Suneel: How Can Judge Decide Who Qualifies for Victim Restitution if Their Claims Were Not Proven at Trial?

Judge Garuafis
Suneel Chakravorty

By Suneel Chakravorty

Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis will soon determine what victims Keith Raniere must pay restitution to and for how much. The judge has almost unilateral power to declare a person a victim of Keith Raniere.

The prosecution seems to have corralled many of the almost 100 individuals into writing victim impact statements and into filing restitution claims, with a little help from Neil Glazer, an attorney who represents many of them.

Most of these individuals were not determined to be victims in the trial.  

Judge Garaufis gets to decide who is a victim and who gets what amount of money, for people he mostly never met, and whose claims of victimization he cannot possibly vet, and then will order the taking of citizen Raniere’s money from that citizen without – in almost every instance – any of the allegations being subjected to the rigors of trial.

There will be no one under oath, no testimony elicited, no cross-examination, no documents to be admitted as evidence, and no jury to listen and judge the veracity of their claims of victimhood.

All a claimant has to do is write a letter describing her or his victimization in any language they care to choose, knowing full well that the greater the harm is laid out, the greater the chance of a bigger payout.

Knowing that there is a limited pot of gold at the end of the Raniere rainbow, I can well imagine contestants competing in their tales of Raniere-horror.

I heard one woman, Toni Natalie, who is said to be seeking restitution, reportedly fabricated the cause of the death of her own brother, who she claims committed suicide because of his despondency over how Keith Raniere was allegedly treating his sister.

According to this publication, Frank Parlato interviewed the brother’s longtime live-in girlfriend who told Parlato that Natalie’s brother died of a heart attack, and she had the autopsy to prove it. 

Who’s telling the truth, the live-in girlfriend of the deceased or his sister?

I cannot imagine the judge will order a copy of the autopsy to vet this claim or any of the other claims made by the 100 other individuals aspiring to qualify for restitution.  

Had Natalie been subjected to any of the rigors of due process, she would have been required to produce an autopsy, or the defense would have produced it, to show the jury before she could claim this harm she endured because of her brother’s suicide.

In other words, a serious claim of suicide would have to be proven to be a suicide before it would even be determined if the defendant had a role in that suicide. This would be true even in a civil lawsuit.

But under the rules in this case, the judge just gets to choose who he believes, without evidence.

There is no compelling reason for so-called victims not to embellish, or lie even, since they know they will not be questioned, no one will vet their stories, and the more harrowing the tale of victimhood, the greater the chances at receiving restitution money.

There is no safeguard to ensure claimants to restitution are telling the truth.

This is a shoddy way to pursue justice. 

Of course, it is easy to go along with granting a judge this kind of awesome power to create victims out of whole cloth, for, in Raniere’s case, anyone who can craft a narrative that fits the judge’s sense of who he is, may get money and be declared a victim, and no one will complain. 

The whole world hates Raniere – they’d rather see anyone get money, even under false pretenses, rather than let Raniere keep a dime of it.

Yet, this concept cannot possibly appeal to those who can look beyond their dislike of Keith Raniere. It is not about Raniere but about the system. A judge simply should not have the power to declare anyone a victim who was not so declared a victim by a jury at trial.

There must be a better process than a federal judge merely deciding what to do with someone’s money based on someone else’s story of victimization for behavior not criminally charged and not proven in a court of law.

This judicial creation of victims by fiat is not justice.

About the author



Click here to post a comment

Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us! (Email & username are optional)

  • Who does this describe?

    “The people who are accustomed to being agreeable and organised, and whose social integration is good, find it more difficult to disobey,” explains Laurent Bègue, a behavioural scientist at the University of Grenoble-Alpes who analysed the participants’ behaviour. And in this case, that personality profile meant they were willing to torture another human being.

    These findings join a spate of new studies showing that people with high self-control and discipline have a surprising dark side. This research can help us understand why model citizens sometimes turn toxic, with important implications for our understanding of unethical behaviour in the workplace and beyond.”

    • –I mean unfair in comparison to the ideals of justice and due process.

      As if you know anything about the “ideals” of either of them. You’re a Python language instructor who’s taken one or more NXIVM courses and has no higher educational nor professional experience in the legal system. This makes you at most merely an armchair philosopher of law.

      As K.R. Claviger has told you a number of times, it is irrelevant if Keith was treated unfairly according to the “ideals” of justice and due process–whatever that even means no matter how you or anyone else defines them. What is relevant is whether Keith was treated unfairly within the justice system as it exists now.

