Suneel: Raniere Convicted More for Kinky Sex Than Actual Crimes

Nxivm Keith Raniere gazing down
Suneel Chakravorty

By Suneel Chakravorty

It is my contention that, during the criminal trial of Keith Raniere, the prosecution did many things to “dirty him up” by soliciting testimony and introducing evidence of acts that were perfectly legal. This was a calculated effort to make him repugnant in the eyes of the jury.

They dirtied him up.

For instance, they had Lauren Salzman testify that prior to Keith’s “arrest,” five of the first-line DOS women, including her, were planning a “recommitment ceremony,” which supposedly was going to include a “group blow-job for Keith.”

Lauren Salzman heads to court
Suneel: Lauren Salzman’s testimony showed that Keith Raniere’s “sex life was not standard” and was most likely designed to shock the “straightlaced, conservative” jury.

These women were all Keith’s long-term romantic partners. All of them had been with him for years.

Of course, I do not know if this story of hers is even true. I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that, based on her own testimony, Lauren seemed to be hyper-jealous of Keith’s relationship with other partners and resentful that Keith did not have a child with her.

Second, she was facing up to 40 years in prison for racketeering conspiracy and racketeering. She may have hoped to reduce her ultimate sentence by cooperating liberally, agreeably, and, if necessary, fictionally, with the prosecution.

Still, for many people, a group blow-job may be an ideal Friday night. To me, it’s hardly a topic of direct examination in a federal criminal trial.

Group blow-jobs are not illegal. The sole purpose of this testimony was to make Keith look dirty. To shock the jury, which, as Keith explained, had a number of straightlaced, conservative members, as evidenced, he said, by their jury questionnaires.

In their effort to dirty Keith by showing his sex life was not standard, the prosecution mentioned not only the number of participants but also the number of blow jobs.

Keith Raniere Trial Prosecution
The prosecution speaks at the Keith Raniere trial. “In their effort to dirty Keith by showing his sex life was not standard, the prosecution mentioned not only the number of participants but also the number of blow jobs.” — Suneel

For example, the number of times another government witness, Daniela, supposedly gave blow jobs to Keith was one of the hot topics of her testimony.

Remember, this is an adult woman in her 20s making the decision to perform oral sex on a man she admired and chose to be with.

Keith was not charged with receiving illegal blow jobs, nor on account of the number who planned to join together on a single occasion to give one to him, nor on account of the number of blow jobs one individual provided to him over time.

But it became an issue at trial — blow jobs.

Nxivm Mark Lesko Keith Raniere Court Sketch
In prosecutor Mark Lesko’s closing remarks, he told the jury, “Daniela told you about her sexual relationship with the defendant that almost exclusively involved at all times of the day having to have him drop his pants and having to give him oral sex, right?”

During his closing remarks, prosecutor Mark Lesko told the jury [and I can see no other reason for him to emphasize this other than to dirty Keith up] “Daniela told you about her sexual relationship with the defendant that almost exclusively involved at all times of the day having to have him drop his pants and having to give him oral sex, right? Two to three times a day I think she quantified it. So I’m not really good at math, that’s why I’m a lawyer, so if it’s two years and you have 365 days a year, what is that, that’s — oh my gosh — 730 days. And if she’s having oral sex with the defendant, let’s be fair, twice a day, that’s 1,400-plus incidents of oral sex with the defendant with Daniela.”

What legal relevance do 1,400 blow jobs have to the law or the charged crimes?

Does the Math Even Add Up?

[By the way, that’s supposedly 1,400 blow jobs, 2-3 times a day for two years, just from Daniela. Also, according to FBI Agent Lever, Keith had a “rotating group” of 15-20 women (by the way, this was simply asserted as fact and never proven.). If the other women also performed on par with Daniela, that would mean 30-40 blow jobs a day. Over a two-year period that’s up to 28,000 blow jobs. This man should not be in prison. He should be examined as a unique and perhaps priceless medical wonder, a national treasure, a testimony to American virility, and, if even half of this is true, I think it’s worthy of submission to the Guinness Book of World Records.]

Why did the judge allow this kind of testimony about consensual sexual contact?

To dirty him up.

Just the perfectly non-standard fact that Keith had multiple (long-term) partners with whom he had sexual relations was enough to make him look dirty – despite the fact that the women were all adults who consented to this arrangement.

Right from the start, it was all about dirtying him up.

Nxivm mk10art Daniela
MK10ART’s Portrait of Dani. “[…] the number of times another government witness, Daniela, supposedly gave blow jobs to Keith was one of the hot topics of her testimony,” Suneel points out.

In the criminal complaint, FBI Agent Michael Lever wrote: “Based on information obtained during the course of this investigation, since ESP’s founding, RANIERE has maintained a rotating group of fifteen to twenty women with whom he maintains sexual relationships.” This assertion was never proven and is likely an exaggeration, yet it was stated as fact to inspire moral outrage.

And so what? What if he had a million women? That’s not a crime.

Nxivm Keith Raniere with Flowers
Keith Raniere. “In the criminal complaint, FBI Agent Michael Lever wrote: […]RANIERE has maintained a rotating group of fifteen to twenty women with whom he maintains sexual relationships.’ This assertion was never proven and is likely an exaggeration, yet it was stated as fact to inspire moral outrage,” Suneel writes.

But the prosecution wanted to pull back the private curtains and let the jury peep in and be shocked, horrified and unsettled.

For instance, the prosecution read an email from Allison Mack about her having a threesome with Keith and another long-term female partner of Keith’s.

Nxivm Keith Raniere Allison Mack
Keith Raniere and Allison Mack. “The prosecution read an email from Allison Mack about her having a threesome with Keith and another long-term female partner of Keith’s.”

Why? The women were in their 30s. It was fully consensual. How does a threesome have any relevance?

Because it is Allison Mack, a famous actress. It was sure to make news and dirty him up.

Why the hell was this read in court? All it shows are the private feelings of a consenting adult woman.

Then there were the endless Whatsapp texts between Cami and Keith that were read to the jury.

Nxivm Camila
Mk10ART’s sketch of Camila. “They did not read any of the hundreds of texts he wrote to Cami that showed genuine solicitude and love and desire to guide and teach a woman who said she was in love with him,” writes Suneel.

It was mind-boggling how many hours this went on. And it was also very selective. The prosecution took texts out of chronological order and only chose those texts that made Keith look bad.

They did not read any of the hundreds of texts he wrote to Cami that showed genuine solicitude and love and desire to guide and teach a woman who said she was in love with him. And there were hundreds more where she wrote to him as a lover and friend and how she expressed gratitude for the wonderful influence he had on her life.

None of those were read.

Instead, the jury heard texts like the infamous “fuck toy slave” exchange.

Much was made of this. We don’t know if it was meant to be arousing or amusing or demanding or what – but it was not illegal. Calling a woman who has sex with a man “a fuck toy” by that man is not illegal.

But the prosecution made hay with that one.

It dirtied him up.

Then there was the one text where he asked her to meet him at her door in a sexy outfit and say nothing, just pleasure him, and then he would go.

Taken as a single instance of sexual conduct, it sounds selfish, but it was not the entirety of their sexual relationship. And once again, not illegal — Cami was 25 years old.

Nxivm Judge Garaufis
Judge Nicholas G, Garaufis sentenced Keith Raniere to 120 years in prison – and 5-years of post-release probation.

Yet, amazingly, Judge Garaufis, in sentencing Keith, actually quoted the text as if it was a high crime: “In one message, Mr. Raniere wrote her: ‘If you want me to come tonight, I will under these conditions: There will be no talking. You will meet me at the door in the outfit you think I would find sexiest. You will arouse me, we will make love for my satisfaction and pleasure. You will do everything you can to provide that. I will finish and leave. Do you agree yes or no?”

The fact that the judge read that text at sentencing shows how this whole trial went.

It deserved no weight at all. It should not even have been read in court, let alone been used as an act to justify a 120-year sentence.

Throughout the trial, the judge allowed the prosecution to shock the jury with things he himself was undoubtedly shocked by.

None of it was illegal.

Gratuitous things like Keith preferring women to not shave their pubic hair. This was introduced repeatedly at trial for no discernible reason. Preferring fulsome pubic hair is not a crime.

Why include this? Dirty him up. Make him look selfish. Get the jury to hate him.

The prosecution dirtied him up beyond recognition, taking the jurors into his bedroom and the bedrooms of his romantic partners, and they made him look dirty.

But even if all the above were true, it’s still not a crime.

Keith Raniere was convicted for moral turpitude, not for any alleged criminal conduct.

This is why he was convicted for a single, mildly kinky incident with Nicole with Cami where Nicole consented to be part of the act. This became a sex trafficking charge with a minimum 15-year sentence and resulted in a 40-year sentence for Keith.

The single act itself was not horrifying, and Keith had no way to know she did not consent since she gave consent to him before, during and after the incident.

Had it been charged alone, had this one brief incident of BDSM cunnilingus been told to the jury, it would never have stood the test of sex trafficking.

But by the time the jury had to make a decision, Keith was already dirtied beyond recognition.

 


About the author

Correspondent

238 Comments

Click here to post a comment

Leave a Reply

  • Giving consent is when a person agrees to do something freely, equally to have something sexual it is necessary to know clearly that both parties want it, it means actively agreeing to carry out activities of a sexual nature with one or more people, that is, to do something consensual , said people must agree to have sexual relations, the above implies that consent is prior to having the consensual sexual act and never after, since a new consent is required for this. However, the North American feminist movement has created gender laws called “affirmative consent”, which are standard contracts available on the internet, to prove consent to sexual relations, with very little success, therefore it is impossible for an adult woman to later from having consensual sex you can withdraw your consent, but incredibly that was what was done at Keith Raniere’s trial.

  • The fact that “kinky sex” is even part of this case obscures the true nature of the problem: The complete and utter violence with which the mindless machine of media-audience goes after anyone and anything that can be exploited for scandal.

    In the end most people feel bad about themselves, feel bad about living, and having something to disdain or attack, alleviates their pain. The same machine that put Trump in office, is now coming after him.

    Democrats are as vitriolic and intolerant as they accuse Republicans of being. It is a human problem, not a partisan or individual problem. And the answer is not and will never be the destruction of whatever flavor-of-the-month we are choosing to trash.

    • So true. I wonder if humanity, as a whole, will ever grow out of this behavior or if this is just the way we are and forever will be.

  • Frank, has the traffic to the site dropped now that Keith has been convicted? The next noteworthy moment is Alison Mack’s sentencing, yes?

    • No the traffic remains pretty stable maybe because of the many people who are going down the rabbit hole of Nxivm scandal/study. Last year 2020 over 4.2 million page views.

  • Why the sexual life of adults who agree, should be mentioned in a trial? Does the law prohibit the different sexual preferences of people? What is the intention of a free woman who approves many times a sexual relationship and then regrets it? What does he win when he suddenly repents and accuses the one he loved so much?

  • Keith was convicted by a jury trial. Which he chose.

    12 fellow humans doing their sacred, civic duty.

    Keith helped choose these jurors.

    You Nxivm dead-enders do not know one single one of them personally.

    But you think that you can look into their hearts and minds and judge their “intent”.

    You have no “data” to prove your spurious accusations about what motivated their jury decision.

    You are the judgmental ones. The haters. The biased ones.

