Suneel Responds to Health Professional Who Said Raniere Was a Textbook Human Trafficker – Blasts Prosecution and Judge in His Case

Suneel Chakravorty is being asked by Bangkok to kindly provide some proof or at least a plausible explanation.

Suneel Chakravorty is a supporter and advocate for Keith Raniere, a man convicted of federal crimes including sex trafficking, forced labor and racketeering with predicate acts of possession of child porn [about 20 pictures of a then-15-year-old girl] and sexual exploitation of a minor [he allegedly took the pictures].

[Note: Suneel says the pictures were tampered with by the FBI]

Raniere was tried in 2019, and at the end of a six-week trial, the jury took fewer than five hours to convict him on all counts. He was sentenced in 2020 to 120 years in federal prison by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis. Last week he was transferred to the U.S. Penitentiary in Tucson, a facility that both is a maximum-security prison and provides special programs for convicted sex offenders. More than 60 percent of the inmates there are convicted sex offenders. Unless he prevails on his appeal, this may very well be Keith Raniere’s final and permanent home.

Keith Raniere Prison USP Tucson Arizona
USP Tucson; Photo Credit: Arrington Watkins Architects


Nxivm Keith Raniere Holding Hands with Unknown Person
Keith Alan Raniere in a photo that appears to have been taken in 2009, some nine years before he was arrested.

Suneel argues that Raniere’s trial was fundamentally unfair, that the prosecution committed misconduct, and that the judge was biased against Raniere. For this, he wants to see Raniere freed or at least be granted a new trial.

The odds of that happening —based on the normal odds of a convicted felon winning a reversal of a conviction via a federal appeal — are about 20 to 1. It would take a complete reversal of the conviction — on each and every count — to warrant dismissal of his conviction.

Suneel’s stance in support of Raniere has garnered him many critics and a few supporters. One of his critics is a reader who uses the handle “Lucid Moment” who wrote, as a health professional, in elegant prose and in a compelling fashion, that Raniere was a textbook ‘human trafficker’ and that Suneel was essentially blind to this obvious truth. 

Suneel has chosen to respond.

By Suneel Chakravorty

Dear Lucid Moment,

I read your post ‘Health Professional Says Keith Raniere Checks Off All the Boxes of Human Trafficking’, which, in part, criticized my advocacy for Keith Raniere. I felt it was earnest criticism.

I think we agree on some issues. Obviously, we don’t see eye-to-eye on all the facts of this case. That may be because I know the facts better than you. After all, I attended every day of the trial. I painstakingly read every page of the transcripts and spent a year speaking to experts in the justice system trying to make sense of this. 

Here are your main comments and questions.

  1. “Who is funding Suneel’s time and effort in his defense of Keith Raniere?”
  2. “Why are you advocating for Keith?”
  3. That I am doing a “supreme disservice” to victims of human trafficking.
  4. That Keith “shamed, humiliated, dehumanized, manipulated, intimidated, triangulated, gaslighted” others.
  5. That Keith “assigned one of the victims to stay alone in a room.”
  6. That I am “turning a blind eye to the bigger picture” of the construct of Keith the trafficker.


“Who Is Funding Suneel’s Time and Effort in His Defense of Keith Raniere?”

I am entirely self-funded. I work as a software consultant and because I am successful at it, this allows me to spend time doing things that are important to me. To date, no one has ever paid me to do advocacy for Keith Raniere. 


“Why Are You Advocating for Keith?”

I am advocating for Keith Raniere because what I saw at his trial disturbed me greatly. 

At the time of the trial, Keith was not my friend. Prior to his arrest, we had talked for a total of three minutes. Our first substantive conversation was after the trial, in September 2019, in the visiting room of the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn.

Where Keith and I had our first actual conversation.

I chose to go to Keith’s trial because I had seen two years of headlines about a company I had been involved with and about its founder. The headlines were the opposite of what I had seen and experienced, both as a student and later as a volunteer coach for ESP/NXIVM, so I wanted to make sense of this enormous discrepancy and see the evidence for myself. 

Sketch of Keith Raniere Trial
Sketch of Keith Raniere at his Trial

At the trial, I expected to hear robust questions and well-reasoned arguments intended to elicit the truth and determine if the facts presented met the elements of the charges. What I saw instead was “evidence” and testimony that I believe were engineered to achieve a singular purpose: to make the jury hate Keith Raniere.

[The prosecution convinced the jury Raniere was a monster, using incendiary witness testimony, emails and texts unrelated to the charges.]

Admittedly, I was biased to the extent that I believe the classes Keith created were beneficial to me and others I’d coached.

Even if I had not benefited and had never seen Keith before, I am convinced that what I saw at his trial was a mockery of justice and a lasting disgrace to our country.


That I Am Doing a “Supreme Disservice” to Victims of Human Trafficking

Lucid Moment wrote, “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 themselves a crime…This is a supreme disservice to all women and all victims of human trafficking.”

The prosecution threw in sordid details, true or untrue, relevant or irrelevant, and propped up witnesses to conform to their narrative. They were trying to show a pattern of repugnant behavior. But if evidence has no probative value beyond inspiring disgust or outrage, then we must throw it out.

In my opinion, that is what Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis should have done. But he appeared to be swept away by his emotions and chauvinism.  He seems to have an old-fashioned view of women as weak creatures that need to be protected, coddled and defended instead of treating all people before him the same regardless of gender.

Lauren Salzman was more than 40 years old when she broke down and cried her way out of cross-examination.

I was shocked when the judge stopped the cross-examination of 40-something-year-old Lauren Salzman when she started crying. I know Lauren. She is an intelligent, strong, successful woman. She was also a co-conspirator in a federal criminal trial, facing up to 40 years in prison, and her testimony was critical to the case. 

One of the finest examples of chivalry I’ve ever witnessed was Judge Garaufis stopping the cross-examination of a crying 40-something woman, Lauren Salzman. Perhaps some may admire his gallant nature, but shouldn’t he treat everyone the same under the law regardless of their gender?

(Note that Lauren happened to cry just as she was about to contradict the claims she made in her plea deal — a plea deal that Judge Garaufis had accepted in his courtroom.)

Judge Garaufis had made his ruling: Unlike men, women are incapable of withstanding even a polite but probing cross-examination. Forget that it’s a violation of the US Constitution’s confrontation clause. I’m sorry, but I believe this sexist view is a supreme disservice to all women.

The prosecution’s case for sex trafficking, enabled by the judge, is even worse. 

A white, privileged actress in her late twenties co-designed a sex act with another woman that included bondage. Every step of the way, the actress consented — this was in her own sworn testimony. No violence. No threats of violence. No money was involved. She even said she consented to the act while it happened. She was asked if she wanted to continue. She said yes, she wanted to continue. 

You want us to “believe women”? Well, tell me, when do we believe her? When she says yes, beforehand, and at the moment, or later when she, prompted by the government, peer pressure, embarrassment or regret, retroactively says no?

A single oral sex act that didn’t directly involve Keith Raniere and without money changing hands — this is what the prosecution is calling “sex trafficking.”

Not calling this joke of a charge out is a supreme disservice to all true victims of actual human trafficking — women separated from their families, beaten or drugged by their captors, forced into sexual encounters for months or years, with no hope, no justice and not a single HBO docuseries or class-action lawsuit against heiresses to sustain them in their suffering.


Keith “Shamed, Humiliated, Dehumanized, Manipulated, Intimidated…”

You wrote: “He then shamed, humiliated, dehumanized, manipulated, intimidated, triangulated, gaslighted, and coerced them until enculturation and bondage seemed to them to be their only option.”

You boldly assert these accusations without providing any specifics that I can respond to.

It seems like you are following the prosecution’s playbook and divesting adult women of their agency, as if they had no ability to think for themselves and no obligation to speak up and tell the truth if they felt they were being coerced.

We are not talking about women sold into slavery, kept captive by force and sent out to be prostituted or into work camps or sweatshops for 25 cents a day.

I know many of the women who were in DOS. These were grown, affluent, privileged women who sought self-improvement. If you or anyone else were not committed to infantilizing them and instead took the time to know these women and women like them, you would know it’s preposterous to even consider that any man could shame, humiliate, dehumanize, manipulate, intimidate, gaslight, coerce or even employ his trigonometry skills and triangulate them.


That Keith “Assigned One of the Victims to Stay Alone in a Room.”

You wrote: “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.”

This needs a serious fact-check. Daniela [her last name was withheld from the public by the judge during the trial to protect her privacy], the woman you are referring to, was in her twenties at the time. She was not a child.

She admitted on the witness stand to criminal behavior — that she stole thousands of dollars from NXIVM, hacked into computers, and illegally entered the country.

The family wanted Keith’s help in dealing with an unruly and defiant daughter. Keith did not groom Daniela’s parents. These are adults. The father is an affluent Mexican businessman smart enough to own and run a successful company. It is a supreme insult to these people to suggest that they do not have the ability to think for themselves. 

That includes Daniela.

Daniela’s father, Hector, is a successful businessman in Mexico. Was he brainwashed by Keith Raniere? Or did he, as he said, knowingly try to find a remedy for what he believed were his daughter’s problems?

Perhaps the family should have called the police on Daniela when she committed the crimes she admitted to in her sworn testimony. However, it is my understanding that Keith thought she might be better served by doing some quiet reflection. 

It was supposed to be for a weekend. But Daniela chose to be stubborn and show Keith and her family that she would stay in the room until Keith, her parents and her family gave up and agreed to let her keep her old, destructive behaviors. 

The bedroom Daniela stayed in for nearly two years. The bedroom was in her family’s home and they made her meals and brought them to her three times daily. At all times, the bedroom door was unlocked [unless Daniela locked it from the inside. She was free to leave any time.]
Adjoining her bedroom is Daniela’s bathroom.

See more pics of the house on Zillow here.

Daniela stayed (rent-free) in her (unlocked) bedroom, in her family’s house, with the family there. She even “cheated” on the arrangement, sneaking out at night when she wanted.

The fact that Daniela was not charged for any of the crimes she admitted to under oath as part of the racketeering charges, and the fact that she is one of the strongest proponents of the prosecution’s narrative is something we need to examine more closely.

It was astonishing to me to hear that an adult woman who illegally entered the USA by presenting false identification to US Customs tried to blame it all on Keith Raniere. And she did.

Keith didn’t make Daniela return to Albany — she wanted to. She could have waited and done it legally, but she didn’t.

Oh yes, I know she was only 22 years old. But in the real world, that is an adult. A woman is an adult by age 22 and is responsible for her own decisions. Yet, her decision to commit a crime and come into the United States illegally is completely forgiven. 

