In a terse decision that was less than 8-pages long, U.S. District Court Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis denied the “Motion For A New Trial” that was filed by Keith’s attorneys earlier this week.
Interestingly enough, the decision was entirely based on the judge’s finding that the motion was “untimely”.
As a result, the judge did not even consider the merits of the motion.
But in a footnote at the end of the decision, the judge made it clear that even it were filed on a timely basis, the motion for a new trial would have been denied.
Here’s the wording of the footnote:
“Because the court finds that Mr. Raniere’s motion was not timely filed, it declines to analyze the merits of the motion. The court notes, however, that even if Mr. Raniere’s motion were timely, it would fail on other grounds, including the fact that the evidence contained in Ms. Hatchette’s and Ms. Clyne’s affidavits is neither material nor exculpatory.
The fact that these two individuals may have perceived their and others’ participation in DOS, sexual contact with Mr. Raniere, or uncompensated work for Mr. Raniere’s organizations to be voluntary or even beneficial does not undermine the credibility of other witnesses who testified to vastly different experiences and perceptions.
Mr. Raniere was not convicted of crimes committed against Ms. Hatchette or Ms. Clyne, and the fact that they do not perceive themselves as his victims is therefore of minimal relevance. See United States v. Scarpa, 897 F.2d 63, 70 (2d Cir. 1990) (‘A defendant may not seek to establish his innocence . . . through proof of the absence of criminal acts on specific occasions.’).
Even assuming, without deciding, that all of the information alleged in Ms. Hatchette and Ms. Clyne’s affidavits is true, the court is far from convinced “that the jury has reached a seriously erroneous result” or that justice was not served by the verdict in Mr. Raniere’s case. Snyder, 740 F. Appendix at 728.”
The message in that footnote makes it very clear why Judge Garaufis didn’t bother to hold oral arguments on the motion – which had been requested by Keith’s attorneys.
No matter what was said during such an oral argument, the judge had already decided that he was not going to grant a new trial to Keith Raniere.
*****
Sentencing to Go on as Scheduled
With yesterday’s decision now filed and made part of the case record, nothing is standing in the way of Keith’s scheduled sentencing on Tuesday, October 27th.
Barring some sort of cataclysmic event, Keith will be transported from MDC to the EDNY courthouse very early on the morning of the 27th.
Then, he’ll sit in a holding cell in one of the lower levels of the courthouse until his case is called at 10:00 AM.
The hearing is expected to last until at least 5:00 PM (Judge Garaufis has nothing else scheduled on his calendar for that day).
Meantime, maybe as many as two dozens victims will speak – all telling a tale of horror – as Raniere must sit there and listen.
Raniere told Frank Parlato that he intends to speak at his sentencing hearing, declaring his innocence.
Unfortunately for Keith, the outcome of that hearing will likely be a sentence of life imprisonment (In the best case, he might only get a 30-year sentence – which given Keith’s age [60], is a de facto life sentence.
So while Frank continues to investigate the allegations of prosecutorial misconduct and illegal activity that have been leveled by Keith and the members of the NXIVM-5, Keith will likely be shipped off to his designated federal prison sometime before the end of 2020.
And, thus, will we close the books on a case that has now gone on for more than 30 months – and that should have been initiated 20-years ago.
Unless, of course, Frank finds evidence to support the allegation of Keith and the NXIVM-5.
I really hope he gets sent to Florence…
Tic-Toc Tic-Toc Tic-Toc
Adios, Douchebag!
To Keith Raniere:
Nah-Nah-Nah-Hey-Hey-Hey-Goodbye!
Not sure why it was untimely. But the footnote covers the Inadequacy of Counsel base, as well.
KRC:
I have a few questions:
After sentencing, KAR can file a full-blown appeal (as opposed to a motion for a new trial) at the federal Appeals Court, correct? And if that is denied, he can then try to get the case heard by the US Supreme Court? (I would not be surprised if, for his appeal, he hired new counsel to allege ineffectiveness of counsel in his defense.)
I am curious where Raniere would be held while his appeal is ongoing – will he have to be kept in the NY area?
If his case from the EDNY is under appeal, does that toll the statute of limitations for any case that might be brought by NDNY?
I predict that this, unfortunately, is going to be a very long saga.
Keith will be able to file a variety of appeals with the Second Circuit – and they will all be based on what he will claim were substantive errors that were made before or during his trial. Any of those appeals that are denied can be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court – but there is little, if any, chance that any of them will be accepted by the Supreme Court.
Keith will likely raise “ineffective counsel” as the basis for another appeal. The same rules will apply for that one: he’ll file it in the Second Circuit – and appeal it to U.S. Supreme Court when the appeal is denied.
Where Keith is assigned by the Bureau of Prisons will have nothing to do with his decision to appeal – or not appeal – his sentence.
Nothing going on in the EDNY case will have anything to do with the four charges that were referred to the NDNY for follow-up. Thus, the NDNY will most likely do what it has always done when it comes to Keith and NXIVM: ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!
The NDNY would better spend their time on Amway and other MLM scams, Raniere’s goose is already cooked. LOL
Thank you!
You’re welcome. LOL
I imagine the corruption in NDNY will only be revealed in re-election campaigns “calling for reform”, which is always meaningless. It will be revealed when someone has something to gain from it. Power.
Judge Garaufis made his decision on the grounds that the appeal out of date. The irrelevant and probably biased statements of the two witnesses shed even more light on the horrors within the NXIVM.
Is Keith just trying to revive the glory of his old reputation by pleading not guilty or seriously hoping for a verdict more favourable to him?
He really can’t take on his actions? Or he’s just so rotten, he’ll always think he’s innocent. That’s the latter I’m guessing.
You took the Beatles content out from the previous story that was taken down but left the remainder intact – it will be harder to find in the future. LOL
Frank, when was the last time you spoke to Keith prior to this interview?