  • It is truly terrible that simplistic thinking and emotion have taken over the justice system. This case and all cases, as shown by the statistics, really need some critical thinking to be implemented by the courts.

  • I really wish more scientific standards for evidence and truth-seeking were employed in the justice system. I’d have a lot more faith in a verdict — guilty or innocent — if that were the case. In practice, the system seems to be more about which side tells the more compelling story, and how much the jury likes or dislikes the defendant. I hope I’m wrong and the latter is more the exception than the norm. In this case, it seems more the latter, independent of the ultimate guilt or innocence of the defendant.

  • For the trial to effectively fulfill its function, it is of the utmost importance that in the probationary period, especially in the development of the interrogations of witnesses, the rules established in the Law are complied with, because with this the conviction and knowledge of The truth is, so that the Jury can give their verdict with justice, which did not happen in the Keith Raniere Trial, since it is evident that in the interrogation of the witness Lauren Salzman, Judge Garaufis unduly interrupted him, preventing him from continuing the interrogation because he was crying, which is illegal and therefore the nullity of the trial on appeal.

  • We have already seen that if the rules for the validity of the evidence are not met, they lose their probative value, in this sense, if Camila’s photographs, as demonstrated, were altered, therefore manipulated, with the malicious intention of make appear a truth that is not, so that such evidence is illegal and therefore must be nullified and as a consequence the charges of organized crime and child pornography be dismissed by the Court of Appeal, and the most important thing is that it is demonstrated fully that due process was not complied with, which has as a consequence the nullity of the entire criminal procedure and therefore order its repositioning, which implies a new trial of Keith Raniere.

  • Suneel-

    Extremely Important:

    If Keith Raniere loses his appeals, your only course of action, as I am sure you are cognizant of, is getting Keith’s sentence commuted. The only way to get a politician to do something, short of bribery, is to get the public behind it.

    You need to work more on public perception.

  • Suneel-

    Re Public Perception:

    If you want to change public perception to help Keith Raniere, you have to be able to persuade an audience such as on the Frank Report.

    The salacious branding story outraged the US population and forced the government (politicians) and DOJ to go after Keith. Public perception was manipulated and a witch-hunt ensued.

    Why don’t you add some tidbits of the good Keith Raniere did do? Many of Keith’s biggest critics say that Nxivm did, in fact, help him.

    You are a highly intelligent man. You must realize there is some truth to my words.

  • Lots of people like ‘Kinky Sex,’ and derive a lot of fun and pleasure from it. Good luck to them. But when it involves underage persons, persons under duress via blackmail and coercion, and sex-trafficking, it is very definitely illegal.

    A quote:

    “And so we use them for a kind of pleasure which can be called ‘fun’. But it is not the creative kind of fun often connected with play; it is, rather, a shallow, distracting, greedy way of “having fun.” And it is not by chance that it is that type of fun which can easily be commercialized, for it is dependent on calculable reactions, without passion, without risk, without love. Of all the dangers that threaten our civilization, this is one of the most dangerous ones: the escape from one’s emptiness through a ‘fun’ which makes joy impossible.” 

     ― Paul Tillich, The New Being

  • To Suneel who sees the prosecution’s case against Keith Raniere as, trying to “dirty him up”, while piecemealing and isolating every situation in his trial. Then he can say these situations are not relevant or in itself, a crime.

    This is a supreme disservice to all women and all victims of human trafficking.

    I am a nurse. Health professionals are educated about human trafficking so we can see, as best we can, situations as symptoms of a larger , nefarious picture. This education is a requirement to practice our profession in at least two states.

    The trafficker does not announce to any of their victims, his or her intentions upfront. Their objectives are all the same, manipulation and control for the sinister reality of abuse and exploitation. When you look at the construct of Keith Raniere’s modus operandi, it checks off all the boxes of human trafficking:
    After carefully targeting susceptible individuals, Raniere utilized grooming or love-bombing with flattery and promises of prosperity and help. Only to not help, often not providing living wages and using threats of legal and social repercussions in the form of collateral. He then shamed, humiliated, dehumanized, manipulated, intimidated, triangulated, gaslighted, and coerced them, until enculturation and bondage seemed to them to be their only option.
    The victims do not go around talking about their situation, typically, until they can talk about it objectively in a safe environment, such is how badly damaged they are. To a person who has not gone through this, their emotional pain and feeling of no other way out, may not be seen. But it exists. Even if they laugh or try to be happy. They are trying to survive. In Raniere’s case, he set the stage upfront by providing the mission statement to indoctrinate them: There are no ultimate victims.
    This is why health professionals, who already have a license in health care, have to take continual training in detection in this to help break the cycle. The victims often hide in plain site, to the outside world, because if they confront it themselves with no one else to lean on, their burden to live like that would be too much to bear.

    Raniere created a culture by which he withheld food from his victims. He shamed, humiliated, and dehumanized them by reviewing their bodies for their “correct weight”. This after proclaiming himself smarter and grander than everyone in every way, including ethically. This after surrounding himself, and them with his special group.
    So now, group behavior, crowd contingency, entered into the victim’s reaction to comply. Some were, by that time, undernourished and most likely had chronic low blood sugar and vitamin and mineral deficiencies, which can obscure one’s will, personality, and mindset. This ensured that they were not in optimal physical mental condition to self- advocate.

    During Suneel’s toney college education, had he studied the social sciences to be able to differentiate healthy from sick, unhealthy behaviors that, under these circumstances, descend into the criminal realm? In the health professional training for victims of trafficking, it is taught that traffickers control the food and sometimes fluid intake of their victim. Check off another box.

    Another sign is that the trafficker/abuser withholds medical (and dental) care from their victims. Raniere assigned one of the victims to stay alone in a room. He carefully groomed and indoctrinated her parents to not advocate for basic needs of their daughter, like socialization, health care, and further education. Thus time passed with her missing out on normal growth and development. In truth, she was a commodity, not a human being.

    Forced abortions. Not, gee, our relationship or activity caused a pregnancy, Now what do we do? Well, after much thought and discussion, we have mutually agreed an abortion seems the best answer to this dilemma. Now how can we avert it in the future? Gee, we better get on some birth control. No, in the climate of having other women as his flying monkeys, he had these women take them to the abortion clinic. He didn’t want to get his hands dirty. Glad he didn’t have to dirty himself up. In health profession-training for victims of trafficking, it is taught to look for women who cannot advocate for themselves in the clinic. Check off another box.

    What is the big red flag of a trafficked human? Branding. Suneel, this is well-documented. Truck drivers as well as health professionals are made aware of this. You present yourself as a bright, educated individual. This shows some real holes in how you proclaim yourself. Why are you advocating for Keith?

    I am from a town in which a famous Madame once resided and worked for about 40 years. Before she died, she told her story for a book that was written about her. She spilled it all so her story could be told. In it, it was revealed that, yes, she kept, and managed all the prostitutes in our town. She shared how she, herself, was groomed for her job, with lies about who was at the top of the organization. She was brought to our town under false pretenses.
    She let it be known that she was well-known across the region for having “clean girls” and how she was always concerned for their welfare. She proudly told how they had money to send home to the rural corners of the county for their families who needed it. The riverboats brought loads of food for them, she bought them treats, and even bought a favorite, longstanding woman, a brand new car with a full tank of gas to drive around town, to thank her for her service.
    By the time the story was over, it’s intended purpose was met. One felt sorry for the grooming and coercion done to the Madame herself to get her into her life’s profession, how she saved lives along the way of unfortunate girls that well-meaning persons brought to her doorstep so she could take them into her group and care well for them by having them work for her. How her “girls” were so much happier and better cared for than other prostitutes in other cities and this was well-known in that part of the country.

    Interspersed with this story was the revelation that the women were chosen as high school girls, by a custodian employed at the school who looked out for at-risk persons. They never saw it coming.

    A friend of mine in town, whose now-deceased mother was a hairdresser had a story about the Madame and her (trafficked) workers. The Madame would bring them to the salon for their hair appointments. When my friends mother tried to engage them in normal salon banter, the Madame would tell her, “Don’t speak with the girls. They are not to talk.” These girls were free? Same climate, same fear.
    When I worked as a young nurse in another city, I told a patient, who had a criminal background, what city I was from. Immediately, he said the Madam’s name. “I used to run speed down there for her girls. So they could work all three shifts.”

    So the question remains: If Suneel is as bright and educated as he seems. A well-meaning fellow, just concerned about justice for poor, misconstrued Keith. How can he turn a blind eye to the bigger picture, to the whole construct of Keith as a human trafficker, with all the nefarious sides that come with holding up this kind of activity. Perhaps the only accolade to be given to Keith is his creativity of his sinister reality.

    Anonymous asked the fundamental question of Suneel in a comment. Who is funding Suneel’s time and effort in his defense of Keith Raniere? In my many years working as a nurse, I have seen administrative practices in healthcare that over time, came to be realized, were not best practices for the patients. Despite warning by the bedside nurses, and nurses leaving their professions at times, so as not to have to participate in care that was not best for the patients, the one thing that drove the change was not the moral high road. It was when funding for the practices were cut. So Anonymous’ question was spot on.

  • Secret Grandmaster of the sex slave ring Keith Raniere wanted DOS sex slaves to be “like hungry dogs for their master”.

    What if the species were switched?

    What if it was a ring of sex slave dolphins? Or pandas? Or trolls? Mermaids?

    What if it were trees?!

    Sex slave trees! The criminal court case would have been so different!

    Bias! Bias! Bias!

    Keith Raniere’s dead-enders…

    Y’all are…

    Special people

  • “Love” the NXIVM kool-aid drinkers complaining about a supposed “sexism” in how this would be much-a-do about nothing if it was men instead of women, when they’re leader was the guy who could have sex with any woman, while the women were supposed to stay monogamous to him for life.

  • One last thought … Suneel? If you think that so-called “kinky sex” is actually super shocking to people? I’m not so sure. We’re living in a pretty progressive society these days. Sexting is pretty normal! So is sharing nude photos and stuff like that. I really don’t think most people are actually as prudish as you’re making them out to be.

  • This part was pretty funny!! “He should be examined as a unique and perhaps priceless medical wonder, a national treasure, a testimony to American virility, and, if even half of this is true, I think it’s worthy of submission to the Guinness Book of World Records.” I mean? Again? Lololol!

  • Dude, he’s Zod, not Superman.

    You went to Harvard. Live a decent life and don’t waste your reputation defending an immoral pervert who’s not worth it.

  • Suneel-

    A few people have responded to you in a respectful, dignified, and intelligent manner.

    Will you be responding to their questions and/or general comments?

    Or will you be only doing the monologue and soapbox act?

    I would like to join you in an intelligent conversation.
    ****
    I have given your argument some thought that if the sex roles were reversed Keith Raniere would not have been prosecuted.

    I agree that the branding would have been a non-issue and I agree with you on several other issues.

    BUT, before I spend time writing, I would appreciate it if you let me know at the very least you will entertain the idea of responding to me.

    Please respond

    • Thanks Penn_Station_195, I would gladly entertain a conversation with you and look forward to your comments.

  • This Vanguard was already charged with sexual exploitation of child but I kind of hope Cami can have him charged with sexual assault too! Seems like she’s come to her senses and realized what this creep did to her and her family. (Cami, if you’re reading this, I’m so sorry for what you’ve been through.)