In the eyes of Judge Garaufis and prosecutors Moira Kim Penza, Tanya Hajjar, Mark Lesko and Richard P. Donoghue, and perhaps your eyes too, Daniela is a helpless woman who can’t think for herself. 

Moira Kim Penza, now in private practice, was the lead prosecutor in the trial of Keith Raniere.


That I Am “Turning a Blind Eye to the Bigger Picture” of Keith, the Trafficker

You wrote: “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?”

Here is the bigger picture:

If I am correct about what happened to Keith and this truth is not exposed, then I believe the prosecutors and judges in the Eastern District of NY will continue to do what they did here in other, less high-profile cases — where no one is watching — and more innocent people will be led to the slaughter. 

About the author



Click here to post a comment

Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us! (Email & username are optional. To leave a name, click on the email icon)

  • I wonder why people who think Suneel must be paid off. Do they also think the same for the alleged victims in this trial? Why is it that some people can do things for the greater cause but not others?

  • It is important to remember that Suneel is the all-knowing, omnipresent eyes of Nxivm.

    Ears too. It began when he was a small child. Although not physically present in Keith’s life and presumably busy with grade school, Suneel knows better than anyone else what happened during this time in Keith Raniere’s life.

    Suneel knows first-hand about Rhiannon. In a very real sense, he was there. Like air. Or God himself.

    Suneel can look into the very heart of any woman who has had sex with Keith. Some say the pee hole of Keith’s penis is like the 3rd eye of Suneel.

    Suneel can look out from Keith’s penis into the vagina of all Keith’s women and experience their authentic soul. He knows who is lying. He knows who has been bad (like that thieving Daniela)!

    Suneel knows who’s been good for goodness sake (Nicki). Through Keith’s pee hole peephole Suneel sees it all. Private moments between only two people (and Suneel), abortion plans, what motivates every single person in Keith’s inner circle, and Nxivm as a (pee) whole.

    Suneel also has perfect recall of every conversation, event, and decision in Keith’s life (even though he hadn’t met him yet) for like 40 years.

    That’s impressive when you realize that Suneel has not been alive for 40 years.

    In conclusion: Media. Hate. Bias. Data.

  • As we noted previously, Camila’s texts were illegally manipulated by the Prosecutor’s Office by presenting fragments of conversations and not the original version, much less presented a translation certified by experts in the field to certify their authenticity, therefore they should not be admitted in the criminal process by the Judge, since they lack the minimum requirements by the Law, in such a way that they created confusion in the Jury, clouding their appreciation, therefore their verdict must be annulled in the application, since they constitute a Once again, violations of the due process protected by the Constitution, and as a consequence, the procedure will be restored through a new trial of Keith Raniere.

    • If these “fragments of conversations” were so unfair, why didn’t Keith’s attorneys simply call someone to read the rest of the conversations to the jury? That would certainly have allowed them to provide the context that you apparently feel was missing — and their failure to do so is why this will not be an issue that will even be considered by the appellate court.

  • The evidence in the criminal trial is of vital importance since it is directly related to the criminal act that it is intended to prove. However, the texts of Camila provided in the trial of Keith Raniere, totally lack probative value and therefore should not be admitted as evidence, since they were contributed reproducing them on paper or a copy of the original content, so these supports they do not demonstrate in an unassailable way that their content is a true reflection of the original document, in addition to the ease with which they were manipulated, altering their content, highlighting fragments of the conversation and not all the dialogue held, making it seem something that did not happen or that is, the content that works in the digital fort was not the same as the one that was contributed to the process, therefore, they do not have evidentiary effectiveness due to their illegality and lack of reliability.

    • Joshua, may I recommend that you try breaking up your thoughts into more than one sentence. It would be far more readable.

  • The jury trial is a judicial process with the participation of citizens supposedly “impartial people”, who do not have technical knowledge of the legal, judicial and legal fields and who through the procedure know the facts and evidence to analyze them and, based on them, issue a verdict , his function is regulated by an impartial judge who directs the process, unfortunately in the Keith Raniere trial this did not happen,

    because contrary to the above, Judge Garaufis manipulated the people in charge of judging, making them accomplices of an injustice since they influences with social damages, distorting the facts and evidence, negatively influencing them, kidnapping them before deliberation, impeding their performance with impartiality, on the contrary, advised them to issue their verdict of guilt unanimously and without deliberation, totally distorting the fundamental law of citizens, as is trial by jury.

      • Law school, no doubt.

        Snark aside, I’m genuinely concerned about Joshua because his writing style matches that of a friend of mine who suffers from schizophrenia. This is how he composes when he’s not on his meds.

        NXIVM is not good for anyone’s mental health. While I don’t think it could cause schizophrenia ex nihilo, it certainly could exacerbate or trigger it. But, the EM techniques sound so extreme, maybe it could cause it from scratch.

  • Zero stars

    This book of essays was described as factual data about women’s issues.

    The bio stated it was written by one of the “four leading specialists in forensic computer tampering. The author is a woman who is also a law professor who works in Anthony’s office”.

    It turns out this book was written by a man who is known as “the a cappella predator”.

    And the binding is terrible. Book fell apart as soon as I opened it.

    Stay away from this book. I do not recommend!

  • I’ve assigned my class to study this case. I have no relationship to NXIVM. I am totally objective and only interested in the data.

    I can totally assure everyone that Suneel is accurate about the sex trafficking charge being an unbelievable, unprecedented misuse of the law. It goes against all legislative intent. I’ve never seen a more biased, hateful, media trial in all my decades of teaching.

    The prosecutors did not prove the elements of the crime. They should be put in jail.

    Suneel is obviously very smart and I’m sure we would totally except him into our program if he applied. He has the potential to be a top lawyer if he decides he’d rather go into the law than focus on being a leader in coding and math.

    • “Data” gave you away. Just more proof that the remaining Nexians lie and lie and lie. You clearly have a “relationship” with NXIVM. The sex trafficking charge was valid and fully supported by the evidence.

      It saddens me to see young people wasting their lives to support a man who has no morals, a man who used people who trusted him for monetary gain and his sexual perversions. You still have time to reenter reality and live purposeful lives, perhaps working for criminal reform in justified cases. Raniere is not coming back; he will not win an appeal on his baseless claims. Will you continue to fight for him 10 years from now, 20 years from now when he is clearly undeserving? There are so many better things you can be doing with your lives. Please wake up.

      Please start thinking for yourselves. Consider that the truth of events may not be what Raniere told you it was. Consider that maybe Raniere had a different agenda than he claimed. Suneel writes about Daniella’s imprisonment based only on what Raniere has told him. In fact, Raniere may very well be writing these posts since Suneel is clearly not very articulate as evinced by the taped MDC phone conversations. Raniere was able to get Suneel his letter to Trump, so why not this post and the ridiculous 44 questions.

      It has become clear that your agenda is not to present evidence of Raniere’s innocence; there is no such evidence. If there was, it would surely have come out already. So, please stop trying to indoctrinate the people on FR into your twisted cult. It is incredibly disturbing. I will pray for all of you.

        • Lol, I’ve never seen a collective group use the word data, data, data ad nauseam quite like you Nxians! But that’s what Raniere taught you, right?

          No feelings, just data. Don’t trust your instincts, just accept the “data” I am feeding you.

          That’s a great way to kill a person’s fight or flight instinct that allows them to get the hell out of a dangerous situation. Have you ever considered that? I know he coerced the women to starve themselves so they could barely think straight but the men have no excuse.

          • Sherizzy, data is used by people to use data and logic to make their conclusions. Examples include: scientists, physicians, and mathematicians, and I guess, if you are correct, Nxians.

      • i thought it was supposed to be the other way around: that the burden of proof was on the accusers.

    • Thank you for the good laugh! Never mind the use of “data”, but using “hateful”, “ media” and saying the prosecutors deserve to be in jail because “they did not prove the elements of the crime”? You had to know you weren’t going to be taken seriously. Btw, I’m sure you would ACCEPT him into your program.

      • Anonymous at 12:06 pm. You are not seriously equating Nxians with scientists, etc.? Don’t you realize that Raniere used the word “data” as a way to make his “teachings” appear legitimate? This is not a new tactic. Other groups have also done this – Scientology!

        There also is no math behind rational inquiry – there is no formula. It’s a lie. Please accept it.

        And, while we’re here, would you explain the “data” proving Raniere’s baby-rape teachings, the women love rape teachings and, of course, let’s not forget, the molested children love being sexually abused teachings. Oh, and what country has a 12-year-old age of consent?

        Tell us the data, data, data, data proving those theories. I find it telling that every single Nxian refuses to answer those questions. Does Suneel believe these theories, Nicki?
        I think those of us on FR should comment on every Nxian post:

        Women enjoy being raped?
        Molested children love being sexually abused?

        • Data is about as general a word as there can be. It doesn’t really signify anything at all because data still has to be interpreted in a particular context.

          Are these NXIVM shills really this mentally stunted?

  • “ I think we agree on some issues. Obviously, we don’t see eye-to-eye on all the facts of this case. That may be because I know the facts better than you.”

    If you know, you know

  • Lucid Moment stated: “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 statement above makes women to be perceived as gullible and naive; as women who could be tricked, who could not speak for themselves, who did not have a choice but to stay in a situation they deemed undesirable.

    I, as Suneel, know many of the women who decided to participate in DOS, including the ones who changed their mind and decided to leave; this is why I disagree with the above statement (and I’m just addressing the perception of what it says as there are no facts stated.)

    Although there are still women in this world who face situations like the ones presented in the statement, the women who participated in DOS were, in my experience, neither naive nor gullible; actually quite the opposite, these were women who knew what they wanted, who had careers, who had built families, who were running companies, who were financially independent, they were women of potency (potency being ‘the power to influence’). Why do we continue to treat women like children?, where it is believed we cannot think for ourselves or get ourselves out of undesired situations by our own resources.

    It takes a brave man to assert that what this view of women does is ‘divesting adult women of their agency, as if they had no ability to think for themselves and no obligation to speak up and tell the truth if they felt they were being coerced’.

    It takes a brave man to want women to raise above being treated like children.

    I believe Suneel is a brave man.

    • The DOS defectors “changed their mind” due to new information.

      That Keith was the ” grandmaster”

      That they had been unknowingly branded with his initials.

      That criminal activity was involved.

      That their physical make over was for Keith’s sexual approval

      That Keith was the holder of blackmail

      That some of them would be asked to service Keith sexually.