      As far as your claim that his treatment is not “unique”, that is utterly silly because this case is quite unique (That is why it has drawn quite a bit of national and world media attention – which is also why you guys whine all the time that “hate in the media” got him convicted), and the claim that many others are dealing with “far worse”, then why aren’t you out there supporting the latter instead of your “friend” Keith if this is really about the fairness of the U.S. justice system as such? Don’t they deserve more with respect to the “ideals” that you speciously wax on about, because after all, far worse sufferers of injustice deserve far more attention because that is only fair, or are you simply looking to just get something out of this fatuous process as the current, most vocal defensive mouthpiece for Keith?

      –make it fascinating to the layperson

      LMAO. Sure. There is nothing universally fascinating to laypeople to make such an absurd statement.

      If jurisprudence was so fascinating to you as an individual (which is at most what you can speak to as a layperson), you would have chosen a career path in it. And then you would no longer be a layperson.

      –to not only expose the issues in Keith’s case but also the systemic problems.

      Is a side effect of participation in NXIVM courses an increase in the manifestation of pre-existing narcissistic tendencies?

      • -Is a side effect of participation in NXIVM courses an increase in the manifestation of pre-existing narcissistic tendencies?


  • Mr. Claviger, you seem knowledgable about this topic so could you please answer a couple of questions?

    Is it possible for Mr. Raniere to get conjugal visits while he is imprisoned? Does that only happen after a certain amount of time like a privilege he can earn?

    Would Mr. Chakravorty be able to have a conjugal visit with Mr. Raniere? Would he just be able to sign up on a list or would that require marital status? Thank you.

  • Suneel-

    You are tenacious and loyal. Both virtues I admire. Anyone who has you as a friend is lucky. I wish I could agree with you, but you have yet to provide a shred of new evidence. You only complain about an unfair rigged system with no proof of bias or tyranny.

    …As I once said, anyone as tenacious as you will always be okay. Take care!

  • Suneel, you remind me of the many women who wrote to Charles Mason proposing marriage.

    You don’t even know this man.

    Compose yourself.

  • When poor, poor Suneel Chakravorty’s fourth paragraph referred to “citizen Raniere” – well shoot! I got the fucking giggles.

    That was fun.

    Sincerely, Chakravorty, a “fiat” at the end of this little essay was unnecessary.

    Now if Chakravorty does not like Fiats, the Italian automobile maker might not care. It is neither here nor there how Suneel gets his “feelsies.” Suneel’s moody disgruntled shit-fits won’t really affect anything.

    Speaking of car talk, my old Fiat wouldn’t want to have Suneel’s uptight little ass in its driver or its passenger seats.

    Maybe Suneel would like an older model Citroen, though.

    The first time I saw one of THOSE, at age five, I said to my dad, “look, Daddy! That car just went down on its knees!”

    The “down on its knees” bit also applies to Suneel Chakravorty. Look behind the undelineated corners, floorboards and mattresses. Check out the foundation.

    This comparison could go into far, far more detail. Ah yes, indeed. I could make it somewhat pornographic with only the slightest effort. Don’t worry. This can be “handled” softly and as painlessly as possible.

    Someone could simply open the door and see that the frustrated elephant gets escorted out of the room.

    But I do try to spare Frank Parlato. Really. You do realize that Frank rhymes with “spank.”

    So lemme keep this brief. Whack rhymes with crack. Ass crack?

    Let’s talk about sex, Chakravorty. Yes, let us talk about YOUR sex and your sexuality. Come on. Are you ready, Freddie?

    Once that gets out in the open with Suneel, perhaps we can get down to a realistic powwow.

    Then at last there could, possibly, be some commiseration. There might even be a toast! During that moment of enthusiastic grace, we could all sing “Breaking Up Is Hard to Do.” Even though some of us were never wild about Neil Sedaka, he did give us that.

    You know, that song even had a chin. Note I did not mention blue balls.

    So. Let’s get Raniere out of the way. See the situation for what it is, and thank Claviger for being patient and polite.
    Come-a come-down, doo bee doo bee down…..”

    “….citizen Raniere.” Tee hee hee. How Kafkaesque. GTFOOH. Or. Let’s talk about (your) sex life, Monsieur Bimbo. No, no, I insist! U go first, young fellow.

    That’s where it’s at, in essence. It would be fascinating, if only it ALL hadn’t been seen, many times before Suneel Chakravorty was even born. The poor, confused horned toad. Dickmania!

    Love makes the world go round but first, one has to learn to stay away from any rat wheels. There is no love to be found in a cage.

    • I didn’t read it either, I just came here to agree that Claviger is indeed unwaveringly patient and polite. Two skills I have rejected and yet admire.

      The comment section is The Spank Report.

      • Patient and polite? LOL.