    It might be kinda fun to lay some additional charges!!! I can totally appreciate that she might just want to move on with her life but it would be really cool to see her and Rhiannon and Gina receive some additional justice.

    You might call it kinky, Suneel, but I can assure you, the rest of the world just calls it statutory rape. We also call the collection of damaging collateral and seduction assignments “blackmail and coercion” and additionally notice that human branding is a behavior typically attached to human trafficking operations.

  • Seems like the more “truth” Suneel spills, the crazier people go in the comments. The more he makes sense, the more haters have to call anyone who supports a different narrative either “brainwashed,” “sick,” or a “fool.”

    • Indeed, that is the “truth” that many people have paid good money to acquire, but have come to find they were bargain basement close outs at a bankrupt Fortune Cookie factory.

      The Frank Report is the only place that will have him, and so it is the only place to throw rotten eggs at the Town Fool.

  • I despise Keith but I think Suneel makes some points until the slip-ups where you can see how deluded his thinking is.

    Take this for example – he states that no one took into account the WhatsApp messages where Keith “wrote to Cami that showed genuine solicitude and love and desire to guide and teach a woman who said she was in love with him.”

    Let’s look at this. A man who lied about his IQ, who has no advanced degrees in anything at all and no special skills besides conning people is going to “teach” someone? A woman, who it’s already been shown is a person Keith considered completely beneath him.

    Suneel – you think it’s OK for Keith to say he’s going to “teach” someone he’s sleeping with and you find this endearing?

    It may not be illegal – you are correct. But given that your thinking is warped in such a way as to not pick up many inherently degrading pieces to the point AND that you use them as backup for your argument – it invalidates your points and makes them questionable.

    Regardless of the legality of sex, he did enough true crimes to warrant the punishment.

    • But the only important question, as far as legality and rights, is “Did he commit the crimes he was convicted of?”

      • Then I guess the answer is “Yes” because all 12 members of the jury in his trial convicted him of all seven charges he was facing.

  • Undoubtedly, any of the evidence that is manipulated, loses its probative value and must be declared null.

    The evidence is illegal because it violates the fundamental rights of the accused, since they are the procedures carried out in the investigation of the crime and seek the discovery and knowledge of the circumstances of the punishable act, and reach the conviction of the Jury, in the specific case, wrongly to a guilty verdict, for which an arbitrariness is committed in deterioration of the entire constitutional system of rights and freedoms, when the evidence that incriminates them is obtained in an illicit way.

    How it happens in the Keith Raniere trial since, despite the express confection of the FBI agent, in which he accepted that the evidence, provided by the Prosecutor’s Office to prove the crime of child pornography, consisting of the hard disk, was accessed by “ an unknown person ”, was admitted and based on it he would issue a guilty verdict.

  • “Still, for many people, a group blow-job may be an ideal Friday night. To me, it’s hardly a topic of direct examination in a federal criminal trial”. May you wonder how the prosecution will work with Tinder or related app users? Or people who joyfully participate in sex parties? What was wrong? Just the idea is a scary one. Judge by your way of living, like in the past with the Scarlett Letter.

    • I want to read the scarlett letter! it is about the principal that killed her boyfriend right? Do you know where the link to that letter is? I have died to read it! I find that case very interesting. the boyfriend was a psychopath who got off from making the two women jealous. He played with fire drove that women to the end

  • Remember when we all grew out our pubic hair and forbade each other to masturbate? You would text me photos of your food and even though you were losing your hair and ability to reproduce, I would say “No slave, you can’t eat more than 500 calories” and we would laugh!

    And by “we” I mean Keith and me. Your master. And your (hidden from you) grandmaster.”

    “Master, I am starving” you would text. And I would respond by asking for incriminating information about your family. Then I would get a message from Keith that he was ready to fuck you and fondle his initials that you had no idea were permanently seared into your flesh. And then we would laugh! (Keith and I again).

    And I would set up a completely fake “seduction assignment” using your past childhood sexual abuse as manipulation. Then we would laugh! (this time me and the other side of me). And you would ask for your pornographic blackmail back. And I would say “No”. And we would laugh (Keith and I again).

    Ahhh. So much fun! Call me?

      • Nutjob,

        Re Nutjob affirms Suneel’s Hypothesis:

        You defend the DOS women as victims and attack Keith Raniere as an evil cult leader

        You believe Dr. Roberts should keep her license, but Dr. Brandon Porter should not keep his license.

        Do you see your bias viewpoints as sex-based or do you have a rational explanation? Otherwise, Suneel’s principal argument of male and female sex biases at trial is true; and, therefore, by the converse of your logic, Keith Raniere would be innocent if the criminal case involved all men. So at the end of the day, you don’t even realize it, but you do agree Suneel!

        Lastly, why is it okay to shit on Suneel, who never did anything to anyone sexually, physically or otherwise? Why?

        Isn’t Suneel a man as deserving as understanding as the women?

        You don’t even comprehend your bias towards men and your parental and parochial attitude towards women.

        Women are malleable sheep in your mind.

        • Here’s my explanation: You 100% made up out of thin air your assertion about my beliefs on Dr Porter. It is not true. Without that incorrect statement, does your point stand?

          As for Suneel, I’ve only made a couple comments about/to him.One was positive and the other(s) gave feedback.

          Those who were caught up in NXIVM did so for good reasons. They wanted to improve themselves and improve the world. Keith used this against them and ruined many lives. The quicker people can recognize what he did and the patterns he used, the quicker their lightbulb will go off. Keith was calculated and is a psychopath. If you aren’t there yet, I kindly suggest doing a little research and then add some things up.

      • The Penn Station 195 comment is my attempt to look at things from the other-side.

        Suneel appears to have a valid point.

        • How about you use the same moniker? Must take a lot of energy managing your multiple FR personalities.
          (cue up Johnson from the peanut gallery)

          • Mr. NutJob-

            I don’t use monikers or aliases. I utilize spirit animals and occasionally avatars for which I have four.

          • A) you are wrong about all your freaky Friday Nxivm/DOS switch the whatever scenarios.

            B) it doesn’t matter. The trial was about what happened. Not “what if” Lindsay Lohan and Jamie Curtis swapped places and the sex slave was the master for a day

            What if… airplanes could talk and candy canes were telephones and my beloved pedophile cult leader could walk free on his wretched rodent feet?!

            Dream bigger!

    • Bangkok,

      Those aren’t women calling you “F*** B**”. It’s your Boy Scout Troop leader looking to score.

      BTW: The tank he has isn’t oxygen. It’s ether.

  • And the fact he had sex with Camila when she was 15 years old? Pretty sure that is illegal.

    The blackmail dressed up as ‘collateral’? Pretty sure that is illegal

    Sex trafficking, identity theft, possession of child pornography…all illegal.

    Tricking women into branding themselves with something different than what was described…where is the honour in that? The morality?

    Coercive control is real and it is deadly.

    I would like to challenge any of the NXIVM 5 to admit that at least some of Keith’s behaviour is abhorrent. That he is NOT the smartest man in the world. That he questioned whether a rape victim was a victim at all and that the age of consent doesn’t matter. That abused children enjoy their abuse. Does this not sicken you???

    The irony of a man whose ‘philosophy’ is that if you are responsible for all that happens to you…he sure is doing a whole lot of whining.

  • Suneel,

    Even if you had real evidence to prove that all your assertions and claims are true — as opposed to the mere conclusions, judgments, opinions, and viewpoints that are stated throughout this post — why do you think that would result in Keith getting a new trial? As I have tried to make clear on several occasions, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals is only going to look at the record of Keith’s case — and the appellate briefs submitted by Keith’s attorneys and the government’s attorneys. It is not going to consider new arguments that could have — and perhaps should have — been raised during the trial.

    So, if Marc Agnifilo didn’t raise objections to each of these statements by the prosecutors that you think are so unfair — which he generally didn’t — the appellate court will not even consider them as an issue in deciding whether to uphold or overturn the verdict in Keith’s case. And consciously or subconsciously, the appellate judges are also going to note the fact that Keith passed up the chance to take the witness stand and tell his side of the story with respect to all the “dirtying-up” you claim happened during the trial (I’ve yet to hear you offer a clear explanation for why he chose not to do that).

    While I might agree with you that it would be more fair if criminal trials did not allow any evidence to be introduced that was not directly related to the charges pending against a defendant, that is not the rule in our current criminal justice system. Instead, so-called “extraneous evidence” is admissible in federal criminal trials in order to prove such things as a defendant’s motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident (You can read more about this topic at https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_404).

    About the only way I think Keith could raise this as an appellate issue is if he were able to get sworn affidavits from one or more jurors that indicated their verdict of guilty had been swayed by the “dirtying-up” of Keith that you claim the prosecutors did during his trial. And I assume that if such affidavits were actually obtainable, you would have already introduced them.

    In my opinion, you’re doing a good job of pointing out some of the flaws in our current criminal justice system. But as of yet, you haven’t provided any evidence that’s going to result in Keith getting a new trial.

    • I don’t read the Frank Report that much anymore because of the elevation of this kind of NXIVM 5 garbage writing, which gives them far more credibility than ever deserved. Claviger hits the nail on the head here with ACTUAL LEGAL ANALYSIS of the ridiculous assertions now being made post-conviction, as if KR wasn’t at his own trial with his own high priced lawyers to make any and all of these arguments DURING THE TRIAL. I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me now the only chance KR has on appeal is to make some kind of argument that his defense was inadequate, which in itself will be tough to do since it’s not like he had a court-appointed lawyer. He could have taken the stand, Clyne could have been called as a witness, etc., etc., etc. The list goes on of things he could have presented at trial and chose not to. It’s terribly unfortunate that FR has allowed this concept of “hate” to be presented as some kind of legal argument, which it is not, which is likely why KR’s counsel did not bring it into the courtroom because he would have been laughed out. We should all be laughing at this Suneel et al garbage now too.

    • KR Claviger: thanks for engaging with me thus far in a healthy debate.

      The issues I have brought up so far are just the tip of the iceberg and I would agree with you that most of them are not strong issues for the appeal but they do hint at how Keith’s case was mishandled. That said, I believe there are some significant appellate issues that you might find persuasive and I’ll write about those soon.

      • I look forward to reading about these issues — but must remind you that the chances for a “total reversal” in any appellate case in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals is less than 4%. Unless you’ve uncovered some “smoking gun” evidence with respect to critical issues in Keith’s case, I’m afraid that you — and his other supporters — will be very disappointed with the outcome of his appeal.

        For those Frank Report readers who want to read ahead — and find out what Keith’s appeal will entail — you can start by reading this introductory piece: https://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/clerk/case_filing/rules/title2/rule_4.html

        • I guess that brings the deeper question forth…should the choice to fight for something or not be decided by the likelihood of success?

  • Don’t you just hate these libtard [redacted]?

    This is what the left does. They take someone unpopular (Keith Raniere) or try to make something unpopular (white people, Trump, slurs like “bigot”), then throw it on anyone they don’t like.

    Stop projecting you [redacted] People are sick of [redacted] you talking shit and showing zero respect for the people you get away with walking all over.

    https://twitter.com/DarlyneDolap/status/1348914680979365891

  • This is stuff that happens in court all over the place. There is a black man named Archie Williams that was sentenced to 40 yrs in prison falsely due to a hate trial also. he performed on AGF and told his story. This is one story of many. At the very least, we need to see neutral trials that don’t involve emotion. In my opinion, this judge clearly lets his emotions get in the way.

