of the five women in the same prison. And because Allison resides in California, she will most likely be assigned to a prison out there.
The fact that Judge Garaufis “recommended” that Clare should serve her 81 months in the Danbury camp will have little, if any, impact in terms of where she is actually assigned. In fact, I’ll be very surprised if she ends up at any part of the Danbury facility.
Keep talking, Squeaky Fromme and Sandra Good.
Of course Vanguard is requesting a new trial. These are just the desperate, predictable machinations of Vanguard et al. Predictable and tired just like Vanguard’s tech and playbook. We all see through these feeble, transparent attempts. Who cares?
It will be poetic justice for Vanguard aka Keith, who weaponized the court/legal system for years as a strategy to perpetuate his evil and to intimidate and terrorize whistleblowers and defectors, to be rendered impotent and invisible by being sent to the Super Max by the judicial system. He has earned his seat there. He can use his “tech” to cope with his consequence/penance of serving life in Super Max.
Tick tock. Tick tock. That is the sound of Vanguard’s futile machinations grinding down to the ground. Game over Vanguard.
All this has the air of a desperate last stand.
Army Detachment Steiner to the rescue…
Two brats dove-tailling their stories outside the Principals office. They have already been expelled, but an ‘advocate’ has taken up their cause
and argues that the target’s evidence, witnessed and proven, might be mistaken.
Meanwhile the target, vindicated and set free from exploitation, gets slammed back into limbo, whilst her abusers and defenders argue over her right to justice.
Thanks Claviger first-rate reporting and analysis.
It has got to suck to feel the quicksand dissolving beneath you and seeing the hole coming to swallow you complete.
Even if the sex trafficking charge is questionable, what about the kiddie porn? They aren’t even addressing that, which is what I think led the 5 women to plead guilty. Maybe some of the women enjoyed dos or found it helpful, who knows, but how can you defend a guy who screwed a 15yo when he was 40?
He was 45.
Is it really that unusual for an older man to screw a willing 15-year-old? Sure, no one brags about it or shows off photos of it to their friends but we all know it’s happens all the time.
Just looked up NXIVM on twitter and shockingly, SultanOfSix is still at it on twitter.
https://twitter.com/SultanOfSix/status/1318180597777432579
These people should read the Frank Report. They clearly have zero idea [redacted] He makes excuses for Kristin Kreuk every time. [redacted].
Since Sultan of Six comments here, he is a guest and I am going to ask that you please refer to him by his handle. I know in the past it got a little insulting for you and him but I would really like to focus more on the exchange of ideas and less on the personal attacks. Thank you.
I plead for Judge Garaufis to schedule a hearing and for Nicole Clyne and Michele Hatchette to be questioned under oath by the prosecution. It is time that the criminals of Nxivm/DOS finally learn their lesson. If the prosecution is back on the case, why not finish it and reopen the investigation with new charges and new defendants.
“Had I not been frightened by the threat of retaliatory action by the Government, I would have chosen to testify.”
Finally some honesty here. It wasn’t the government’s actions or the media that silenced Nicki, she felt afraid. I wonder why she just didn’t EM it away, after all that is the purpose of EMs? Guess what Nicki, how afraid do you think everyone who testified against Raniere was of terrorism by litigation by Clare? Oh no, you think those were legitimate, same as victim
hood is legitimate only for Raniere, and his blind followers. Right?
“How afraid do you think everyone who testified against Raniere was of terrorism by litigation by Clare?” That is an excellent point!
Well said!
Wow. These affidavits would be hilarious were they not so very sad….and in true Nxivm form, loaded with hypocrisy. For someone who just ranted about the infantilization of women and denying that victims exist, the words shared here are those of the infantilized victim. They sound so precious, like little kids.
The Story of Injustice and the No Good Very Bad Prosecutors by Nicki Clyne
So and so told me that the prosecutor lady said she was going to be mean to me if I said something so I didn’t say anything, but I wanted to say something, and I was going to say this, but I don’t wanna, but I wanna. It’s so not fair.
“There is no injustice. There is no unfair. There’s just cause and effect.” Keith Raniere
Based on Hachette & Clyne’s affidavit excerpts, ignoring the fact that el Vanguardo and his lawyer could have forced her & Clyne to testify, nothing in their “experience” exonerates the sex trafficking charge.
Even if Nicole was told ahead of time it’s a master/slave relationship, she was not told banging Kieth would be the principal purpose of that relationship. She was told like every other woman who joined that it was a female boot camp/empowerment group. They were never told the grand Master was the chief NXidiot.
In fact it’s been proven that Hachette & Clyne and the other first line slaves were told to never divulge vanguard was at the top of the pyramid. On that premise alone, if your master orders you to have sex with her, under threat of releasing your blackmail material, that is already a felony. If she orders you to have sex with mr smarty pants under threat of releasing your blackmail material, that too is a felony, and if they made you travel to to follow those orders, that is sex trafficking. As for the paying tribute (free labor) under the threat of releasing blackmail material, also a felony. In more simplistic terms, two adults can not have an agreement that violates the law and when caught say well we agreed to it so it’s not against the law.
As for Clyne complaining that she was threatened by the prosecution, no direct threat was made. A statement of fact was made, first we cut off the head of the snake (vanguard) then we go after the body (prefect, Clare and anybody else who is complicit). She got good advice from her lawyer, keep your mouth shut since you’re not charged. But if she was true to her convictions she could have ignored that advice and stepped up to the plate. All moot really because vanguard and his lawyer could have compelled her to testify.
This is all so sad to me. Watching these kids just throw their lives away like this.
“… because of threats, coercion and intimidation of the government…” -??? Who showed threatening, coercive, intimidating behavior? Keith Raniere and associates. But they’re going to fall into their own trap anyway, it’s a matter of time. A crime is always a crime, and the Judge knows it.
Exactly right. If Raniere wanted to call witnesses, who stopped him?
How many witnesses testified that they were helped by Queef and considered him a Savior? None.
I wonder why???
Now, he’s complaining because he chose: 1) not to testify and 2) not to call any witnesses on his behalf.
BooHoo BooHoo. Allimackgator Tears.
I’d like to know why Nicki Clyne still hasn’t been charged with immigration fraud.
Trump Administration only cares about immigration fraud if they are Mexican. Besides, Nicki is the gift that keeps on giving. I believe that they are letting her stay free because of the stupid shit she continues to do, which is just burying people more and more.
I agree and why havent more of the first line so called masters been charged with other criminal offenses? They should all be undrgoing thier own prosecutions for what they all have done!!
Probably because she didn’t commit immigration fraud. LOL
Agnifilo is great at defending pedophiles and rapists. I mean misogynistic without any moral not so smart, sorry, my mistake. I hope that Camilla files that letter, and comes to Raniere’s sentencing. I mean he is a pedophile. By Clyne everyone Will know that you defending him. And Hatchette, the black slave, I mean I thought that the black Guy from Django was revolting, but you take the cake, thanks for showing everyone that the Rockefeller defended Nxivm, the connections to the mk ultra makes the job of reporters and history way easier.
You must always capitalize Black out of respect, even when the next word is “slave.” LOL
white, not so much, even when it is the first word of a sentence – class dismissed. LOL