        He’s got an ego bigger than Godzilla and can be as petty as kids on the playground.

        Let us not forget that last summer, Claviger wished death upon me and my family for disagreeing with him about the severity of Kung-Flu.

        Claviger argued that Kung-Flu is a super-deadly illness that we must all cower from (by hiding under the sheets and not living life). However, I disagreed with him and presented FACTS about the REAL death rates which proved otherwise.

        After that, he said:

        “If there’s any justice in the world, my family would get infected with COVID” (and presumably die, LOL).

        Why did he wish death upon my family?

        Because I had the audacity to disagree with him. Because I had the audacity to say that we shouldn’t all cower like scared ‘wittle boys and girls.

        Does Claviger wish to deny that this incident took place?

        Will he (or Frank) simply block this post to prevent us from discussing his juvenile ego and temper? Let’s see.

        Have a nice day. 🙂

        • I don’t deny that I wished that you — and/or some of your family members or your friends (assuming you have any) — would get infected with COVID-19. I’ve said the same to any ass-clown that tried to talk people into believing that COVID-19 was just like the flu.

          You’re the guy who said it was “No big deal” — so why are you arguing that I wished death upon you and your family? If you truly believe it’s “No big deal”, you would treat what I said as if I wished that you — or your family members — got a bad cold.

          BTW, there are 450,000 Americans — and more than 2.3 million people worldwide — who think you’ve been spewing stupidity in your “advice” about COVID-19.

          And more than 5,100 Americans died yesterday from this “No big deal” disease.

          I never understand why people like you get so much enjoyment by talking other people into doing stupid things.

        • I don’t really read your comments, they just aren’t that interesting. You project, like The Leftovers. It’s boring.

          • Don’t read them,huh? That’s why you’re here replying.

            Duh. 🙂

            Please have a wonderful day. 🙂

          • —Don’t read them,huh? That’s why you’re here replying.

            Yep, there’s no fooling Bangkok. He’s the smartest kid in Special Ed.

            Hey Special Ed Bangkok,
            Here is an important math problem:
            If your teacher shares 2/3 of her hot apple pie with 11 men how much pie will each man get? The answer will help you figure out who your real dad is. Get out your calculator, pencil, and paper!

        • Pious Bangkok,

          Be honest! Your parents were wishing they were dead long before Claviger came around. Bangkok, you make Kelly Anne Conway’s daughter look like a pleasure.

    • Shivani-

      Chakravorty monologue ran all over like my 79’ VW rabbit’s chronic oil leak— or diarrhea from a Guatemalan salad.
      I chomped down Chakravorty’s written biblical passage and grew bewildered. I read Chekhov instead of Vonnegut! Catch 22 anyone? I’m watching Bugs Bunny, but the carrot is in my mouth. Can you say, “what’s up Doc?” Cuz, I need a lobotomy doctor!

      Suneel’s piece reads like a crazy blond bitch, screaming as she takes a bath while holding a ‘hare dryer’. Suneel’s in a big powwow and the 10 little Indians aren’t coming to the gang-bang; so Suneel sits in a tent scratching his three headed totem pole thing. The banjo plays, “Someone’s in the kitchen with Dinah. Someone I know.”

      Let’s all sigh a collective relief, then take a breath and sing “Bird is the word,bird is the word” tis a broken record Suneel!

      Ever hear of the WHO? “Mommy’s got a squeeze box daddy don’t sleep at night.” So take that old 79 Rabbit to jiffy lube. Lube up! Put a 100 miles on the jalopy’s odometer making the bed springs creek with delight.
      Ice cold Budweiser all round!
      Drink motherfuckers!

    • Shivani-

      My comment to you was meant in admiration and jest. Like you, I kept a common thread throughout, with the exception of the last paragraph.

      Your writing style, truthfully, is more skillful than I had imagined…

      ….. I had to spend a fair amount of time writing a cohesive-passage using metaphors, alliteration, poetry, and popular culture.

      I will never critique your writing again!

      You gotz mad skills, my lady!

      • Yours was not bad, actually good pastiche, but Shivani? Who tf does it like that? I’m a total stan of her ‘mad skills’ – yes.

  • Just commenting to say I didn’t read this article. I won’t read any article that contains “Suneel” in it.
    It’s sure to be boring.

    • Same.

      Not reading any further Suneel posts.
      For the same reasons.

      Suneel doesn’t answer questions. Because Suneel has no answers. He claims to both have just met Keith and know him deeply.

      Suneel is a misogynist masquerading as a feminist.

      Suneel attacks victims. And to quote back to Suneel an approximation of what he has stated previously:

      If the Nxivm dead-enders have so much proof of prosecutorial misconduct – why the need to demonize the victims?