    Another point I see is that any comment on this site that doesn’t support “hate for Keith” is being accused as someone who participates in Nxivm. This. to me, shows how far we all are from considering anything but ways to condemn. Be careful. This kind of attitude is what will ruin this country. This leaves no room to find the good people who needed help and didn’t get it due to emotional bias. I highly doubt that Suneel enjoys facing a world against him and slandering his own name just for the fun of it. He clearly is doing his own homework. And is finding a lot of cases that need to be looked at. I love this country, it’s a gift to live here. I hope to see us all grow better at doing what works so we can agree more.

    Big thanks to Frank Report for allowing space for opposing sides to be heard. If he didn’t catch this stuff we are hearing, no one would. That is sad to me. We need more men with that sort of character whether we like it or not.

    • –Another point I see is that any commenter on this site who doesn’t support “hate for Keith” is being accused as someone who participated in Nxivm.

      If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it most likely is a duck.

    • Thank you for your unscripted and honest post.

      Just like old NXIVM testimonials, and more recent letters of support for Keith, many of the posts in support of Suneel seem to follow a specific pattern.

      I’ve seen people be prepped to give NXIVM testimonials. There are suddenly a lot of “prepped” comments in support of Suneel’s assertions. Suneel himself seems to get more support than the pro-Suneel commenters because Suneel is being more straight up.

    • Lots of “we” in your comment. Speak only for yourself as honest people do. And there is no “also” with Keith Raniere and the man you reference. No similarly at all. You are shameless.

  • Judging by all the NXIVM acolytes posting the similar comments here over and over again, I think NXIVM intensives either create sociopaths or mentally stunted fools.

    • It is a bunch of insane cultists trying to defend blackmailing to make someone a slave. All these people should be in jail too.

    • They need to get together and stop posting the same things, or come up with more scripted angles to choose from.

      Maybe NXIVM produces sheep who are afraid to be themselves? They are posts in support of your glorious Vanguard. How hard would it be to speak from your heart and not from your Scientology playbook???

  • I personally like having access to articles such as this one and access to articles like Claviger’s. They both provide different perspectives and arguments that show each of us how to think about things, evaluate and choose.

    Thank you to all contributors, editors, and commenters.

    • Nope. It doesn’t mean those people were killed. They did not get to choose the most expensive lawyers and jury trial as Keith did. Your hyperbole marks you as not “rational” in your inquiry and lacking all “data”. Also, it’s demeaning to the mostly women who died horrible tortured deaths. Keith was convicted of crimes. Only you have magical thinking.

  • I’m starting to think Mark Vicente was just jealous of Keith (or maybe he was jealous of the women… seemed pretty obsessed with him from what I saw in The Vow) and that’s why he took him and all of his companies down.

  • I agree that while fun to learn about his polyamorous lifestyle (something I myself want but am too afraid to go for), this information did not belong in the courtroom. I also see that we as a society are criminalizing sex in many ways. I am referring to consensual sex which I certainly hope doesn’t become illegal soon regardless of the number of partners or things adults choose to try and explore in their private lives.

    • If he was charged with parking violations, then bringing up his sex life would be inappropriate. But he was charged with sex crimes – which makes it totally relevant. That is why his ultra-high price attorneys did not object. Next.

    • Keith’s sex life was not polyamory. Only his branded slaves had to be in a committed sexual relationship ( for life) with him. He could do whatever/whoever he wanted. The women ( and at least one child) were “punished” for transgressions like jumping on a teammate to celebrate a volleyball play and kissing another man. A woman was kept in a room for 2 years because she wanted another man. He told these women when & what they could eat. Keith kept an extensive homemade porn blackmail stash. He financially crippled them and took their immigration documents. He asked for newer more incriminating “collateral” monthly. If that is your idea of healthy polyamory, then you might be a Nxivm dead-ender cult member. Seek help.

  • I think taking things out of context is very deceiving. I have heard Raniere say things to make a point by being outrageously provocative or prejudicial.

    It was so common that I would say it happened more often than not. Here is an example: Someone would be angry with a woman and be bad mouthing her behind her back in front of Raniere. He would chime in and say, “….yeah, that cunt….blah, blah, blah.”

    It made everyone see what was going on and that it was not good. He would go over the top with prejudicial slurs, hateful comments and other politically incorrect comments to get people to sit up and think about what they were saying. This can be seen in hours of video tape of him. Unfortunately, you have just herd clips taken out of context. Buyer be ware!

  • Well… Suneel’s blow by blow account of the trial has garnered a lot of attention. You’ve development quite a personal brand, dude.

    John P. Capitalist is a long-standing, astute member of the anti-Scientology community–he has a lot of insights into cult workings, including their financial shenanigans. Great to see him show up here.

    Better step up from your C-game to your A-game, Suneel.

    I’m wondering if we’re going to get any commentary or evidence that relates to issues applicable to the legal appeals process, rather than these ham-handed PR releases.

    Trying to decide whether your handle should be The Harvard-trained Blow Job Analyst™ or The World’s Smartest Defender of Child Rape™…

    Do board contributors have a preference?

    • I missed my chance to weigh in. But I am glad! I love what you settled on. You are one of my favourites, Nxidvmdvm. Keep up the awesome comments.

  • Damn, Frank! This guy daxie2016 is still on Twitter trying to smear you:

    https://twitter.com/daxie2016

    He has taken offense to potentially you being called “ethical” by the Vow’s Twitter page.

    I think the Vow’s official Twitter page called you “ethical” and the creepo has gone on the digital jihad rampage.

    It seems the Vow deleted their tweet and have “liked” some of his comments smearing you in response.

    Also, Toni Natalie liked all his smears against you from her Twitter account and her “fall of Nxivm” account. She also said:

    https://twitter.com/ToniNatalie1017/status/1348367789984247809

    Is it SultanOfSix? It reads like the mad spanker. Sad, angry and full of jihadi venom.

    If this person is not a member of Nxivm, then it is a superfan of someone you have called out. Seeing as he is in an intimate sexual relationship with his palm while thinking about Kristin Kreuk, it seems like it could be him. Or possibly another crazed Kreuk/Park/Mack STAN/stalker/weirdo.

    And this comment about Sarah “me, me, me” Edmondson:

    https://twitter.com/daxie2016/status/1348345479856156673

    Who is she saying you published lies about, Frank?

    Also, does Spanky stand a chance with Toni Natalie, or would she never swoop that low?

  • I think there was so much bias in this case and so much rules about what women are allowed to do and not do in our society. It is sad for me to see that women still have much less freedom than men today. Got to keep working

    • Yes, I long for the good old DOS days when men were men and Grandmasters with blackmail material and women were slaves and masters of other woman slaves. So much more freedom back then.

    • Women in the West are not oppressed in any manner. Males in the West are such pussies, women walk all over them. And you know it. Sad.

    • Freedom to be sexually blackmailed is not a freedom that I have ever seen women march to attain. Maybe you and Nicki can lead that movement

  • This was a tough article for me to read, especially because these are things that, not only I wouldn’t choose, but because in the culture I was raised in they were exactly what Suneel is referring to, dirty.
    Now, not because I think so it means they are, I think everyone is allowed to choose the way they want to express themselves, even if other people disagree; as long as it is consensual, which it sounds like in this case it was. This was not a crime.

    So, I can see what Suneel is trying to bring up; why was this relevant to the case? It makes me wonder if they had a strong case with the other accusations, why the need to use this as ‘evidence’ (or ‘context’ as they call it)?

    I don’t have knowledge of the law so I’ll stay away from that topic, but, what I do have knowledge of is the psychology of the mind and the subconscious; if the jury (and/or the judge) had a conservative way of thinking about sexual acts, then this would not look good on KR’s side, as they would most likely make up an image of him that would feel ‘disgusting’, even if they are not aware of it consciously (even if they tried to be impartial) and this would ultimately bias their perception; whether they were conscious about it or not. Not sure how much the defense could do about ‘undoing’ this, now, biased perspective :-/

    If we care about due process, we cannot turn a blind eye to these things.

    • Consensual blackmail, I’ll need some time to process that concept. Check back with me in about 1,000 years from now.

      If you state you don’t have knowledge of the law, then don’t try to know about due process.

      • I agree with you that ‘consented blackmail’ would be a misnomer; now, to my understanding, women in the sorority were not coerced to give collateral, rather they chose to deliver it as a sign of them willing to make it clear they would uphold their promises; this would make it consensual. As for the due process comment, I really hope no one needs a law degree in order to understand it , talk about it or make sure it’s being upheld; it is in our best interest to be able to raise our voices when we see faults in the system.

        • The “uphold their promises” was the cover story, but then they kept asking for more and lied about who was at the top of the pyramid. Raniere got his due process, now he is due to be processed out of Oklahoma to whatever hellhole awaits him.

      • When this case started, that is what I thought would be discussed in court…what is consent and what is blackmail. But none of that happened at all. It was all about making Raniere look “awful” and “disgusting”. To me, that was a sure sign that the trial was derailed.

        • If these were important issues, then why didn’t Keith’s attorneys call witnesses to present them to the jury?

          Maybe Keith’s attorneys were in on the deal to get Keith convicted…Yeah, that must be it.

          • actually no. i would have hoped that the prosecution would have dove into those issues. sadly they went for scandal instead.

  • Please answer the questions below — all of which have been asked repeatedly by most all the readership of this blog (which have yet to be addressed by you or any KR Supporters). We all have read your articles defending KR and we do you the courtesy of commenting with feedback and posing other questions, none of which are ever addressed. If the readership of this blog is willing to take the time to read this blow job article and provide feedback, then surely you can take the time to answer these seven questions? Thank you, in advance, for your consideration. We ALL look forward to your answers.

    1. Why did Keith have a sexually explicit pic of an underage girl in his possession (regardless of the one unknown access while in the FBI’s possession)?

    2. Was the underage girl (now a woman) who publicly confirmed the abuse in her victim impact statement lying in her statement? If yes, what portion specifically of her statement was a lie?

    3. Why was it not disclosed to the DOS members that Keith was the grandmaster (but rather they were told that Alison was the grandmaster)?

    4. Why weren’t the DOS members told that their brand was KRs initials (but rather were told it was a symbol representing the elements)?

    5. What are your thoughts on the charges referred to the NDNY (sexual exploitation of a child and child pornography)?

    6. Why didn’t you, Suneel, testify at Keith’s trial in his defense?

    7. Who is funding Make Justice Blind?

    • 1. If you read the certified reports from 4 of the top forensic experts around (you can find the full reports on http://www.MakeJusticeBlind.com) 99 photos were tampered with. The dates were changed to make it seem like she was 15 years old at the time. So they did not find a naked photo of a 15-year-old girl as you stated. They found a photo that had its date edited through tampering to make it appear that she was 15 years old when the photo was taken. A scar from an appendectomy she had was also photoshopped out since the presence of the scar based on the timing of her surgery would have revealed her as being well over 15. If there was any proof whatsoever of this relationship taking place when she was 15, you can rest assured this prosecution that went to great lengths to find some (even breaking the rules of the search warrant) would have found some. But they didn’t and that’s why they tampered with evidence and had FBI agent Booth lie under oath about how difficult it is to edit the dates on these photos. This is a horrific thing for a government prosecution and an FBI agent to do and we should all be outraged about it. Most of all it points to the fact that their accusations were not true and so they had to commit crimes of this magnitude to support them.