      Changing your mind based on new information is a sign of intelligence.

      Stepping forward to help other women escape your plight is brave.

      Admitting you were fooled takes humility, critical thinking and self awareness.

      God bless the defectors of DOS!

      • A lot of your statements though are not supported by evidence in court. They are just supported by hearsay.

    • Women do not need men to “want” or “allow” or “teach” them anything about being female. Men don’t get to grant or deny women agency.

      Can you really not see how messed up that thinking is?

      Here I’ll play your “switch it” game…

      “It takes a brave white man to assert that this view of a black man…”.

      “It takes a brave white man to want black men to rise above being treated like children”

      Go through your other statements and switch them like this – as Nxivm loves to do!


      I’ll make sure to tell all the single moms I know about Suneel’s “helping them” by advocating for a child molester and pornographer.

      I can imagine their gratitude!

    • Why aren’t any of these bad-ass women publishing under their own names on Frank Report and only using pseudonyms?

      Why are these bad-ass women expecting a low-level NXIVM coach to speak for them?

        • Your sentence makes no sense.
          If they had done nothing illegal, they would have nothing to fear.
          Illogical excuse for cowardice.

          • This would be the most logical thing to think and it would be a great world to live in.

            Question is, what if that is not true? What if you can be accused of something without having done anything wrong?. I also thought the same as you; until it happened closer than I would have liked.

  • “Why Are You Advocating for Keith?” The same question arises on the other side and for many persons in the world advocating many causes. Is not that part of humanity?

  • As we have been observing, the attitude of Judge Garaufis was unequal throughout the process against Keith and we reaffirm it again with his determination that the prosecution’s witnesses should be known only by name and not the defense witnesses. , to those who did allow them to know each other by name and surname, which in addition to being illegal, is intimidating for said people, since as we know the persecution, threats and intimidation by the FBI, in the investigation was truly inhumane, in addition

    How such action is contrary to the Constitution because they violate the principles of equity and legal security, which undoubtedly negatively influences the objectivity of the Jury, who were influenced and manipulated on the facts necessary for the discovery of the truth and to base their ruling, when contrary to the above, the figure of the judge in the court must by constitutional mandate have a role as an impartial third party.

  • I thought the nurse wrote a really good article. She talked about how people in helping professions are trained to recognize abuse and signs of when people are being abused.

  • Zero stars.

    This shirt is not true green. More muddy brown-green. It is also itchy and has 3 sleeves

    When I opened the Amazon box it smelled like burning hair.

    Also, free Keith Raniere, he is in prison due to bias hate media.

  • I really like the idea of men accepting that we (women) can make decisions for ourselves. Although, is convenient to say “I didn’t know what I was doing” when I want to get away with something…. It’s definitively not to our own benefit in the long term as this behavior makes us extremely insecure for convincing ourselves that we’re stupid and don’t know what we are doing.
    Thank you, Suneel for acknowledging women’s decision power.

    • Why not just worry about yourself instead of speaking for all women?

      Because I know you haven’t spoken to all women.

      Part of being a strong person of either sex is saying, ” i” not ” we”.

      Unless you’ve been elected to speak for your condo board or something.

    • Collateral + Blackmail = Not Freewill

      How can women have decision power if they’re being collateralized/blackmailed?

      I can’t “see” your logic? Because I’m using a microscope and I don’t see nothing, but parameciums, amoebas, and boat load of bacteria.

      Can you please explain where “women’s decision power” is—Cuz they are all getting blackmailed.

  • I haven’t commented on here in a little while since everyone else is doing an excellent job at critical analysis already.

    Just wanted to say again, these defenses of KR simply sound 100% cherry-picked. Removing context from Daniela’s, Nicole’s testimony, whomever, etc. and then listing what they *should* have been charged with is, I dunno… only compelling with those who aren’t very familiar with the case.

    I doubt this holds weight with anyone who has spent years on Frank Report already (or law enforcement). More importantly, the prosecution and professional experts have established and proven the instances of brainwashing, manipulating, indentured servitude, malicious prosecution, etc. So just saying that you think this is chauvinism, inequality, or whatever is irrelevant. That’s your subjective view. Period.

    • I wish what you say were true. Then we could all feel good that “justice has been served”. But looking at the details of the case, at least as far as the transcript, it doesn’t seem like a very rational process, nor that rationality prevailed. It seems that emotions and prejudice prevailed. If you do a little research, in fact, science does not endorse the concept of “brainwashing”, for example.

  • I think Suneel has made some great points!

    I have always had my suspicions that the justice system was flawed and this clearly settles it! It is clear that this white man did not have a fair trial because not enough millions were spent on his law team and because white men can’t jump.

    Also, I have noticed his feet are square-shaped and this has raised my suspicions about prejudice because it is well known that people who have square-shaped feet have been vehemently discriminated against in our society for some years. Did you see the way the judge and prosecuting attorney were constantly staring at the poor man’s feet all throughout the trial?

    I mean, that is proof right there! Although slightly less well known as a physically profiled group of people, square-foots are right up there with enduring the suffering of persecution the black race has faced based on the physical characteristics they were merely born with.

    Suneel, you have convinced me. Have you ever thought about giving up your software profession and working full time as a lawyer?

    I say fire off your resume and the various articles Frank has posted here of yours to the top law firms in the country as proof of your aptitude for the job. And if you hear nothing in response from any of them, it is their loss and is further proof that the justice system is broke in this country!

    P.S., So much hate.

  • Hey Frank you should start another column called Frank Report 2 – The Followers.

    That way the Nxivm Peeps can cry, scream, and bitch about prison life (something not one of The Followers even thought about until Keith’s sentencing and not once voiced an opinion about prison life or the unethical treatment of prisoners here on the Frank Report).

    Now, they are all up in arms about prison life and unethical treatment of prisoners since their Vanguard got himself a one way ticket to BOP’S Tucson Hilton.

    I sometimes skip the stories if they are of no interest to me (i.e., Sara Bronfman’s many men) and go straight to the comments and, lo and behold, there they are “The Followers” and their blah, blah, blah: Keith didn’t get a fair trial (Shut up and prove it); blah, blah, blah: Keith is being treated badly in prison (Shut up and prove I); we have very different views on how Keith is being treated; I think the BOP should have thrown him in the SuperMax for 120 years so maybe you all should count your lucky stars); we need to revamp the prison system all I can hear is Charlie Brown’s school teacher (Shut up about it; better folks than you lot have tried and failed complaining about it on the Frank Report isn’t going to get you anywhere) I was thinking until Keith got sentenced they were not on the Frank Report, I remember someone asking Nicki about a post that was on the Frank Report and she said: “I don’t read the Frank I Report”.

    Now, you can get them to shut up on the Frank Report, then I thought no matter how annoying they are, “ The Followers” are always entertaining.

  • I was also at the trial a handful of times and my experience of Judge Garaufis was very similar. He stopped the trial for things that seems irrelevant to the trial like making a joke at an inappropriate time during testimony. If we are going to uphold a system of justice that honors our rights and the legal system, those in power must be held in check.

    • That’s crazy! Judge Garaufis and I popped into your work a handful times!

      We noticed you did not put enough ketchup in the bags.

      Or napkins. Those fries are greasy!

      And it was a joke how dirty the shake machine was kept.

      If we are going to uphold a system of fast food that honors burgers and those who serve them, it is important that managers weed out weak employees such as yourself.

    • I also attended the trial and was there when Judge Garaufis stopped Lauren Salzman’s testimony, right before she was going to reveal the fact that NXIVM and DOS weren’t criminal organizations designed to hurt, cheat, coerce or manipulate people. The trial would have proceeded very differently if she had been allowed to answer.

      • Everything Lauren stated on the stand and under oath supported the prosecution.

        Your unsubstantiated claim that all of a sudden Lauren would reverse course and either commit perjury or claim her prior sworn testimony was perjury is ridiculous.

        And irrelevant. Keith’s attorneys did not object to her testimony concluding. Nor did he recall her to the stand.

        The defense attorneys knew that there was nothing Lauren would say that would exonerate Keith.

        A separate interesting observation about the Nxivm apologists is that many of the comments state Keith should never have been convicted on the word of the victims.

        Why then should Keith be found innocent by one statement from one woman?

        Especially a statement that was never spoken?

        There is no way for you to know what Lauren might have said. But logic should tell you that it would have been more of the same. Lauren’s testimony consistently supported the victim’s testimony. Not Keith’s.

        Again, it does not matter. It was not brought up during the trial. It’s over. Keith lost.

        Move on.

  • I respect that Suneel responded without insulting anyone. There’s definitely some emotion in the response, but no outward attacks on the author. If that can continue, focused on the story instead of the storytellers, the debate will be much more interesting.

    • Why are you so passive aggressive? Why are you full of so much hate? What have you done that makes you insult victims of crimes?

  • Suneel responds directly and head on to each of the assertions made against him. He doesn’t hide nor avoid the topic at hand. This trial needs some serious re-examination and a new trial seems extremely deserving!

      • It’s easy to call something “the truth”. it is harder to truly contemplate what we don’t know and can’t be sure of.

        • Your comment reads like a bumper sticker slogan fail.

          Or an alcoholic’s embroidered pillow quote.

          Then they sober up and are like,”Why did I think that made sense or was deep?”

          And they remember, “Oh! because I was wasted”.

  • Suneel uses logic and rationality and evidence in his response. This is well written and deserves attention.

  • A prior comment reminded me that you and Clare were very close prior to her incarceration and that you spent quite a bit of time with her. Given your close connection w her, why aren’t you or Make Justice Blind advocating on her behalf or defending her in any way? There has been absolutely no mention or support of Clare by you or the other NX5 or other KR supporters. Why is that ???

    • I agree! I asked this very Clare question, repeatedly.

      They care not at all for Nicki’s wife, Allison.

      Kathy Russell.

      The Salzman criminals.

      None of the women.

      Only Keith “Charlie Manson” Raniere.

      Is anything more telling?

  • If only Buzzfeed would do a ‘12 Reasons Why Keith Raniere Is Innocent’. It would really put this to rest. If only Keith’s lawyers were motivated enough to have followers hover over comment sections, this wouldn’t have happened to him. I guess Suneel wasn’t serious back then.

    Now that Pornhub is compromised, you can’t be expected to get the word out about unequal justice through interpretative dance moves outside a prison without a reliable outlet. Speaking of, whose idea was it to mimic the Manson Girls and for Nicki to LARP Squeaky Fromme? Keith is 60 and the smartest little child rapist on the planet, surely he would know that’s not a good look for a group that says it’s not a cult?