    • Snoring, I have my qualms about Keith, but I actually find that Suneel has much more thoughtful and logical analysis compared to other guest contributors (not including KR Claviger). Why would you tune out thoughtful analysis?

      • Some version of “I have my qualms about Keith, but” is a way NXIVM-bots love to start their posts.

        Amy B, you forgot to use the word “data.”

      • It doesn’t appear that way to anyone unless they’re a former member or paid to defend him.

        I have often wondered how Suneel is able to navigate life without a court appointed social worker, but to each their own.

      • Does it occur to you that “thoughtful analysis” contains detachment? No subjectivity like Chakravorty’s can even rustle up a breeze. He is not “analyzing” a single, fucking thing or any thoughts whatsoever.

        Suneel Chakravorty is merely a voluntary mouthpiece, and as such, Suneel has no thoughtful analysis to offer. None.

        See it now or hold your “piece.” And if you want to hold onto this crap, clutch the living shit out of it, and without the spouting which is so transparent, about trying to use “thoughtful analysis” as a lame cover job. It is too easy to look through you. See that now, too. Climb out of the suit, Yusef. Your guard dog days have passed. Here’s a cookie.

        Chakravorty is simply symbiotic, and every word he writes is symptomatic of his own chosen corner. Suneel is like a barnacle ATTACHED to a shipwreck. You seem to be easy to fool, eating Crackerjacks, unhappy with the prize. Was it a broken plastic goo-gaw ring? No good brandings?

        Suneel is a lot like a useless condom, fashioned out of an old fishnet stocking, splendidly made out of interconnecting holes. Holes named Nicki or Michelle? “Thoughtful analysis.”

        Did you know that the macaw has a brain the size of a walnut? “Walnutbrain” is a popular phrase at my house. We also love talking birds, but birds are birds, for crying out loud.

      • Amy B., Shivani gave the perfect answer for why I don’t read Suneel’s crap.

        “Does it occur to you that “thoughtful analysis” contains detachment? No subjectivity like Chakravorty’s can even rustle up a breeze. He is not “analyzing” a single, fucking thing or any thoughts whatsoever.”

  • Suneel, what data did you base your claim on that the money belongs to Keith? Because the official data (a form HE filled in and signed) shows he has a total net worth of 60K or thereabout. Critical thinking, but omitting glaring data, my friend. He pretended to own nothing, which means he cannot now claim possession of any of it. Tough. Whatever the judge decides has technically zilch to do with Keith – or only up to the tune of 60K.

  • Broken record “argument” in summary:


    Keith can whine until the sun burns out, but no one–except for his diehard followers–believes this underlying thread that exists in all of his claims made through those he still has some sense of control over.

    That’s the problem when you live your life as an insincere douchebag. Your lack of true integrity becomes your own worst enemy.


  • Suneel, you seem to believe that the funds to be distributed belongs to Keith, somehow. Any proof of it? Or data? Because Keith claimed to be a renunciate, own nothing, except a half share of a property (He declared his total net worth to be 60K – and there is data to back that claim in the paperwork from his arrest.) So … did he lie to the authorities? Or, like his shirts, did the money appear by a miracle from somewhere? Since it doesn’t appear to be Keith’s money anyway, why would you care who gets a share of it?

  • Absolutely agree. This judge’s incompetence keeps digging an owfull hole in our justice system. Great point Suneel.

  • Suneel,

    Just as your wishing that our criminal justice system operated differently in terms of how trials are conducted — and how appeals are limited in scope — doesn’t change anything, so too does your criticism about how restitution is awarded not change anything.

    Worse yet, claiming that Keith is being treated unfairly in terms of being ordered to pay restitution — when, in fact, he’s being treated exactly the same way as any other convicted defendant — underscores your overall lack of understanding of our criminal justice system.

    By way of example, if Keith got a speeding ticket for driving at 75 mph in an area that was clearly marked with signs stating that the limit was 45 mph, you’re arguing that Keith should not have been ticketed because the speed limit in the area should be 75 mph. Do you really think that sort of argument will result in the traffic court judge dismissing the speeding charge against Keith?

    Keith has been — and is being — treated in accordance with the applicable rules and standards of our criminal justice system.

    You may think that many of those rules and standards of that system should be changed — but that doesn’t mean that Keith is being treated unfairly within that system.

    Because Keith has been — and is being — treated fairly within the rules and standards of our criminal system, I do not think that any of his appeals will result in him getting a new trial.

    If you want to change the rules and standards of our criminal justice system, you need to direct your efforts to members of Congress. But even if all of your desired changes were enacted, that may not change Keith’s fate.