      • Even if everything you claim is true — and I don’t believe some of it is — the time to raise these points was DURING Keith’s trial, not AFTER it.

        His trial is over — and all the appellate judges are going to see is the record of his case — and whatever briefs are filed by Keith’s new appellate attorney and the prosecution’s attorneys. They are not going to review “new evidence”. Nor are they going to consider “new issues”. And they aren’t going to consider “new arguments” that could have been raised during the trial but weren’t.

        You may not like the rules that govern appeals. But not liking them is not going to make them go away.

      • I think you need to think that through. It’s illogical, and sadly delusional.

        Further – a simple forensic image test could tell if they’d been altered. Takes a whopping 2 minutes.

        Back to delusional. I’m sad for you. There’s so much life to live! Drop this and get out there and get living without Keith. This is your life to live not his. You got this.

    • I’m not part of NXIVM and don’t know Keith at all. However, I’ve been doing a lot of research on this case and I can respond to your questions with my findings in the most objective way. I am interested in law and bringing justice to every case. So if you find my responses not supporting your perspective, please note I’m not defending any type of abuse or criminal activity, I’m trying to be as objective as possible.

      1. After reading all transcripts of the case and Make Justice Blind’s evidence, I can say this is not a good piece of evidence for this case and shouldn’t have been used. It brings up too many questions that actually help Keith. Based on findings the hard drive wasn’t in Keith’s house, and didn’t even have a backup of his computers. The hard drive was old and not used in many years. The only photos found were those photos in the whole trial (besides DOS allegations which were not proved to be in Keith’s posetion) and on top of that the evidence that this hard drive was tampered with really makes a case for Keith’s innocence.

      2. I can’t say that she lied or not based on the information about her on the transcripts. What’s is interesting to note is that she didn’t accuse Keith of sexual abuse. If they had sex while she was underage, that is a crime but as of now we only have her word against his. The only data out there is that they were in a long-term relationship for many years which could help Keith’s defense on fighting for his innocence.

      3. Based on trial transcripts this was supposed to be a women’s only organization. Keith’s defense alleged that he was more of a consultant to DOS women leadership not a member. His master/slave relationships with other women wasn’t linked to DOS on the transcripts so he can definitely argue he was not part of DOS. From a personal opinion I found this really hard to understand and regardless of his participation I look into all the women who choose to be in DOS and question their grown up decision. If they didn’t know Keith was port of DOS why join? If Keith wasn’t linked to DOS was it good for women to join this group anyways?

      4. Bases on the trial transcripts and the dossier project (DOS former members wevsite) Keith didn’t know about the Brand until some of the women did it on themselves. Women choosed and came up with the design. There is no proof anywhere this was Keith’s idea and what his defense said was that some women from DOs choosed this and made it into a form of tribute to him. Keith didn’t entirely support the brand. There’s more details about this on their website.

      5. There are no child exploration charges. Child pornography posetion in my opinion as you are asking, I believe was part of the NDNY strategy to win the case as there is no proof of child pornography to support this charge.

      6. Suneel and many other NXIVM members have shared they were threatened by prosecution and would’ve been consider co-conspirators under RICO. This is common on our justice system and definitely not good for justice.

      7. As far as I’ know Make Justice Bkind is been funded by NXIVM members most of them public.

      This are my responses. Overall I believe in this blog there’s a lot of people who won’t see beyond they dislike for Keith. This is a very interesting case that shows a lot of unjustice to this man. While he might deserve it or not really doesn’t matter. I’m analyzing the case from a justice perspective and there is definitely a lot that does not make sense and there’s nothing wrong with saying that. I’m not his supporters or part of NXIVM. I do believe is important we point out the irregularities on our system.

      • Anthony, literally one day ago you said that you were ” new” to this case? Which is it? You said 1 day previously that you had only watched 2 TV shows and didn’t have any other information. Remember? So you’re all caught up now? Trial transcripts – everything? In 24 hours? Impressive!

        • The answer to your questions: Anthony is not being sincere. He is trying his hardest to help Vanguard’s cause, but he is simply looking like a Vanguard disciple. Lie, lie, lie – for the good of the mission. I have a question for Anthony – what again was this mission?

        • I find it more disturbing that almost all research was made from the “Make Justice Blind” website, not from the trial transcripts or any other source, and he´s interested in justice and bringing justice to every case…

          I´m curious: which other cases have you reviewed?

    • 2. It most certainly seems she was lying in her statement which remember was not under oath nor cross examined. It is curious why she didn’t testify under oath but only made a statement without any of those checks in place. I believe she was threatened (like so many others) by the prosecution since she could have been charged with sex trafficking (as a trafficker) based on her I comment in certain things. So the prosecution had her where they wanted her. I believe once the tampering evidence hit the media they had to threaten her so that she would make a public statement. Also the part about being isolated is a lie. She had a very active social life surrounded by friends family events parties and support of so many people who loved her. Keith payed her rent. I think this is something many boyfriends do. Not a crime. On the contrary he was helping her.

      • Why do you claim “it most certainly seems she was lying” in her victim impact statement because she “was not under oath nor cross-examined” when the exact same thing can be said about Keith and Suneel?

        Keith had a chance to provide sworn testimony during this trial but declined to do so.

        Suneel had the same opportunity but also declined to do so.

        Keith and Suneel could both proffer statements now that are “under oath” — and that could possibly subject them to charges of perjury if those statements are proven to be untrue. But, instead, they have simply offered up statements that offer no assurance whatsoever they are telling the truth.

      • Keith doesn’t have to pay rent now or for the next 120 years. You see what a caring state does for its citizens. The state helps Keith like a friend would for his girlfriend.

    • The guy is obviously in love with Vanguard, and he, focusing on his sex life all the time and blowjobs, and claiming that´s why he was found guilty and ignoring the other accusations, shows that he needs a therapist and to wake up from his fantasy, facts sadly won´t change his view

    • #2 – Saying something in public does not make it true. Especially when it was kept out of the trial, no evidence was presented, and there was no cross-examination.

  • I was not aware of these details of the trial and, despite how gross I feel about the whole situation, this article brings up some very good points.

  • It is my contention that, during the criminal trial of Keith Raniere, the prosecution did many things to “dirty him up” by soliciting testimony and introducing evidence of acts that were perfectly legal. This was a calculated effort to make him repugnant in the eyes of the jury. And it works, many of the comments are based just in what was said, what was presented as a clear and irrefutable “evidence”, when truly all was manipulation.

  • The lack of evidence of the imputation of the attempted sex trafficking to Keith Raniere and specifically without the testimony of Oxenberg and Alison Mach is evident, since with their knowledge of the facts the Jury would have no doubt of his innocence, let’s see why: the alleged victim Jaye, traveled every week from Brooklyn to Albany to participate in the Women’s Group and stayed at home with them, however, the fact that is accused, happened voluntarily and after more than a year, in which Jaye continued to attend the Women’s Group, traveling every week and already with Mr. Raniere on the steed, curiously the accusation arises after Jaye’s arrest by the FBI, obviously threatened and coerced by them, why it is not explained otherwise, because as we said, she continued to participate in the Women’s group for more than a year and we already know that the FBI as “investigators” of the Prosecutor’s Office persecuted, threatened, imprisoned and forced to confess Guilty of crimes that they did not commit, men and women just because they belonged to Mr. Raniere’s organizations, sufficient reasons to prove the violations of due process.

    • The volume of the comments from Keith’s die-hard supporters stating the same thing over and over again no matter the evidence to the contrary has made me believe that Cami, Sarah, Mark, the Oxenberg family and the rest of the dissenters/victims should look over their shoulders for the rest of their lives.

      I was of the mind that the Nxivm dead-enders were not dangerous. My opinion now is changed. When I read these incoherent, repetitive ramblings, I read, “Charlie says, Charlie says, Charlie says”.

      And we all know how that turned out

      It is their desperation. Their belief that all the victims are lying. Their conspiracy theories. Their fixed idea that people “hate” Keith. Their notion that they judge, lawyers and jury are complicit in a cover-up. The disordered thinking. The making of themselves and Keith a persecuted class of people. The Jewish and Nazi comparisons. The “Keith is an innocent black man” delusional apartheid statements. I think these are sick, sick people.

      And I can see them hurting someone in a misguided attempt to “save Keith”. I really can see Keith (modern-day Manson) directing them to do so for vengeance.

      I think this demented outpouring does more to warrant Keith staying in jail than anything a detractor of Vanguard could ever produce.

  • While the depictions of Keith Raniere’s sexual life sound demeaning towards the women involved, I fully agree that the stories told at trial all have to do with women of consenting age, so it’s not really my business.

    In trying to understand why so many women would be with him that way, I realized that I have enjoyed reading erotic fiction that, viewed with a critical eye, is pretty demeaning to one or more of the parties involved! So I can imagine that for some people even something that is “demeaning” might actually be a purposeful and looked-for aspect in a real-life sexual encounter. Also, it’s notable that there are zero instances of violence through all this, which adds weight (to me) to your assertion, Suneel, that Raniere was “dirtied up.” All of this is shameful… and NOT for the people who enjoyed alternative, kinky sex lives.

    • Except many women testified under oath they did not “enjoy it”. It was under duress. Blackmail. That’s a form of rape. Very violent. Having women branded with your initials (and lying about it) “like a sacrifice” is violent. It’s not fiction. It really happened to these women and they are physically damaged from it. Scarred, hpv, abortions, hair loss from starvation, psych problems, reproductive issues, and more.

  • I have noticed that Suneel’s lack of responses to K.R.Claviger’s articles coincided with Keith’s departure to another facility other than MDC in Brooklyn. So, I’m wondering if it was, in fact, Keith and not Suneel who was behind the 44 questions now that KR is unable to talk to his peeps. I would find it most interesting to read what Suneel and Keith’s response might be.

  • Suneel’s strategery of saying “blowjob” over and over again so that it lost its shock value, backfired. I’m even more disgusted now.

  • “…proven and certified by 5 top forensic experts to have been tampered with while in FBI custody”

    For screaming about “false” narratives, the NXIVM-5 seem to have their own ones. First of all, nothing was “proven” concerning “tampering”. The device and files were “accessed” outside of a recorded chain of custody. Tampering is a loaded term in the sense that it implies improper handling with an intent to falsify. Accessing files on an OS does not “tamper” with files. It merely changes the metadata associated with a file and not necessarily all of the metadata. Also, changing the metadata of the file does not at all necessarily mean the CONTENT of the file was changed or tampered with, and that was certainly never proven, nor was this ever implied, stated, or ever raised in court by the defense.

  • To choose a jury with a conservative profile and then dirty the accused up was the strategy that prosecution and judge used to cloud jury fair decision.

    The trial emphasized the kinkiness of the accused which is not a crime.

    And to add flavor he was charged with RICO complicating the defense job.

    If kinky behavior is punishable, then very many, including myself, would be in jail.

    There is a difference between the conservative jury’s beliefs and the law.

    • It sounds like you don’t understand that Keith and his attorneys participated equally in the selection of the jury along with the prosecutors — and that Keith’s attorneys had the same ability as the prosecutors to exclude any potential juror they didn’t like. So, know that you have that information, does your comment change?