    And these Amazon product reviews in the comment section? These *makes extravagant chef kiss* are delicious.

  • A posture out of emotions does not indicate holding an action. The truth equation is integrated with accurate data.

  • Dear Suneel

    I appreciate your viewpoint even though I do not agree with it at all.

    Please answer my one question in order for me to reconsider my stance. As an attorney, I do not entertain hearsay. I only consider facts or at least a version of the facts that have probative value. In this case, my question to you is about Daniela. Daniela claims that she was imprisoned and has provided evidence accordingly. Her testimony was corroborated by her “jailer” Lauren Salzman so I appreciate that her version is more or less truthful or at least submissible.

    You claim on one hand to have only spoken to Keith a handful of times. How can you say that what happened to Daniela was because of her own stubbornness and her own refusal to accede to a crime that she may or may not have committed? How can you say for sure that what you say is truthful? You weren’t there when Daniela was imprisoned but Daniela and Lauren were indeed there. I want an answer from you and not a flimsy ‘Oh, someone told me’ excuse. I want to know about this in terms of what factually happened and what you had seen with your own eyes. If you weren’t there, it stands to reason that your justifications about the way Daniela was treated mean absolutely nothing.

    I respectfully await and expect a response from you in this regard.

    • In all seriousness, where the hell is Flowers? If ever we needed her and her sensitive BS meter, it’s on these threads.

    • I wanted to ask this same question — thank you for doing so, Amy! I noted that Suneel has not responded.

      Relatedly, the question goes toward his statement, “It was supposed to be for a weekend. But Daniela chose to be stubborn and show Keith and her family that she would stay in the room until Keith, her parents, and her family gave up and agreed to let her keep her old, destructive behaviors.”

      Suneel – how do you know this exactly? Did Daniela tell you that she wanted to return to her ‘old, destructive behaviors’? I will go out on a short limb here and guess that she did not, but instead, you are justifying her seclusion in a room for over two years by reversing the blame toward Daniela.

      It seems more and more of Suneel’s statements are pure conjecture on his part.

      • Thank you, Clifton Parker, sir!

        Let us please face facts, Suneel…No matter how stubborn or egoistic a person is, no one in their right mind would waste two years imprisoning themselves in a room to prove a point! This argument of yours about Daniela is speculative at best and ridiculous at worst.

        If you cannot think critically when it comes to a simple and logical point like this, I seriously question the probative value of the remainder of your submissions.

        Also, who is Keith? Who died and made him judge, jury and executioner to punish Daniela for her purported crimes? We have the law for a reason! If she stole, press charges and let the police deal with it. But, no! Keith had to play the false messiah. Whether or not he was correctly convicted of the crimes he was accused of, he committed heinous acts of cruelty against many people, men and women alike. I still find it next to impossible to feel sorry for this pretend prophet!

        I wish we could all spend our free time standing outside his putrid cell (a safe distance away of course) and oink at him to make him feel bad about himself the way he did to these women.

        And Suneel…I still await your response. I have not forgotten.

        Clifton Parker has also phrased this point much better than I could. He deserves a response as well.

    • There are other people who were very close to Daniela at the time of her supposed imprisonment, who say differently. I don’t know if and when they will come forward. I guess that is part of the problem with testimony. No testimony, however abundant, is a guarantee of truth.

      • Irrelevant.

        They didn’t testify at the trial.

        No post-game hearsay is getting Vanperv out of his forever home in prison.

  • I wonder if the prosecutors are terrified that their false narrative, supported by their powers to imprison people with their false narrative and a compliant judge, will crumble under the weight of the truth. No need for concern, though. Historically, there are no external consequences for behaviors like this.

    • “No need for concern” – Correct, Vanguard is going to be in prison until death do he part. Don’t worry, the prosecutors sleep very soundly satisfied with their work putting him away.

  • I call b.s. on the “studying it in law school claim”.

    Exact details or it is not happening.

    And what do you mean by “studying the case’?

    I am about to go on a law school forum and see if anyone can verify this as true.

    But much as you have already reached a conclusion while “studying the case”, I think I have my answer.

    • As someone who actually graduated law school… I agree that this “studying the case” statement is b.s! You study how to read cases and glean the points that you need. There is too much material and too many cases. Few cases are studied in-depth and those cases that merit deeper study are usually cases that shape the law as we know it and which are heard in the higher courts such as the Appellant and Constitutional courts. I studied in an English Law syllabus and we are taught to find the “rationes decidendi” which is the crux of the case.

      To say that you are studying one case is simply illogical, especially a case about a tubby, unwashed cretin.

      • Amy-

        I reject your body shaming and derogatory language.

        We men are constantly being objectified and body shamed by the Matriarchy.

        I’m sorry we all can’t meet your unreal definition of handsomeness. It’s what is the inside that’s important.

        • I am so sorry… I insulted one horrid oaf who body-shamed women constantly and who had the nerve to oink at them to hurt their feelings and guilt them into starving themselves to the point where they were susceptible to his brainwashing. My comment certainly did not apply to all of humanity.

  • ¿Por qué el sistema de justicia americano no puede actuar de manera imparcial? seamos consientes del daño que nos causamos todos como sociedad. Sea Keith o sea alguien más. Respetemos el debido proceso y paremos ya con tantos atropellos a la ley.

    Google Translation:
    Why can the American justice system not act impartially? Let us be aware of the damage that we all cause as a society. Be Keith or be someone else, let us respect due process and stop with so many violations of the law

  • I’m a law student and we’re currently studying this case. I can vouch for the fact that Suneel’s point about the sex trafficking charge being an unprecedented misuse of how this law was intended is accurate.

    It is also true that the prosecution did not prove the elements necessary to meet the crime.

    For example Nicole taking a train the day before (not the day of) and saying that affected interstate commerce is an outrageous stretch. Also the fact that she traveled the day before as per her own testimony but then the prosecution said in their statements to the jury that she traveled the day of the sex act was really just a blatant lie stated by them because the elements did not meet the charge otherwise. Finally the fact that is was one women consenting to a sexual encounter with another woman and the sex was not even with Raniere is also an unprecedented use of the law.

    • Would you mind sharing the name of your law school — and the name of the professor who is teaching the class in which you’re discussing the U.S. v. Raniere case? I’d like to contact her/him to discuss some of the points you’ve raised plus several others that I have about the sex trafficking charge. Thanks!

      • The law school is the University of Vanguard, Clifton Park, and the professor’s name is Keef Raininear.

        Keef though is currently on sabbatical in Tucson, Arizona for a while.

        • The law school professor can only communicate with another attorney through the comments section of Frank Report?

          Sounds legit!

      • Can’t wait to read the guest article written by the professor. How are your discussions going with them, Claviger? Please don’t disappoint me and say that Lawless never responded with any details.

        • Surprisingly, I have not heard back from her/him. And I keep checking my spam folder at least four times per day.

          • I’m shocked to read that. Just shocked.

            Sad, so sad.

            Thanks for continuing to check, Claviger. You bend over backwards for these people.

          • Mr. Claviger Sir

            Please don’t keep us in suspense if you eventually hear from them though I doubt you will.

            I find it amusing that these Nxians think they know what actually happens in law school.

            My expectations were blown out of the water on my first day.

    • Maybe one of the lawyers who works at Anthony’s office can help you get a job after you graduate. Kinda surprised they don’t expect proper use of commas in law school.

      • Classic!

        It is amazing how just a few days ago a Nxivm dead-ender fantasized that a “class of law students would study this case”.

        And now they have! And they are already done!!!

    • Lawless-

      I bet you’ll graduate from your law school
      Cum LAuDe.

      BTW: Have you ever been to the Capital of Thailand?

      When your not yanking Claviger’s chain are you yanking Grandpa’s [redacted].

    • 22 U.S. Code § 7102 – Definitions

      (12) Sex trafficking

      The term “sex trafficking” means the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, obtaining, patronizing, or soliciting of a person for the purpose of a commercial sex act.

      There is nothing in the definition about a trafficker having sex with the victim.

  • The Frank Report has been hijacked and has become the sounding board for NXIVM propaganda.

    Next, we will hear arguments about how Sarah Edmondson enjoyed being branded like a cow.

    • I’d rather the Frank Report be highjacked by Raniere supporters than a bunch of Qanon types.

      Qanon = treason

    • And then we’ll hear about the abortions being part of personal growth. We already know that suicide can be a good thing. This new Frank Report is gonna be awesome!

    • Yeah? You saw the trial, huh. Not buying it but kudos for the vagueness. Nuttin’ to say, huh. What was your mouth clammed up back then, and now you want to sound “smart”?

      Well, kaboom. What a surprise, the usual kind of pleasant surprise from a source of petulantly, bitchy-moany vapidity. Zzzzzzzzzzz.

      Mirror, mirror on the wall. Have at it with the lukewarm, halitosis-ridden exhalations. Hubba hubba and go ahead, continue onwards, promoting a completely failed yutz who won’t be coming out of prison alive, unless he’s wheeled out on a stretcher, having his final paroxysms from whatever eventually finishes him off.

      WTF is the mattah with these douches who write in uselessly without even realizing it, never having coherently debated anything before (?), staggering through some short-attention span theater of thickheaded superfluousness, of the superficial, and expecting anyone else besides the culty cavalcade of fools to agree with this absolutely disorganized CRAPFEST?

      There is nothing to defend about Raniere beyond what few rights he has left. The culties will soon start to besmirch the jurors who watched and listened throughout Raniere’s trial.

      I’m surprised that hasn’t been “tried” yet by some of the chowderheads who still SUPPORT Raniere and who are full of misinformed complaints about how this sadistic little dictator has been treated.

      How about you excavate that? Dig up what it is about you, who sees Raniere as a fucking noble, heroic, advanced human being who is still worth lying for and is worth making a fool out of yourself over, in print and all over the world?

      What is it about you, that you choose to stand up for a miserable borderline personality monster, who interfered with the minds and hearts of so very many people, including a small batch of them who did not even get to live through it?

  • The FBI and the prosecutors and the judges aren’t the ones who have plotted to shut up Keith. It is really the lizard people. Keith was going to expose them so they had to make him go away. They put the pictures on the computer to dirty him up. Camilla, who spoke at the court hearing, was not the real girl; she was a clone puppet of lizards. All lies. All hate. Thank you, Suneel, for writing out true data.