  • A Nursery Rhyme 4 K.R. Claviger

    All the kings horses, all the kings men, and all of Claviger’s free-time couldn’t help Suneel to see the light.

    P.S.
    K.R. Claviger’s billable hours will suck this month!

  • Suneel, your article is missing one small detail: Keith had a team of expensive attorneys representing him. Did they object to the “dirtying” of him during the trial? How often? What specific acts did they object to (if any)? Which ones did they not object to?

    Surely, experienced criminal defense lawyers would know what the threshold was for admission of behavior not part of the charged crimes and how to ensure that prejudicial material doesn’t get into the trial. Objections not only help steer the outcome of the trial but also create a record for appeal. If the newly-hired appeal attorney doesn’t raise this as an issue, then two experienced legal teams would have passed on this as relevant to establishing Keith’s innocence. Instead, it is pretty likely that your understanding of the phenomenon of “dirtying” a defendant and what actual legal guidelines exist regarding the threshold of this is not correct.

    Of course, if your answer is that not only are the prosecutors and judge in cahoots, but they were aided and abetted by a defense team that intentionally failed to raise objections that they knew would exonerate him, and Keith may additionally become the victim of an appellate lawyer who is also in on the conspiracy to imprison him, then you’re on the crazy train.

    You should also step back and realize that the government put together the minimum case they figured would achieve their intended result: getting him off the street as long as possible. If this case is overturned, they’ll be right back at him with tax evasion and all sorts of other charges. There’s plenty more bad behavior where this came from, and they’ll keep grinding away at him until he’s neutralized. So, it doesn’t really matter whether he successfully appeals this conviction.

    • NOT COOL, JOHN!

      Plagiarism is for [redacted], communists, florists and Mitch Carroty.

      Here is my comment made at 3:20 pm:
      “Keith’s attorney did not object nearly enough.” -Nice Guy

      “You can steal my thunder, but I’ll never let you ride my jock.”— Wu-Tang Clan

    • ‘You should also step back and realize that the government put together the minimum case …’ Well said JC.

      Yes. We are being bored to death by a bunch of cult-steppers who drone on and on imagining they did nothing but have ‘kinky sex’ Guys you need to get out more. There’s kinkier, harder, dirtier sex on, freely available to any citizen, Apps. No one is stopping you from servicing yourselves and others any way you like. So long as you don’t set up an exploitative blackmailing, racketeering, tax-fiddling cult. Fill your boots.

      There is so much more to this than the government chose to prosecute, acres of evidence. It took a fraction to lock away a fraction of you all. Keep this up. You’ve certainly persuaded me that the full measure of justice for Nxivm has yet to be served.

  • You have a cynical and inaccurate view of mankind if you believe juries cannot tell the difference between sex and sex crimes and abuse. The world’s smartest child rapist chose a jury trial.

  • The most delicate thing I see here is that people view it as OK to skip due process if there exist enough details they consider morally wrong.
    Although some of the things described are situations that I wouldn’t choose, I agree with Suneel, none of those things are crimes, they don’t even really appear to be morally wrong at first glance. Maybe if there was context provided, people could make a better assessment regarding the morality of it all. Take for example someone demanding another person to show up dressed sensually, tosay nothing, and to just please them sexually; I can imagine this as a sensual interaction that can make a couple excited, it’s actually mild compared to what a lot of people do to get themselves going. If you take a few things like this out of context, the picture looks bad even if it’s not.
    Good job getting people to think critically Suneel.

    • These situations were presented to give context to the actual things he was found guilty of doing. The defense had every opportunity to provide context to the context.

    • You could study the list of criminal charges filed against Keith Raniere for some “CONTEXT.” Take off the lemming blinders, for heaven’s sake. Or perhaps more aptly, come out, come out! Whoever, wherever you are. These useless denials serve one purpose, and that is to demonstrate what thinking with a lame brain is. Limp but not limpid. It is just like watching smog. After it finally rains awhile, the mountains show up unobscured, not having gone anywhere at all, really. Bone up about “predicate acts” while you’re at it, as it is topical when trying to apply context to what is and what is not permissible evidence, for either the prosecution or for the defense to use.

  • I don’t mind him posting but these articles by these people always almost wilfully blindly exclude all the crimes of KR. He was only convicted of some. There seem to have been very many others too. Part of my original interest in this was the BDSM side of it, the fact some of those things are legal (not all, though, in many places – .g., you cannot consent in law in some places to some supposedly consensual acts and brands and beatings) and how you draw the line but it became quickly clear a whole host of wrong things had been done. The fact it’s hard to pin a crime on a cult leader like being blindfolded and pinning the tail on the donkey but they managed it here is a testament to the wise prosecutors, the persistent parens, the victims litigated into the ground financially, and the sensible judge, never mind, of course, the jury.

    The pattern of how the women were abused is classic and just how it happens in so many other groups. Some are conned into thinking they are the one and only. Or that what will be done to them is X and it is Y. They are persuaded into a country where they have no rights to stay as happened with FDLS girls moved from Texas up to Canada, their lack of legal status and money meant they had few choices. Or their successful careers are removed from them as they are conned into giving their all to the leader as with Scientology sea org people rather than building up a profitable business. If they leave, they are sued again and again and again totally disproportionately in the way a normal enterprise would never do as the cost would not be worth the gain – revenge is the motive because most of these groups are the opposite of being about love.

    I have not been entirely in favour of the new English law criminal offence of “coercive control” because of how hard it is to distinguish it from true consensual power exchange relationships but I can see why we added to the law in that way because it can be so hard to pin an offence on this kind of conduct.

    I can never remember all the wrongs done by KR because the loyal Nx5 churn out their pro KR PR but there were a vast number of things done from computer hacking to not paying wages, to branding without people knowing that would be done, never mind underage sex. These are not minor things. This is not a dreadful miscarriage of justice. Instead it was justice done.

    The defence had their chance and could not convince the jury. KR lost. You don’t tend to get two bites at the cherry at these things and you bring everything up for your defence early and well before the trial. It is not like in films.

  • Suneel-

    I AGREE that the prosecution did play the “sully and dirty him up game.” You are 100% right.

    There is no such thing as a fair trial or a fair fight for that matter. Sometimes the defense is stronger than the prosecution. OJ Simpson had an excellent defense. Keith’s attorney did not do the best job in the world.

    Unfortunately, that is how things work. I do believe Keith Raniere is guilty. I also agree with you that some of the prosecution’s tactics were not “ethical”. You are right about that fact. My wife’s friend from law school was a prosecutor. He would state on occasion he felt bad for the defendant because the “defendant’s attorney was awful.” He also said that, regardless of how he felt, his job was to represent the state of Massachusetts to the best of his ability.
    _________________________
    Keith’s attorney did not object nearly enough.
    ————————————————

    A modern trial, in reality, is simply intellectual trial by combat.

    • It does seem like Keith’s lawyers didn’t object nearly enough. I wonder why. Maybe he should apply for ineffective counsel?

      • WW1984-

        Trials are adversarial by nature with a winner and a loser or, in other words, a zero-sum game.

        I believe Kieth Raniere is guilty.

        I believe Kieth Raniere was given a fair trial, RELATIVELY speaking.

        I believe Kieth’s attorney should have objected more.

        I believe the outcome would have been the same. Guilty. That’s what Suneel does not understand.

        *************************
        I agree with Suneel’s points about fairness and the somewhat immoral tactics the prosecutors used in Keith’s case. But the prosecutors did not break the rules of the law. The prosecutors used all the tools and weapons legally available.

  • Suneel has brought up a great point that has actually made me question my previously made assumptions about the trial. The “crimes” in question are not actually crimes, and blowjobs are not crimes, yet the prosecution has artfully tried to depict Keith as a terrible person because of his sex life. Even though I don’t like Keith, I think these are valid points.

    • Also, what about TONGUES?
      This is merely another salient detail to disqualify Suneel’s apparently limited, possibly secondhand info about oral sex. He just keeps slipping up.

      As Popeye used to say, “this is embarrasskin.’

      • I do understand why Suneel did not mention teeth. However, I am not sure that Suneel would understand any of the fine points (hahaha) regarding blowjobs.

        And another thing terribly, terribly missing here is any oral reciprocation. Colonel Lingus is pissed about it.

        For even though yes, these groupies are somewhat repulsive, no one ought to snatch away their vague attempts, as a group, to find a bit of pleasure. At least a five second heat wave or something or maybe that long-sought blue light special! Cheap bastards.

        None of Raniere’s slaves were any good at math, or it would be inherently understood that one man is never enough.

        Helen Gurley Brown just stomped quite a few holes into her astral cloud-bank. She thought that she had explained things well back in 1965, with Sex and the Single Girl. Poor Suneel.

        • Keith-Mart went out of business. Suneel is hawking obsolete merchandise. Who sold him this bill of goods? Also, never ever take any sexual gossiping seriously when it comes out of a nontypically chinless fellow.

          God help me, but for some reasonless reason, I imagined that EVERYONE on earth already knew that. Chinlessness can be a genuine sexual disadvantage or deficit. You’re welcome. Save yourself any extraneous efforts. There are so many fish in the sea. Think about temporariness. Besides, there’s always masturbation if one is so inclined. Remember Cool Hand Luke? Was he a disciple, too?

  • Frank, I get free speech is important but I can’t take it!

    Dude, KR was a FRAUD!!

    You can’t seem to grasp the bigger picture. He LIED about who he was. He exploited people. Do you really think it’s humanity to treat women like this despite the age of consent?

    I’m a woman and I certainly think it was a disgrace to have women believe group sex/blowjobs would be an evolutionary event to women’s existence and value. It’s horrific that you’re the kind of person to support this perverse way of thinking.

    Do you have sisters? You have a mother. Could you really support this for the women related to you?

    Imagine if someday you have a daughter. What kind of man are you?

  • Suneel to appellate court:

    “He was convicted or moral turpitude, your honors. He was dirtied up. There’s no law against getting blow jobs. His partners were all blowing him voluntarily, your honors.”

    Appellate court to Suneel:

    “If his partners were all blowing him voluntarily, why would it be necessary to hold onto blackmail material to compel them never to leave?”

    Suneel to appellate court:

    “Your honors, it wasn’t blackmail material he was holding onto. It was merely humiliating personal material which, if leaked, might destroy their lives — which served to solidify their solemn vow to never leave Keith.”

    Appellate court to Suneel:

    “Aha. So it’s not blackmail material. Okay. That makes sense. It’s just humiliating personal material which, if leaked, would destroy their lives? Got it. Son, are you on crack? Judgement upheld.”

    Suneel to Appellate court:

    “Your honors, I’m taking this matter to the US Supreme Court. My Vanguard means the world to me.”

    Apellate court to Suneel:

    “Bailiff, take this man into custody. He’ll be given a 72 hour mental health evaluation to determine if he’s fit for living outside of an asylum.”

    • Bangkok,

      This latest comment is one of the best comments you have made in a really longtime. You must have swallowed a bottle of smart pills or you’ve stopped breast feeding.

      I am honestly proud of you. You have surpassed yourself. Keep in mind Frank and I keep the bar set especially low for you.

      • Bangkok-

        I hope you know my comments are meant in good fun. Do not take them personally.
        *****

        You should know your last comment is ‘somewhat intelligible’ and shows your improving your writing and analytical skills.
        😉

  • Suneel– if you think what you described is normal “sex behavior”, you’re sadly wrong. And I do hope you never ever treat women that way.