  • To all the defenders of this child rapist, do you not see the obvious? This maniac took elements from all the famous cult leaders and put them into action so he could have a harem and live the good life with millions of dollars. Cases in point:

    – Manson family (members blindly loyal to their leader, holding vigils outside prison)

    – Scientology (suppressives, acquiring blackmail to use against defectors, hiring private eyes to target and discredit defectors, threats of lawsuits to silence critics)

    – Jonestown (marathon sessions, sleep deprivation, loyalty tests)

    – Branch Davidians (female members made to worship leader as a deity, leader believed he was godlike and was the only one who could share his enchanted sperm with females)

    The reason why these cults keep happening, again and again, is because there is never a shortage of idiots who believe this sheet if it is said articulately and convincingly enough.

    I can’t blame Suneel though. He is just a gullible weak-minded fool probably purchasing some magic beans by the Costco cuz some guy dressed like Jesus said he could save his soul.

    • Lie Smeller, I’m concerned when you say defenders of this child rapist. Are you aware that Keith was not charged let alone convicted of raping anyone or a child for that matter?

        • I’m simply trying to point out calling someone a child rapist, when they are even convicted of that, is a serious problem.

          • Not a problem at all.

            I know two rapists who were never even charged, let alone convicted.

            A court is not the only venue where one can form one’s understandings of the world.

      • Camila = child porn = pedophile

        Allow me to draw you a roadmap. When someone has child porn on their computer, it means they more than likely are masturbating to the image. Hence, the commenter’s assertion Raniere is a pedophile. What don’t you get?

        • Although I don’t think Keith is a pedophile, a pedophile is different than a child rapist. I’m simply pointing out that Lie Smeller is propagating falsehoods.

    • Read the first article. Software consultant means Suneel wiping Clare’s ass after she uses the toilet. You don’t want to download that software.

  • “If I am correct about what happened to Keith and this truth is not exposed, then I believe the prosecutors and judges in the Eastern District of NY will continue to do what they did here in other, less high-profile cases — where no one is watching — and more innocent people will be led to the slaughter.”

    This is a big concern!!!

  • I appreciate all of these details I did not know of before. Why were they not part of the trial? Aren’t these points significant pieces of evidence?

    • Why were they not part of the trial? Bc they are false

      Aren’t these points significant pieces of evidence? No

  • It seems Mr. Chakravorty has impressively answered the questions of Lucid Moment. I believe he has made a good case for an unfair trial.

  • Lauren Salzman testified in court as a witness for the prosecution. She did so after she entered her guilty plea(s.)

    By pleading guilty, Salzman was able to reduce her criminal charges. Do we really have to keep going back to kindergarten here, about the predominant facts, as well as regarding what is the nature of “the law”?

    All of Raniere’s fellow culties who were criminally charged entered guilty pleas. Raniere did not. His attorneys, however, put on no defense witnesses, nor did Raniere testify.

    Welcome, wilkommen, to the stagnant world of magical thinking.

    This substrata of superficial thinkers have dreams of mangling its (dimwitted) conceptualizations about JUSTICE, all to fit its narrative about rescuing Raniere, the perverted jackass (yeah I said it) who played philosophizing sperminator to a whole ship of foolhardy Beliebers.

    The stalwart, remaining wartheads, Raniere beliebers, have an outstanding lack of sensitivity or compassion concerning the ones who have said that they have been harmed by Raniere and by the Salzman culties, the Bronfmans culties, etc., including experiencing “criminal harmfulness” from personal experiences with Allison Mack.

    Yep. Ignore. If that goes down with an ineffective whimper, then use offense as the only available defense. And good effin’ luck with that, Baba Louie.

    Here comes I Dream of None of You Mofos, like Barbara Eden dreamt of her genie boy. Sheesh, dude, better hightail it. The astral Amazons are going to serve you, splayed on a plate to some mean, ugly asshole for lunch. The fork holder? Keith Raniere.

    It is not too late to avoid this. But why bother to whistle any dixies to Suneel, so stunningly lost in the 15th century as he appears to be, poor chap? This could make a good half hour mini-series, Suneel is Tone Deaf, one potential title for the shitshow. Hoo yes. How ’bout at?

    The testimonies given in court, the many impact statements provided? This is all trash to the agenda of Suneel Chakravorty. He saves his “sensitivity” for Keith Raniere, and now, Chakravorty has made himself somewhat of a joke, as a Blowjob Expert nonpareil.

    It is getting awfully repetitive, and it’d be boringly tedious, the Suneel crapfest, if only it were not so damned godawfully funny.

    The lack of understanding or compassion for anyone outside of his Raniere reindeers’ circle isn’t funny at all, though.

    Suneel is no Angela Lansbury. There’s no need to shoot him for that, though. He has time to develop. It was Murder She Wrote, Chakravorty varthi. It was not called That’s All She Wrote. You poor widdle Boy Scout.

    And Keith Raniere was not just doing a cheap imitation of executive tantraism for 20 or so years. Raniere was only having tantrums. He could have made a good elevator man, since his skill was pushing and holding other peoples’ buttons.

    Butt on, Suneel, butt on! Such linguistics! Mah mah mah.

    Judge Garaufis spoke some memorable words in court when he ended Agnifilo’s cross-examination of Lauren Salzman, all right.

    The words included his observation that before he is a judge, he is a human being. Suneel Chakravorty will not twist those words from Judge Garaufis. No gymnastics of unexamined mentality can twist those words of compassion away from anyone. Cluelessness often has a degree from school and a big mouth. Magical thinking is such weak tea, though, nearly lifeless and colorless, and it has no good taste at all. Gyad, Suneel. A century ago you’d have been just as lost in Paris. Too bad. 4U.

  • Prosecution painted Keith as a monster who brainwashed and controlled most of the Nxivm community. In the judge and jury eyes most of the members were victims. In reality there were grown ups, thinking persons, some even prominent in their endeavor of life. Hard to believe the prosecution story.

    In particular, Judge Garaufis stopping the defense to question Lauren when she was about to contradict herself as a key witness in a court!! Because a 40 years old intelligent women cried!!

    When I think in Sex trafficking many deeply sad, tragic and inhuman stories that are not in film or even make the news come to my mind. Certainly not consensual sex, which is intrinsically part of us humans.

    And lastly about Daniela, Suneel brings a different story than the one Daniela told in court.

  • Judge Garaufis, shows his illegal partiality in Keith Raniere’s trial, how he warns of the disproportionate treatment he has with the defense lawyer Marc Agnifilo, whom he had with the prosecutor Moira Penza; to whom he allowed everything she wanted, favoring her accusation, which is unconstitutional and contrary to the law, since as already said, the Constitutional principle of equanimity obliges all authorities to comply with it, precisely to avoid arbitrariness and excess on the part of judges, to respect individual guarantees and the legal security of the accused, therefore the process must be reinstated.

  • Quoting K.R. here (and this is NOT a rhetorical question):

    Remind me, again, why Keith and his attorneys chose not to call any of these “4 of the top forensics experts in this field” during the trial — when they could have testified and been cross-examined. Were they all just really busy during those 6 weeks?

  • Suneel, the questions for you:

    Were you in possession of Keith’s hard drive as outlined here:

    “Some of us have a theory about why Suneel Chakravorty suddenly rose to the surface.

    Some of us hypothesize that Suneel had a significant part, or possibly a leadership role in, the analysis of Keith Raniere’s hard drive access statistics.

    Consider this: Keith had access to Clare Bronfman’s millions to get the best electronic analysis team on the planet, but this evidence never surfaced in his defense.

    That leaves two possibilities: Keith had the evidence and wanted to suppress it so he could be declared guilty and have evidence in his pocket for a mistrial motion or this next jabberwocky movement he’s invented, or Keith didn’t have the evidence in hand because Suneel failed to produce it.”

    That needs clarifying, sir.

  • Not calling this joke of a charge out is a supreme disservice to all true victims of actual human trafficking — women separated from their families, beaten or drugged by their captors, forced into sexual encounters for months or years, with no hope, no justice and not a single HBO docuseries or class-action lawsuit against heiresses to sustain them in their suffering. I totally agree, the Judge make this a joke not following the justice and due process.

  • “Justice demands judging people by the chosen values that shape their character, not by irrelevant factors like skin color” Neither because we like or not the person. Why this case arises so much hate?

    • Why do people hate sex traffickers and child pornographers is a mystery to you, Joshua? Keith can explain it if you write him a letter. His IQ is huge.

    • There’s no justice for white cult leader child pornographers backed by millionaires and represented by the best attorneys.

      Sad, so sad.

  • No Comment!


    4 posts
    3 following
    Keith is a good man with a loyal, honest heart.

    Sign the petition please. I would appreciate it and so would Keith. #justice #newyork #nyc #manhattan #allisonmack #vanguard #injustice #unfair

    I want Keith RANIERE to be released from jail

    Delilah Leonard started this petition to New York Times and 3 others
    Keith is a great man! He’s truly miss understood. I feel as if I know Keith more than my father or brother. Keith has always gone up and beyond to put me before himself. He truly doesn’t deserve to be locked up just so a tv show can make lots of money off of him. It’s so very wrong that someone innocent and loyal has been denied rights that every human should have. I suffer with Anxiety and Keith and I used to walk it off and talk it off. As soon as I got home from work he’d be sitting down waiting to greet me with a cup of tea and moral support. Keith deserves love and compassion just like any other person. Good people make bad choices and that doesn’t make them bad, it makes them human. I love you Keith . Allison I’m also here for you darling you’re not alone! You’re beautiful and I wish the best

  • Suneel makes some very strong points. After looking into it, the whole room thing is a complete lie. Daniella is a sociopath who was grounded by her father, not by Keith and basically had to do a book report for her being grounded to end. She chose not to do it and instead stayed by her own choice. But this was in her parents’ house with food and the ability to leave whenever she wanted. If you ask me, she did this whole charade to blame her multiple crimes on Keith. She is perhaps a sociopath. And he is paying for her sins.

    • Adult women do not get “grounded by their parents”

      And for 2 years?!

      And why? Because Keith wanted to punish her over sex.

      And who gives an adult woman a “book report” as a condition for release from a room?

      Lauren was Daniela’s enforcer…Why? Is she her parent?

      Why keep Daniela’s immigration papers? She is an adult. Entitled to them.

      You are all always saying “hate, hate, hate” about others’ comments.

      Your comment is vile. And this is a beloved member of the community and Keith’s “partner”?

      If your opinion of her is correct, then Keith has horrible character judgment and is far from smart.

      And the “tech” sux.

  • Suneel, I am thrilled that you responded! Frank, I fully support using this site as a place for back-and-forth debate that allows for fine-tuned perspectives and (hopefully) more clarity.