    There’s swingers and wife swappers and s&m–yup, we get it–but they’re not in jail, are they? They haven’t branded people, have they? Piped minors in across the borders.

    1. Frank, it WAS proper to post this, because the nitty gritty must be told, and no other media outlet will tell it.

    2. Suneel– the facts, texts, victim impact statements– all very, very disturbing.

    None of this happened in a vacuum. It goes hand in hand with the charges. Its an ingredient to a larger picture you’re not getting.

    3. What is MOST disturbing is YOU JUST DON’T SEE IT. PLEASE GET HELP.

  • I just have one burning question today: If KAR or any NXIAN’s or ex-NXIAN’s or ex-consultants, apart from Mr. Stone, do get a POTUS Pardon from Trump, what NYS charges might be brought instead of the Federal ones and how soon would those have to be filed to hold Keith in prison?

    Thank you.

  • Hi Frank, what is the date of the header picture for this article and where was it taken? From Allison’s hair color, I’m guessing sometime between 2012-2014 but would be good if you could put dates, or at least a year on the photos that you use. Also, who is the woman between Keith and Bonnie P and the woman between Clare and Allison? Thank you

    • Free speech David. I’m in favor of free speech that I despise, not just the free speech I agree with. Instead of wanting this censored, persuade Suneel he is wrong.

      He believes this, so if it is palpably false, it should be easy enough to rebut – with more free speech.

      • Frank,
        Yes, free speech matters. But continuing to publish Suneel’s boring, immature, arguments on FR, are only giving him the false sense that what he is saying makes sense and matters. Meanwhile, he listens to none of the very clear evidence and arguments that some more educated in the law have put forth.

        Why doesn’t he respond to KR Claviger’s very logical arguments? Suneel clearly doesn’t understand the law and it’s so annoying to see his lame posts one after the other.

        Has he not read any of the rebuttals to his stupid rants?! What does he have to say about any of that?

      • Frank, with all due respect, while you are an expert on NXIVM and many are grateful for your central role in taking it down, your response here shows you are uninformed about cults.

        What is happening is that those like Suneel, like most cult members, are so emotionally bonded to their leader at this point, where they don’t see the harm that is being done to them or others. And they are not open to evidence or reason.

        They will rather resist any challenges to their beliefs. And so, what you do is you don’t try to persuade them, you try to correct the circumstances that led to those beliefs. And that, first of all, is to separate them from their leader, which you’ve done. Secondly is to offer them emotional support, including social support; a place of belonging, a means of attaining dignity. Your call for freedom of speech is really just a platform for them to perpetuate their delusion.

        You make them stronger, you do not help healing or understanding. I suggest you stop providing this platform.

        • To Roger S..January 18, 2021 at 3:54 pm

          I support your statement. You are right in what you say. Frank Parlato’s attempt is the wrong way. It is not helpful, but only prolongs and amplifies the damage done. This blog cannot deprogram anyone and is no substitute for a psychologist or therapy.

          The only additional thing accomplished is to disavow Suneel Chakravorty and others so much that the Frank Report helps them commit social suicide. It seems that the Frank Report is helping to ruin these people for the rest of their lives.

        • Free speech pertains to the government. Not blogs. Common misconception. Learn & know your rights! The disinformation about rights is a leading cause of entitlement.

          • I didn’t make the claim, the owner of this blog did. Common error to not read for comprehension. Learn and know your words! The disinformation about words is a leading cause of Libtards.

      • Frank, free speech is great except Suneel and the other brainwashed followers, don’t acknowledge or seem take in at all the very sound, logical free speech from some of the commentators like KR Claviger.

        There is zero response. It makes me think they don’t read them. Or sadly don’t comprehend it at all— as the sound of their NX programming is too loud.

      • You are one of the few free speech outlets around these days! Thank you for what you’re doing. Bringing people with VERY different perspectives together for public discourse is a noble cause and I commend you for it. Keep it up!

        • Free speech pertains to your rights with the government. Not blogs. Please learn your rights. It is leading to confusion and entitlement.

    • It is 100% necessary to post this. No one believes horror until they get to see it. No one would believe how horrible the holocaust was until the footage was released.

      Now the world will know the true sociopathic nature of what the female Nxivm victims endured. It is secret no more. The devil is in the details.

      And for everyone who has the balls to go on the record with their name and reputation and endorse this as “free sex”, it’s their reputation on the record forever.

      A lasting tarnish when they finally wake up.

      HAS ANYONE MADE THE DALI LAMA AWARE OF THIS?

  • Well stated, logical, and clear once again, Suneel.

    If group blowjobs and having sex with multiple partners is a crime, most professional athletes, rock stars and celebrities would be behind bars.

    I was also at the trial as a spectator and experienced the same tactics by the prosecution taking things way out of context, especially with the Cami texts. If you take any text from any one of us on here and place the message out of context, it could make anyone look bad.

    To the contrary, when I was reading the parts of the message that were not highlighted by the prosecution, I found Keith in his messages to Cami to be caring, concerned, and compassionate. Keep up the good work, Suneel.

    Thanks for posting, Frank.

  • It does appear that Keith miscalculated the “surprisingly conservative” – quoting Keith – composition of the jury; judging by Keith’s first appearance before them in a grungy, some call sexy, man bun.

    Backfired along with all Keith’s attempts over many years to normalize his psychotic, criminal behavior. Same old, same old rape justification when we now know rape has nothing to do with love making or sex as most of of define it. KAR may be the century’s best living example of that fact.

    Btw, again, Frank and Kristin Keeffe, doesn’t some of Keith’s handwriting in your pic of him here look very similar to some found on Gina’s NXIVM, EM chart? How’s that handwriting analysis coming along?

  • Oh, my…This is another PR fail. I don’t have the patience to explain why every single thing brought up in court was part of the case and supported the overall portrait of Keith Raniere the self-help mob boss. & grandmaster of a sex slave ring. But for now: it wasn’t an issue raised and won by the defense. It is irrelevant now after the trial. The prosecution ” builds a case” pre-trial. There are many tiny pieces of information that corroborate evidence. If your case is a sex case – many of those tiny pieces may be sexual in nature. If your texts, emails, recordings are sexual and the criminal case involves sex crimes, they are relevant. More importantly, you just wrote a piece mentioning blow jobs a record number of times. You worked on it. Labored over it. Proofread it. You spent your free-time detailing blow jobs someone who is not you got. A deep blow job dive. A fellatio expose. You even covered a group blow job that did not happen. You may have asked a cult member to edit your blow job missive. Then you posted your blow jobs of Keith Raniere manifesto. To defend a pedophile convict. Viva Executive Success!

  • This points are very interesting Suneel. I do recognize I immediately have a prejudice with this. I feel this things are bad. But then you say they are not illegal and you bring a great point. it is true all of it, all the sex stuff discloses was not illegal. It just feels bad, and although I don’t agree with that lifestyle as I consider myself more conservative and as uncomfortable I find it, you bring a great point this things are not illegal. It does make me thing bad about Keith and judge him as a perv, but again you are right I believe this has nothing to do with any of the charges. Like what does this have to do with tax evation? Or racketeering, etc. The sex trafficking charge would be the only one you would think of but having partners talk about how he might be a perv has nothing to do with sex trafficking definitely hard to swallow topics and again sounds like Keith has an entire lifestyle and a way he relates with women I do not agree with but not illegal. Great article Suneel definitely hard to read.

  • I can’t even read this entire article, the same point comes to mind time and time again. Keith not only had a lawyer, but from what I understand a good one, who would have brought up all these points on cross examination and in closing arguments. If he didn’t, then you can’t blame the prosecution, the court, or the system. Cry me a river.

  • We have the right to CHOOSE even when the Department of Injustice doesn’t approve
    Keith is a victim of media hate RAPE
    WHO runs the media? WHY are they silencing Keith?
    Why was Edgar M. Bronfman President of the World Jewish Congress out to smear Keith?
    What are they afraid of him exposing?
    #keithtoo

    Maya Angelou said

    “I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life’s a bitch. You’ve got to go out and kick ass.”

    “Stepping onto a brand-new path is difficult, but not more difficult than remaining in a situation, which is not nurturing to the whole woman.”

    “What you’re supposed to do when you don’t like a thing is change it. If you can’t change it, change the way you think about it. Don’t complain.”

    “When someone shows you who they are believe them; the first time.”

    “We delight in the beauty of the butterfly, but rarely admit the changes it has gone through to achieve that beauty.”

    “Courage is the most important of all the virtues because without courage, you can’t practice any other virtue consistently.”

    “You may shoot me with your words, you may cut me with your eyes, you may kill me with your hatefulness, but still, like air, I’ll rise!”

    • Maya Angelou would revile you. And Vanguard. She would never support supporters of sex trafficking, branding women, child porn. You are a sad, sad person. You are not on the moral high ground.

    • Women are not Children-

      —Why was Edgar M. Bronfman President of the World Jewish Congress out to smear Keith? What are they afraid of him exposing?

      Amazing! The Jews are always involved. Most alt-right racists believe the Jews control Black people. Most far-left people believe the Jews secretly run the world’s economy at the expense of the common people. Which is it today?

      Clare’s and Sarah’s dad is a Jew as well as the Salzmans. I guess by your logic those are the only good Jews in the world. So sad that there are only four good Jews. I wonder who you’d blame if the Jews weren’t around. Maybe the Italians or the Blacks?

  • You mean to say the statements were INFLAMMATORY, much like the cold weather is to my joints right now.

    When we have something INFLAMMATORY, we take an ANTI-INFLAMMATORY like aspirin or ibuprofen.

    In your case, may I suggest another ANTI-INFLAMMATORY called PREPARATION H, because I think you have one serious HEMORRHOID called VANGUARD who is being a PAIN in all our asses.

    • “Keith would have stipulated in court that he had a lot of sex — blow jobs, group blow jobs, threesomes, cunnilingus – you name it – with lots of different women.” Suneel. So why didn’t he? He gave no defense except for to do the same tasteless thing you object to on survivors of his abuses. Where were Keith’s supporters? And don’t tell me they were bullied by the government. They are as toothless as Keith by not showing up to defend him under oath. This is despicable what Make Justice Blind and the whole lot are doing to corrupt a system that is holding Keith Rankere, a con man, accountable.

  • Suneel. You are smarter than this; I think. KAR is not convicted for having relationships with women. He is convicted because he had sex with an underaged girl. You can NOT reason that away with your deluded accusations of the prosecution “dirtying up” the felon. That, he himself did when he raped a minor.

    • Sex with an underage girl was not a charge in the case .. at all! You can bet you a$$ if there was any proof of sex with an underage girl whatsoever it would have been there. See how they fooled you into thinking it was though? Precisely Suneel’s point. I suggest you do even the slightest bit of research before re-spreading lies that you bought.

      • Maybe you’ve forgotten, but he was also charged with two counts of Sexual Exploitation Of A Child — and one count of Possession of Child Pornography. But those counts were dismissed because of jurisdictional issues — and referred to the Northern District of New York for prosecution. What do you have to say about those charges?

        PS/The Possession of Child Pornography issue that you’re referencing was not a charge. Instead, it was one of the sixteen underlying predicate acts for the Racketeering charge. Some of the other predicate acts — all of which the jury concluded had been proven — included Sexual Exploitation Of A Child and Sex Trafficking. What say you to those proven acts?