    I am curious if the Health Professional author has any facts to share to complete the bigger picture, especially regarding the sex trafficking? This is a very serious issue and shouldn’t be swept aside but it also shouldn’t be free from deep scrutiny just because it is such an abhorrent act.

    • There’s a great website with tons of facts to share about NXIVM. Gives the big picture including sex trafficking. Its called Frank Report. Check it out.

      • LOL, I admit I’m lazy and not combing through all the historical FR articles. I was hoping the Health Professional already had their sources assembled (perhaps referencing trial transcripts or perhaps interviews via FR articles or..?) and could easily provide them or reference them.

        Still hoping over here…!

        • This isn’t a NXIVM intensive. No one feels any pressure to explain themselves or convince you of anything. If you enjoy thinking Keith is getting a raw deal, knock yourself out.

          Keith was lazy too.

          • I’m not entirely following your response but I think you are criticizing me for pressuring people for an explanation or demanding something? To be clear, I did not intend to pressure or demand anything, it was a genuine request with the hope that it would take very little for the Health Professional to grant it. I am not asking for someone to go to great lengths to satisfy my curiosity.

            Too bad we weren’t in a NXIVM intensive, because a face-to-face conversation might be easier than writing back-and-forth where tones can be misinterpreted!

    • Somewhere on the Frank Report, I believe Claviger or Frank summed it up.

      The subject you are interested in unfortunately would yield way too many search results. Maybe Shadow can help.

  • BTW, Suneel:

    You were having leaked phone calls with your Vanguard really quick, which were published here.

    Hate to jump the gun, but sounds like you’re Vanguard’s puppet on a string.

    He had a lot of those, so you’re in good company.

  • That was a more eloquent 4Chan incel rant. Chad and Stacy are there, so is the unyielding lack of self awareness and repetitive bargaining.

    This is so boring, coupled with the very guilty pleasure of watching a deplorable struggle in a tar pit of his own making.

  • Suneel, all these points can be raised on appeal, or should have been raised at trial.

    With that in mind:

    Do you PERSONALLY think Raniere is guilty of ANYTHING? Anything at ALL?


    Do you think –just opinion– he is 100% innocent?

    Please answer.

    • No, all these points cannot necessarily be raised on appeal.

      The issues that can be raised in a direct appeal in a federal criminal case are primarily limited to what is called “trial court error”. These include, but are not limited to, such things as the composition of the jury, the admission of evidence, prosecutorial misconduct, jury instructions, and sentencing.

      It is important that defense attorneys preserve the record during the trial. In this context, the term “preserve the record” means raising errors as soon as they arise — and making objections at the proper time. Although an issue that has not been properly preserved can be raised on appeal, the appellate court may choose not to review it or to review it under a much higher standard.

      The court of appeals will review unpreserved issues for plain error. For issues that have been preserved, there are different standards of review that the court of appeals will apply. For example, the court of appeals will review the trial court’s evidentiary rulings for abuse of discretion. A trial lawyer’s failure to properly preserve issues can limit the appellate lawyer’s effectiveness on appeal.

  • Here’s my problem with Suneel’s defense of Keith and pretty much every past defense of Keith. They all rely upon “She lied.” or “He lied.” or “They lied.” Suneel just listed off a handful of liars that doesn’t even scratch the surface. Really???? Every one of them lied???? And the FBI? The much shorter list would be people who knew Keith and DIDN’T lie about him.

    And let’s not forget, Keith makes sure everyone knows that he takes vengeance very seriously. He ain’t a dude ANYONE wants to cross. The ONLY reason any of us speak up ‘against’ Keith, is because we know it is the right thing to do – not dissimilar to Suneel’s reasons for speaking up ‘for’ Keith. Nobody crosses Keith for their health.

    In defense of Suneel, he is sharing his own unique ‘Keith’ experience. The “liars” seemed to know Keith way way better than Suneel.

    • Nut, You some kind a of human lie detector? You don’t know who’s lying and who’s tellling the truth boy . Contrails disappearanced, then 5G showed up and then vaccines, are you telling me it’s all coincidence? You telling me people don’t lie? I’ve been a member of Q for 3 years. I’ve seen things that would make the hair on the back of your neck stand up. Raniere is most likely a threat to the global power elite and the 5 kings as laid out by Alex Jones. You need to get your head on straight!

      • Oh… I stand corrected. Although, I only posed questions, so I guess my intended point stands corrected. Gotta go – The Cabal is calling my bat phone.

      • I’m glad Suneel is attracting the right kind of people who sympathize with Keith Raniere’s plight.

        It speaks volumes as to the validity of his arguments.

    • I agree with everything you said. And I pretty much always do, Nutjob.

      It is also interesting to note that I do not know one soul who would lie to law enforcement or in court about any of these crimes.

      Yet the Nxivm community seems to be made up almost entirely of liars.

      Especially female liars. According to Keith apologists.

      Which is verrrrryyyy convenient because Keith always said women were… Not honest.

      Now did Nxivm/DOS create liars.? Attract a disproportionate amount of liars?

      Or just teach the community to “prepare for future lying women out to get Keith”?

      • Excellent point about training the NXIVM community that females lie. From the very beginning, he also trained everyone that people were going to be out to get him and stop him. That his mission was so important and so anti what the government wanted, that big business/big government etc. were going to be out to get him.

    • NutJob- Suneel’s experience was markedly different than Raniere’s victims. I do not understand your need to trivialize Suneel’s feelings by constantly ridiculing him. Do you believe haranguing speech will help him? Does it help children? Show Suneel the same empathy you show the Salzmans, Daniela Roberts, and Allison Mack. You seem to forget Suneel never hurt anyone sexually or physically, unlike the women you so earnestly defend.

      • Either you are confusing me with another Nutjob, or we have different definitions of the words constant and ridicule.

        Could you please give me a few examples of my constant ridicule of Suneel? I think I’ll even settle for one example, but I’m leaving open the possibility of me having done the dirty deed once. (And I’m not saying I won’t do it in the future. But Suneel seems honest and earnest. For the most part, I agree that he doesn’t deserve ridicule.)

        As to your other point – Suneel wasn’t having sex with Keith and wasn’t being promised avatar babies. Suneel didn’t have “the long game” played on him. Suneel didn’t have Keith using hypnosis and NLP on him.

        Suneel didn’t have flying monkeys working him over. Suneel’s pussy wasn’t branded (or was it…jk – wanted to show you I’m capable of ridicule).

        Suneel watched everything go down from the bleachers. Suneel has chosen to believe Keith over everyone else. While Suneel may be presenting interesting tidbits that may or may not make us feel pity for our poor Vanguard victim, Suneel has jumped into bed with a very dangerous conman.

  • I think Frank is taking the wrong approach with Suneel.

    Putting all the endlessly REHASHED legal facts aside for a moment, Frank needs to attempt to verify if Suneel is behaving as a textbook cult-follower or not. That should be Frank’s line of reporting on this topic.

    Suneel’s cult-status can be uncovered by having Frank ask him one simple thing…

    Is Suneel capable of making ANY personal criticisms about his Vanguard’s personal behavior?

    I’m not talking about legal issues here. I’m not talking about issues of guilt or innocence.

    What I mean is.. A true cult member is mentally INCAPABLE of criticizing their leader’s personal behavior in any fashion, even for the smallest of things.

    I believe Suneel fits this definition.

    Suneel talks about Keith’s choice to live in polyamorous relationships, but he’s forgetting that ‘polyamorous’ means that everybody involved is allowed to have an open relationship with the consent of all parties.

    Keith didn’t live that way. He forbid EVERY sexual partner from having sex with other men and forced them to be with him only — by making them take a solemn vow (and by holding collateral on them). That’s not a true ‘polyamorous’ or ‘open’ relationship.

    That’s POSSESSIVE behavior by an INSECURE MAN who doesn’t want his women experiencing superior sex with other men.

    Frank needs to delve into the issue of WHY would a GREAT LEADER (like Vanguard) be so insecure that he forbids his women from having sex with other men, especially when he’s allowed to have sex with other women?

    What do psych experts have to say about this possessive behavior?

    If Keith is that insecure about himself, how can he qualify as a great leader to Suneel?

    Why would Suneel follow a man with those types of insecurities?

    Let’s take a different path now…

    Can Suneel at least admit that Vanguard was an ‘imperfect’ man who lied about his personal credentials, like being East Coast Judo champ and breaking the state record for the 100 yard dash?

    My guess is that Suneel cannot admit any of this because he’s still brainwashed.

    Can Suneel at least admit that his Vanguard lied about these small things to create a false image in people’s minds?

    Why would a great leader have a PSYCHOLOGICAL NEED to lie about small things to enhance his credentials? Doesn’t that indicate a sense of insecurity? If so, how can that leader be a great man who’s qualified to dictate how others should live?

    If Suneel cannot answer these questions for Frank then he’s a textbook cult-follower. Frank needs to begin reporting on how such an educated man is remaining loyal to his Vanguard.

    Perhaps Frank could even enlist the opinion of psych experts to explain what’s going on in Suneel’s mind and how he’s failed to break free from the cult —- even after 3 years without his cult leader being there to brainwash him?

    I think this would be an interesting line (to report on) rather than having Suneel rehash the same logic again for the umpteenth time, without Frank even challenging him on the elephant in the room (his cult-like loyalty and inability to criticize Keith).

    Have a nice day.

  • I’m so sick of people whining that Keith has it so bad in prison. He’s living in a mansion compared to the hell holes that are most prisons in the third world.

    We are not talking about a man sold into slavery or sent out to be prostituted or sweatshops for 25 cents a day.

    Keith will be better served by doing some quiet reflection.

    • Do not disagree with most of your comment. But also want to remind you — and all Frank Report readers — that because of the exception clause in the 13th Amendment, prisoners in the U.S. are classified as “slaves”. That’s the primary reason they can be forced to work for $.08 cents an hour — and have so few rights.

      • –prisoners in the U.S. are classified as “slaves”

        LMAO. Sooooooo much irony in Keith’s case. The signs are there for everyone to see that this fool is so guilty of all the things he’s done and more.

        • Anonymous 1

          The 13th Amendment is not a joke. It may be the most poorly written Amendment in the Constitution.

          13th Amendment:

          Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

          Criminals who are nonviolent and non-sexual are kept in what amounts to human to gerbil cages.

          It’s cruel and unusual punishment and is especially in conflict with the 8th Amendment.

      • All true, but Keith wasn’t “sold” into slavery. (It isn’t clear being born into slavery would count as coerced by Suneel.)

        $.08/hour x 8 hour day = $.64/day = 256% more than women who qualify as coerced by Suneel’s standard.

  • Suneel-

    You are spinning your wheels. Every legal argument, psychological argument, and philosophical argument you have repeatedly brought up has been shot down and/or debunked.

    The only thing you have been correct on is the salacious nature of Keith Raniere and DOS. Keith is the one responsible for making it salacious, no one else.
    It’s salacious because of the blackmail and the branding, ordered by Keith, which were completely not necessary.

  • May I suggest Suneel that you watch the three-part series on Netflix about how the RICO statute was used to convict the New York crime families? Then compare the structure and methods of those crime families to the way Mr. Raniere ran the underlings of his organization. It’s quite informative and will facilitate an understanding of why Mr. Raniere was convicted under RICO.

  • I cannot read Suneel’s never-ending opinion pieces on Keith. And blow jobs. But I do have questions:

    Would make justice blind ever allow people to freely comment on their site as frank allows here?

    Same question for the dossier project? Which isn’t even accessible to the public at all.

    I see never-ending complaints about the media. And ” free speech” (though they are definitely confused about that right).

    Why are they so hypocritical with their own social media platforms?

    Have any Nxivm members who freely post here reached out to Frank to privately apologize (with their real names) for what Nxivm did to Mr. P.?

  • —Not calling this joke of a charge out is a supreme disservice to all true victims of actual human trafficking

    Haha. Suneel has become the legal arbiter of sex trafficking definitions and invoked the “No true Scotsman”.

    This statement—among many other things—shows the utter idiocy of Suneel’s argument. This case doesn’t take away ONE BIT from victims of sex-trafficking in more extreme scenarios.

    The only way it could have possibly do that is if in the future any of them aren’t prosecuted while this one is, which will NEVER be the case because they are by definition more blatant and therefore, easier to prove. What the prosecution has actually done is a service to all victims of sex trafficking by expanding the umbrella into a nuanced, manipulative, coercive, subversive form of it, and for that they should be applauded.

    You’re acting pathetic Suneel—defending someone you hardly know against the victims who you hardly know who testified against him while he cowered from taking the stand himself—based only on a superficial involvement in the lower layers of a corporate front for a cult, many of whom have testified to the beneficial nature of some courses, while ignoring the compartmentalizations that occurs in the upper levels that were evidenced and testified to. You really, really should shut up before embarrassing your Harvard education any further.

  • Damn .. I didn’t know Daniella had committed all of those crimes and c’mon THAT was the room/bathroom/house she was “confined” in. Her family’s beautiful home with the door unlocked until she did one simple task! Soooo she was baisically grounded.

    My parents did way worse to me when I was grounded for acts that definitely did not involve stealing or other extremely illegal things. That’s a joke!

    I was picturing a dirty cave based on how the media, prosecution, Seduced etc has presented this. Sounds like the Crimean is her and she did whatever she had to to make sure Keith took the fall for her unlawful behavior.

    • But I thought she was an adult woman?

      Who “grounds” an adult woman?

      For almost 2 years?

      A cult.

      It was clear she was denied her legal immigration papers.

      Did your parents do that to you? As an adult? Until you went back to being sexually and romantically subservient to an old creepy man who also was sexually and romantically involved with your two sisters? Impregnating you all?

      If so, I am truly sorry about your childhood.

    • Glad this article helped you understand things, and that you’re using FR to educate yourself. However, if you truly didn’t know about Daniella’s past and are using this article to judge crimes she committed, you may want to change your approach on how you learn.

    • Sooo-

      You conveniently left out the part of the story where Daniela was told that if she didn’t comply, she would be left in the middle of nowhere on the border with no money, and no passport or ID. She was an illegal alien. Remember?

      BTW: “A 1/2 story is only 1/2 true.”

  • This is an excellent response to many people who are caught in just hating Keith. Thanks for all the clear points you make Suneel. I’ve done this research myself and have found exactly what you are commenting here.

    I’m not sure what it will take for all of us to see this craziness, again I have no interest in defending Keith. But I do see the big picture here. This is wrong. I hope everyone reads and verify this points you are making here Suneel as I did and they finally see what’s really going on.

      • It does. As snarky as I am frequently, I’m genuinely on the fence about whether Anthony is a true NXIVM bitter-ender or whether he is a very skillful troll who knows how to mimic the true-believers and push the ridiculousness of their line hard, but not to the point of it being farcical.

        Poe’s Law.

    • Anthony, with all due respect, it’s the same points Suneel always makes and they always get debunked and shot down.

      Suneel’s points have no legal merit and do not even rise to the ‘threshold criterion’ of common sense or objective truth. Suneel and you are smarter than this…

      Suneel’s arguments amount to wishful thinking.

      • Debunked and shot down where when and by who? Certainly his points about 99 photos (used to “prove” child porn charge) being heavily tampered with while in FBI custody to change dates and photoshop images since they didn’t find any real evidence of this charge were not debunked. Rather they were certified by 4 of the top forensics experts in this field. They signed their names to this and certified that Suneel is absolutely correct. THIS is a horrific crime by the prosecution.

        • Remind me, again, why Keith and his attorneys chose not to call any of these “4 of the top forensics experts in this field” during the trial — when they could have testified and been cross-examined. Were they all just really busy during those 6 weeks?

        • —Rather they were certified by 4 of the top forensics experts in this field.

          By your statement, I guess you’re well aware of the fact that I already debunked the forensics experts as nothing more than four people who received certificates that are worth less than the paper they’re printed on.

          Is this Bangkok?

          Please stop yanking my chain. Between you and my wife, my neck is mighty sore.


        • —Rather they were certified by 4 of the top forensics experts in this field.

          Who happen to not hold degrees—but we should take their word for it.

          Suneel is well aware the four men in question aren’t qualified to be database admins.

        • Claviger has no reason to lie and would be the first person to point out unfair legal issues in the case.

          I’ve been following the Frank Report for a few years. Claviger sometimes seems almost ACLU-ish; no offense to Claviger.

          My theory is Claviger does do some pro bono legal work. Meaning he is one of the good-guys.

          • In my opinion, there are some “unfair” aspects to Keith’s case — but that’s because I think there are some unfair aspects to our current criminal justice system. It is also my opinion that none of the so-called “legal issues” that Keith raised in his “Call To Action” — and none of the 44 questions that Suneel has raised about Keith’s apprehension, expulsion, arrest, indictment, pre-trial incarceration, trial or sentencing — will result in a new trial.

            Maybe Suneel will change my mind when he produces “evidence” with regard to his 44 questions. I’m trying very hard to keep an open mind about that possibility but longer times goes on without any such “evidence”, the harder that is to do.

      • The fact the Nxivm 5 hold the
        four-clown-experts up as experts highlights the extreme level of cognitive bias they hold.

        Dissociative Bias anyone?

  • A brave citizen who witnessed an injustice and is risking a lot to stand up for what he believes is right.

    I’m currently 50/50 on whether Raniere is innocent but I am clear on the fact that there were crimes committed by the prosecution and unprecedented interpretations of certain laws to convict him in this way. If any citizen witnesses an injustice they should stand up and fight.

    The issue is we prefer to turn a blind eye or spew nasty comments on social media which changes nothing. I applaud Suneel and the others for standing up for what they believe is right.

    • Agreed – anyone pursuing justice and clarity should be supported. Time will tell if the effort is worth it, no need to let the court of public opinion degrade the pursuit.

  • Key point: ask yourself Do you believe women who blame others and try to get them in trouble for things the women did in their own lives? How can one blame another for choices in one’s own life? This is the biggest crime in our society – people taking down other people because they say so. This is dangerous for anyone because no one is immune.

    • Your entire comment rests on the reader agreeing with you that this is what happened in this legal case.

      It doesn’t matter if anyone here agrees with your premise. The jury did not.

      Crimes like identity theft and others Keith was charged with do not fit into your false narrative under any circumstance.

      Is Keith then not to blame for his decisions to break the law? Isn’t blaming unnamed women for Keith’s other crimes hypocritical? If you believe in personal accountability?

  • “See the evidence for myself”

    This is what I’m talking about. If more people would do this, we wouldn’t have to depend so much on the media and empower them to be our only resources of information.

    • Remind me exactly where the prosecution introduced into documented evidence of wrongdoing/illegality, sources of media, such as clippings from newspapers, magazines, online sites, etc., of text, video, audio, etc., that were used to convict your beloved Vanguard. Did Cami’s nude photos come from a porn website? How about Nicole’s story of sexual seduction? Was that ripped from the pages of “Penthouse Letters”?

      This notion that Keith was “convicted by the media hate” is hyperbolic balderdash that has no basis in reality and only exists in cult member delusion.

      • -Remind me exactly where the prosecution introduced into documented evidence of wrongdoing/illegality, sources of media, such as clippings from newspapers, magazines, online sites, etc., of text, video, audio, etc., that were used to convict your beloved Vanguard.

        The prosecution does not need to introduce any of those things because the media introduces it or feeds it to the jury. All juries on high profile cases are tainted.

        Why do you think France doesn’t allow the offender’s name in the right place to be published?

        • The media doesn’t “feed” anything to anyone. You can choose to read or watch it, or not. Believe it, or not. Plenty of citizens don’t hear or know about cases referenced in the media, even high-profile ones.

          The right to a free press is a huge part of the U.S. Constitution and this isn’t going to change.

          Besides, the jury selection process is in place to be as fair to the defendant as possible, allowing the defense team to say yay or nay to any jury selection member who’s a defendant’s peer, based on what they know, how they feel about things related to the case, etc., in the best interest of their client. Juries are specifically directed to look at only the evidence presented and judge from there.

          So, no. Universals that state “All juries in high profile cases are tainted” are very difficult to support claims, just like crying “hate in the media” got my beloved convicted is.

          • Anonymous 6:03pm

            In view of the testimony and evidence presented at Harvey Weinstein’s trial, do you believe Harvey Weinstein was given a fair trial? What’s your honest opinion?
            Do you believe the media played no role in prosecuting Harvey Weinstein?

            I believe you have a quixotic view of the legal system and juries. I’ve sat on juries. The guarantee the last thing you ever want is to have your life or loved one’s put into the hands of a jury…And for that matter, a Grand Jury because a Grand jury rubber stamps everything a prosecutor puts forth.

            I believe 100% Harvey Weinstein is guilty. However, my feelings do not negate the fact his trial was a total farce.

            The woman had a long-term sexual relationship with Harvey Weinstein voluntarily for almost a year and claimed she was raped at the beginning of that relationship. I don’t blame victims and I understand there are deep psychological issues at hand, but at some point, a line needs to be drawn.