        • Attorney Claviger,

          Re Your Obstinate Clients/Audience:

          “Maybe You have forgotten”; Sixteen underlying predicate acts”; “racketeering charge”; “proven acts”;
          and yada-yada-yada.

          Claviger, I am reporting you to P.E.T.A for beating a dead horse post mortem, you sicko! You can’t lead a horse to water or a wayward client to reality. Please remember you’re working Pro Bono; it’s time to withdraw/recuse yourself.

          Then again maybe you have a masochistic side. Got your hair-shirt and nipple clamps on? 🙂

        • Hi K.R. Claviger. The “sexual exploitation of a child” I believe was in relation to the possession of child pornography. Have you seen the evidence regarding how the government tampered with the evidence for the alleged child pornography? Remember, even the prosecution’s own FBI witness testified under oath, someone accessed and altered the hard drive.

        • There won’t be any answer available from Suneel and co. Desperate mentalities often stick with unrealistic ideations, due to their personal motivations. This is pretense, artificial argument, essentially baseless but seeking attention anyhow. Emotionalism looks for ways to justify itself that sound “rational” but that stance, that posturing, will avoid analyzing any argument which doesn’t bolster their own motive.

          It is similar to dealing with a seeing-eye dog who cannot see beyond his or her very own nose.

  • This post settles it: Suneel is a NXIVM apostate who’s playing a long con troll–he’s feigning being a bitter-end acolyte to make The World’s Smartest Rapist™ look even more like a total tool.

    In a month or so he comes out and says “Surpise! You’ve all been punked!” and reveals he’s been filming a reality show this entire time.

    Suneel’s performance here will be revealed to be on comedic par with Andy Kaufman’s pro wrestling shtick.

    You had me going for a few weeks, Suneel. Well played, Sir!

  • Suneel seems obtuse. Did he really go to Harvard? I wonder how he got into Harvard. Was it connections? Money? Was he a special exchange student on an experimental program? Perhaps someone can contact their administration and tell them one of their former students is defending a convicted sexual predator.

    Keith was charged with sex trafficking and sex trafficking conspiracy. That he formed a coercive sex cult for himself is indicative of this. His (at the time current) and past sexual behavior is fair game and goes to establishing motive. No one has to “dirty him up” by relating his behavior because Keith is already a filthy old pervert.

  • To his main point, yes Raniere’s sex history was used against him. Ask any sex worker, this is an all too common practice. It wouldn’t work if people were not hung up about sex and acted like it was this great sin. For me it fell under no shit he is having a bunch of sex. It is part of what makes the branding and collateral so much worse. He literally didn’t need to do it except it stroked his ego. He could have had his choice of women. Any one of them would have fucked them with very little effort on his part (which likely was the problem for him.). Using sex against someone is not new, it’s not going to change, and it’s the defense’s job to know it’s coming and prepare accordingly. Again, as throughout Suneel’s pathetic attempt at analysis shows, he keeps laying failures of the defense on the prosecutor. He knows so little that he is unable to tell where one job ends and the other begins. The man is a moron trying to sound smart. Frankly, it reminds me of “the smartest man in the world.” We sure he isn’t just passing on Raniere’s words?

    Suneel should lose all credibility for anyone. He keeps ignoring the house-sized elephant in the room. He is unable to acknowledge that Raniere is a pedophile or even attempt to contest it.

    This is a fundamental weakness all current NXIVM members have about Raniere. It’s one of the ways you can ID them in the comments. They have to ignore this ugly truth to keep their hero on his pedestal. To acknowledge means that to then ask “who did I actually believe in? Is he worth fighting for? Did I throw my life away for a pedophile?!?” They can’t confront that, so they don’t.

    His having underage pictures is dismissed as an FBI conspiracy. The rapes are woman changing their minds later so doesn’t count. But the whole screwing an underage girl in Mexico, they just ignore it as if it never happened. It’s not even something Raniere denies. It just wasn’t a charge because it happened outside of US jurisdiction. Raniere crossed an unforgivable ethical line and because it wasn’t part of the US case, it’s “Pedo-what? This word doesn’t mean anything to me.”

    It takes an extra special morally-broke person to be so obsessed with defending someone that you rely on semantics, vague moral accusations, and twisting of words — and yet ignore two of the most important aspects of the case – pedophilia and rape. Or as we see here, just dismiss it as some prosecutor tactic that never happened.

    Suneel is clearly a member of NXIVM, and he clearly has a motive for his defense of Raniere. What he doesn’t have is any excuse for his bankrupt morality to acknowledge the clear pain and hurt a then child (now woman) and other women have gone through due to Raniere’s actions. To dismiss it all as just a tactic that made Raniere the victim… that is damn near evil.

    Thankfully, this thought exercise doesn’t mean shit and fingers crossed that Raniere isn’t on the list of names that psychopath plans on releasing Wednesday. After Wednesday, Raniere’s ass is permanently cooked. None of Suneel’s questions that I am sure he is quite proud of rises to the point of doing jack all to the case. There will be no overturn, there will be no re-trial. At most, there might be a reduced sentence from until he is really really really dead to just really dead (aka anything over 30 years).

    At first, I was amused by Suneel’s thought exercise. Thought it was fun. It’s no longer fun. It’s sick. He should no longer be given attention or credibility.

    • I believe the charge was child pornography, which is different than having sex with a minor.
      Having sex with a minor is a crime in the United States and that would require a trial to examine.

      • He had sex with a minor in Mexico thus why no charges in USA. Just because I can fly to some country and screw a minor doesn’t mean I didn’t do something repugnant even if legal there.

      • Yes. But you could argue that taking naked photos of a child is a sexual act. Vanguard was obsessed with his home porn. The child was posed in a sexual way. He got off on it. She was used sexually.

      • Camila and Rhiannon reported his “sex with a minor” crimes. So did Gina Melita who said she was 15 when Raniere took her virginity.
        Gina Hutchinson’s sister, Heidi, claims Raniere raped Gina when Gina was 15.

        Why wasn’t he charged with those crimes? Why wasn’t he charged with more crimes than the proven child pornography he was convicted of? If he ever got out he would be. What does it even feel like trying to justify a pedophile with petty legalisms?

        Why was his sexual history brought up? When you are charged with sex trafficking and other sex crimes, it is relevant.

        • Had the Northern District of New York (NDNY) ever investigated Keith and brought charges against him there, he could have been facing even prison time that he ended up with in the Eastern District of New York (EDNY) case. And the potential NDNY charges definitely included many more sex-related crimes.

          • To K.R. Claviger.January 18, 2021 at 12:16 pm

            But that doesn’t just apply to Raniere, it also applies to Allison Mack, who could also be charged with other sexual crimes.

          • Clav, could any of these uncharged sex crimes (or otherwise) be charged by the State in the (God in Hellsinki forbid) – event a Federal pardon is purchased?

          • This is a little complicated but let me try to break it down.

            There is currently no statute of limitations for first-degree rape in New York State. But for first-degree rapes that occurred before 2006, the statute-of-limitations was 5-years.

            Under legislation that was signed into law in 2019, the current statute of limitation for second-degree rape is 20 years — and the current statute of limitation for third-degree rape is 10 years. But those limitations only apply to rapes that occurred after that legislation became effective (Before that, the statute of limitation for both was 5-years).

            First-degree rape is defined as sexual intercourse (a) with a person by forcible compulsion, (b) with a person who is physically helpless, (c) with a person who is less than 11 years old, and/or (d) with a person who is less than 13 years old and the perpetrator is 18 or older.

            Second-degree rape is defined as sexual intercourse (a) with a victim who is “incapable of consent by reason of being mentally disabled or mentally incapacitated” and/or (b) with a victim who is under 15 years old and the perpetrator is 18 or older.

            Third-degree rape is defined as sexual intercourse with a victim who is (a) incapable of consent and/or (b) with a victim who is under 17 years old and the perpetrator is 21 or older.

            All in all, I doubt that Keith can be legally prosecuted for very many of the rapes he allegedly committed in New York State.

            But I should also note that New York State has its own RICO Act — i.e, the Organized Crime Control Act of 1986 — and that its use has been expanded over the years in a very similar fashion to the way the use of the federal RICO law has been expanded. So, if the Saratoga County DA wanted to prosecute Keith for many of the same crimes he was charged with by the feds, that’s probably how they would do it.

            But

      • When you take a photo of a child in explicit nude poses it is sexual. Are you really not aware of that fact? Or just very, very forgiving because you love Keith? Or maybe you don’t think creating pornographic images of child is sexual exploitation?

    • There is no way around this fact. ☝️ Suneel should direct his efforts towards helping someone who deserves it and not a pedophile. What a sad individual. Being used and abused by KR even with him in prison.

    • Then why wasn’t he charged for this? I think if this were true there would be SOME evidence of this ANY evidence of this would exist and surely would have been used by the prosecution in trial and to bring a charge. Are you kidding me? This would have been all they’d have to do. He was however charged with a child pornography possession charge that came solely from having naked pictures of Cami on what has been proven and certified by 5 top forensic experts to have been tampered with while in FBI custody. They didn’t have anything so they had to plant it. Do the math.

      • Why didn’t Keith’s attorneys call any of those “5 top forensic experts” to inform the jury that the evidence had “been tampered with while in FBI custody”? I did the math — and that decision comes up as a ZERO.

        • LMAO! Forensic Experts? LMAO?

          I looked up the experts. They are all jokes along with their ridiculous patents. The chief expert resides outside the United States and has a questionable resume. The other shoddy experts don’t even have degrees. They have certificates from unaccredited organizations.

          I can go to a webinar and be issued a certificate as well. Come to think of it, maybe there is a way for Bangkok to get a college certificate/degree. The GED eludes him.

About Frank Parlato

Frank Parlato Investigates

Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist.

His work has been cited in hundreds of news outlets, like The New York Times, The Daily Mail, VICE News, CBS News, Fox News, New York Post, New York Daily News, Oxygen, Rolling Stone, People Magazine, The Sun, The Times of London, CBS Inside Edition, among many others in all five continents.

His work to expose and take down NXIVM is featured in books like “Captive” by Catherine Oxenberg; “Scarred” by Sarah Edmonson; “The Program” by Toni Natalie, and “NXIVM. La Secta Que Sedujo al Poder en México” by Juan Alberto Vasquez.

Parlato has been featured prominently on HBO’s docuseries “The Vow” and acted as lead investigator and coordinating producer for Investigation Discovery’s “The Lost Women of NXIVM.” He was credited in the Starz docuseries, 'Seduced,' for saving 'slave' women from being branded and escaping the sex-slave cult known as DOS.

Parlato has appeared on the Nancy Grace Show, Beyond the Headlines with Gretchen Carlson, Dr. Oz, American Greed, Dateline NBC and NBC Nightly News with Lester Holt, where Parlato conducted the first-ever interview with Keith Raniere after his arrest, which was ironic since many credit Parlato as being one of the primary architects of his arrest and the cratering of the cult he founded.

IMDb — Frank Parlato

If the whole world stands against you sword in hand, would you still dare to do what you think is right?

Got A Tip?

If you have a tip for Frank Report, send it here.
Email: frankparlato@gmail.com
Phone / Text: (305) 783-7083

Archives