            Once the branding article broke and all of the other press that came afterward Raniere’s goose was cooked. I was biased and anyone familiar with the story was biased as well. How can you not be?
            There was one positive article during that time period regarding NXIVM and Keith Raniere; the sole exception was the NY Times article by Vanessa Grigoriadis. I read her article and I thought the whole branding story was sensationalist and Frank was pissed-off dude with an ax to grind.

            Then I researched Vanessa Grigoriadis and realized she is not someone you necessarily want to turn to for an objective unbiased point of view.

    • FP8-

      What new facts or legal information has Suneel brought forth or uncovered which hasn’t been debunked by K.R. Claviger?

      I guarantee Kieth Raniere’s new attorney will not use a shred of what Suneel has brought forward. Suneel does not know bunk about Constitutional and Criminal law, or the overall appeals process for that matter

      Raniere’s attorney should have put up a defense. Shoulda-woulda-coulda don’t get u an appeal

  • Suneel, since you have now finally written in the comment section of this website on another thread and indicated a willingness to engage in discussion on this forum, I, and I think many others here, would be curious about

    1) your explanation of KAR’s “rape-able baby” statement that commenters have raised several times.

    What is the full context that makes his recorded statement innocent?

    2) your responses to the 7 questions raised by “SUNEEL (and all KR Supporters):”

  • Ah, Suneel. I believe you that you didn’t know about the evil of NXIVM when you were a low-level cog in the cult wheel. I believe you had good intentions.

    It is a sad testament to the corrosively persuasive acumen of The World’s Smartest Child Rapist™ that he has been able to transform an intelligent, well-educated, well-off man like yourself into a tool to do his bidding. Through your consent and participation, he has converted you from a well-intentioned seeker of wisdom into The World’s Smartest Defender of Child Rape™ and a Harvard-Trained Blow Job Analyst™.

    You are an excellent example of how the intelligence required to be a successful software engineer is different from everyday critical thinking.

    You are blinded by confirmation bias and the fallacy of relative privation.

    There’s nothing more indicative of your prejudice than your assertion that true and relevant details should be thrown out of evidence if they show a pattern of sordid, disgusting, outrageous, repugnant behavior on your “Vanguard’s” part. You make a serious cognitive mistake by believing that any fact which invokes an emotion is, therefore, untrue. This is the product of NXIVM indoctrination designed to narrow the focus of your empathy to one and one person only: The World’s Smartest Child Rapist™.

    You are not open to factual data. You are caught up in your own emotions. You hate the people who accuse your beloved guru of crimes. Your hatred is misplaced.

    Seems like you have almost entirely given up on uncovering evidence that will lead to your “Vanguard” ever leaving prison with a heartbeat and are now focused on trying to improve NXIVM’s (and your own) PR image.

    This is a positive sign that there is hope for you to see the truth. You’re going to have a hard journey. As much as I hold your actions defending the World’s Smartest Child Rapist™ in contempt, I hope you will come to your senses. Redemption and making amends are always possible.

    • What is the factual data you are referring to? Are you willing to put it up here with proof?
      You calling Keith a child rapist indicates you are not talking about the case but about the narrative the media has put out there. This type of comment is what makes our media of today so hateful. Also, don’t pretend to be kind by calling Suneel smart. You’re full of hate and anyone can notice that. If you’re going to engage in a dialogue, do it without hate, that is if you’re capable of it

      • Only three ‘hate’s’?

        The factual ‘data’ is available in the court evidence, in Frank’s body of work here, – going back years, and out of the mouths of all the witnesses who spoke, under oath, in the courtroom in front of the judge and those twelve members of the civitas, who gave their time and witness to this case.

        Whereas you dead-enders are the dregs of a racketeering, slave driving, whining bunch of errant lying criminals – seriously, what’s not to hate?

        I’m amazed at my own and everyone else [on this board] capacity for sympathy and compassion.

        You are not entitled to a nano-second of the thoughtful assistance you have so far received. Here’s some simple advice: providing you are not born into desperate poverty/ a war/ with a severe and incapacitating disability, you tend to get out of life, what you put into it.

        • NFW, I know, right?

          I thought my comment was at least 4-hate worthy, maybe 5, plus definitely a “What are your crimes?”

          Maybe the bitter-enders are growing a thicker skin?

          Well… I tried.

      • Ahhh Anonymous,

        I believe the recorded statement counts as proof. Visual, auditory, and viable proof.

        Further, your whole “full of hate” diatribe is only tantamount to your vitriolic anger and rage. It is no different than hate, sorry sweetie. Turn the mirror on yourself before pointing a finger.

      • Ahhh, Anonymous,

        I believe the recorded statement counts as proof. Visual, auditory and viable proof.

        Further, your whole “full of hate” diatribe is only tantamount to your vitriolic anger and rage. It is no different than hate, sorry sweetie. Turn the mirror on yourself before pointing a finger.

      • Suneel-

        You are right between the dichotomy of legal facts and the morass of arguments the commenters bring up.

        You are correct regarding the commenters’ biases, but if you can’t win them over, you won’t be able to win the public at large over either.

        • Nxidvmdvm.

          Excellent question

          I would also like the “full context” of Vanguard’s “Is it rape if the woman enjoys it”?

          Also an indefensible comment.

          • Since he has a new place to live with friendly housemates, a better question for Keith “Is it rape if YOU enjoy it”?

      • —Also, don’t pretend to be kind by calling Suneel smart.

        Jesus Christ, seriously? If you get into Harvard University on your own merits these days it means your IQ is over 130 and scored high enough on your SATs to qualify for MENSA by MENSA standards.

        Commenters are confused by Suneel’s IQ and his perspective of Keith Raniere; taken together, they appear incongruous to most, including myself.

        Fact: Suneel qualifies as a genius.

        Fact: People generally are being complimentary.

        Fact: Some people are being condescending and/or patronizing. 🙂

        Fact: I am being honest.

        Fact: Suneel is a tenacious mother f’r who has stood by an imprisoned Keith Raniere for 3 years. We would all be lucky to have a friend like Suneel. I admire Suneel’s tenacity. I truly do.

        The problem is we can not understand Suneel’s perspective.

    • I remember, from years ago, one of my professors stating that in marriage and family counseling, the biggest difficulty is dealing with males in the engineering profession. She had a great practice and passed along a valuable bit of information. In college classes, I noticed that there was a difference in the way engineering students thought, and the thought processes of those not in the hard sciences. Suneel is a good engineer, but he lacks legal and psychological knowledge that would help him understand Keith’s crimes and precisely what Keith was convicted of. Even though it has been explained, he does not get it, and without therapy, he is very unlikely to ever understand. He is singularly focused on his belief that Keith didn’t get a fair trial, no matter what other evidence is presented. It is very doubtful that any of us could convince him otherwise, and as such, the continued dialogue that is leading us nowhere becomes very frustrating. It is one of the problems of therapy; sometimes it takes a very long time to get someone to see the light, if ever.

  • “Keith was not violent and the women consented…” under the threat of blackmail. Suneel, what you really seem to be saying is that you think blackmail should be legal. In fact, this might be the ideal case in your quest to make blackmail legal. After all, it causes no violence.

  • We have 2 systems of justice in the United States, and Raniere had access to the better one. To cry foul for Raniere is an insult to the legal underclass — namely, the poor and nonwhite — that goes through the system every day and fills up our prisons without adequate representation. Suneel’s arguments here are a pathetic attempt at gaslighting as a way to muddy the waters of fact vs. fiction. We’ve seen this show in America the last 4 years, the abuser/liar claims to be the victim of abuse and lies. It’s an insult.

    • I don’t think there are 2 systems of justice in the United States. There is one system of justice, injustice. This case is excellent evidence that you cannot beat the Federal system even if you have millions of dollars to fight it. I’d suggest reading “Blind Injustice” by Mark Godsey. It is a great book that explores the psychology of federal prosecutors, by a former federal prosecutor who now leads an innocence project. Also, look at these data about the number of people who are accused of crimes by federal prosecutors and the number who are found innocent ( Now consider the estimate that 2%-10% of prisoners are innocent. For me, it is difficult to not come to the conclusion that our current justice system is broken for everyone.

      • Ask Clavinger, there’re two systems of justice: one for the rich and one for the poor.

        Raniere got a fair shake.

    • Please show us your two systems of justice in this case. Clare Bronfman was given 6 years and 9 months for a crime that is generally given less than a year of probation. Her bail was $100,000,000 and placed, basically, on house arrest, for a non-violent crime that is usually punished with less than a year of probation.

      There was no violence in Keith Raniere’s case. There was question of consent and he received 120 years in prison. Here is a case where a man forced women into prostitution (including 2 minors), was accused of threatening them with physical harm (including pointing a gun at one woman) and profited from their activity. He received 30 years in prison (

      There are more examples like this. Please share with us where the two justice systems were in this case.

      • Bail issues aren’t going get you a new trial; nobody cares.

        When an individual is prosecuted under R.I.C.O., the Government puts the screws to you and holds your feet to the coals.

        RICO lowers the bars of evidence and testimony to get a conviction.

        • Ii am growing weary of Suneel. Same
          #$%^ diferent day. I will no longer read articles with his name on them. Enough is enough.

      • Clare bear Squandered her wealth harassing people and ruining lives through the justice system.

        Her sentence is “apropos” just like the name of the defunct Nxivm restaurant.

        • She was not convicted of using the justice system to harass people. She was not even formally accused of it and allowed to defend herself against the accusation. It is outrageous for this government to punish people for things not charged, not proven, without the chance to mount a defense.

          • It’s called “the OJ principle”. You’re sent up the river for the despicable things you did, but not necessarily were convicted of. It is an around-the-block type of justice with a little bit of karma thrown in for good measure.

          • Who said she was? I just said it was “apropos”.

            Please write up a defense to what Clare did to Frank.

            And sign your name.

            And post it as here.

About the Author

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

Additionally, Parlato’s coverage of the group OneTaste, starting in 2018, helped spark an FBI investigation, which led to indictments of two of its leaders in 2023.

Parlato 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. This was ironic, as many credit Parlato as one of the primary architects of his arrest and the cratering of the cult he founded.

Parlato is a consulting producer and appears in TNT's The Heiress and the Sex Cult, which premiered on May 22, 2022. Most recently, he consulted and appeared on Tubi's "Branded and Brainwashed: Inside NXIVM," which aired January, 2023.

IMDb — Frank Parlato

Contact Frank with tips or for help.
Phone / Text: (305) 783-7083