    He was arrested, indicted, held, tried, convicted and sentenced under our existing system. And unless you can prove that he was treated substantially differently from all the other defendants that have gone through that system, your arguments about him being treated unfairly will continue to fall on deaf ears.

    • You keep missing the point Claviger. Just because all of the convictions, trials, etc. are the same it doesn’t mean their right and most importantly it doesn’t mean their serving justice. We should stand together for justice for all let aside Raniere. I hope you realize this and actually support a good cause.

      • No, Anthony, I think it is you and Suneel who “keep missing the point”.

        If you and Suneel have any evidence that Keith was treated differently at any stage of his case than the average criminal defendant is treated, please show it to all of us. Simply complaining that the system is unfair — which is all you’ve done so far — is not going to get Keith a new trial.

        Do prosecutors often over-charge in order to force defendants into plea deals? Yes, they do!

        Do prosecutors in jury trials often try to portray defendants as “general scumbags” rather than just focus on the elements of each charged crime? Yes, they do!

        Do juries often get caught up in emotions rather than simply apply the law in some cases? Yes, they do!

        Do judges sometimes hand out excessive sentences because they are so thoroughly disgusted with certain defendants? Yes, they do!

        And even if you and Suneel can prove that all those things happened to Keith Raniere, my response is “So what…it happens all the time. And appellate courts and the U.S. Supreme Court have set guidelines and standards on all of those issues”.

        So, unless you and Suneel can prove — and “prove” is not the same as “allege” — that the existing guidelines and standards regarding one or more of those issues were somehow violated in Keith’s case, there is zero chance that Keith is going to get a new trial.

        Keith decided not to take a plea deal.

        Keith decided to have a jury trial rather than a bench trial.

        Keith decided not to put on any defense.

        Next case…

      • Stop trying to put us all on Team Vanguard.

        You have no idea who has been fighting for justice equality.

        Because you haven’t been involved in that fight.

        Please list three things you have personally done in your fight for “justice for all”.

        Not for Keith. Or Keith’s case.

        And commenting on Frank Report does not count.

        Thank you.

      • Anthony, if you or anyone else actually cares even a tiny bit about criminal justice reform in the US, literally the last place it is effective to post about it online is here on the Frank Report.

        This is why no one with a single firing neuron capable of critical thinking believes you are anything other than a NXIVM bitter-ender or, maybe, a false flag sock puppet mocking NXIVM bitter-enders. I really hope it is the latter. If so, hats off, you have their schtick down pat.

      • Anthony,

        —You keep missing the point Claviger
        K.R. Claviger is not the one ☝🏼 missing the point.

        He has explained everything to all of you Raniere supporters.

        Not one thing have you brought up that is a legally valid argument.

        K.R. Claviger has debunked or invalidated any of your ideas.

        Your only argument is “It’s not fair.”

        Life is not fair… That’s the one thing Americans and Europeans have in common; they all cry life is not fair. Life has never been fair.

        Life is a euphemism for “this sucks”.

    • Claviger,
      Suneel was elbowed very harshly by fate when he was dealt two very substandard sources of genetical material to draw upon. I admire your patience.

    • LOL. Pot, meet kettle.

      Claviger is lecturing Suneel that bitching about the criminal justice system is a waste of time and has no chance of accomplishing anything.

      Yet, Claviger has written dozens of articles DOING PRECISELY THAT, lol.

      Claviger is always complaining about inmates not being treated fairly by the courts, by federal prosecutors and by prison systems.

      That’s practically all he does here.

      Yet now he’s lecturing others to just “SHUT UP” about that same topic which he’s always bitching about?

      Would Frank like to weigh-in here? I’m guessing not cuz he doesn’t wanna make Claviger look bad.

      If Claviger were standing in front of me right now, I’d throw a CREAM PIE in his face. I might even bend over and fart in his face, just to show my disgust.

      Claviger is a joke. It’s no wonder why it took him 6 tries just to pass the BAR exam.

      • If you don’t understand the distinction between the arguments that Suneel is raising on behalf of Keith — and the arguments that I have raised regarding the need to reform various aspects of our criminal justice system — there is really nothing that I can do to help you. As one of my favorite coaches once proclaimed, “You can’t teach height — and you can’t teach intellect”.

        • What favorite sport did Claviger learn from a size obsessed coach?

          1. Basketball
          2. Horse racing
          3. Midnight Volleyball
          4. Balance beam
          5. Badminton
          6. Cricket (non-bowler)
          7. Strongman
          8. Figure skating
          9. High hurdles
          10. Equestrian

        • KR-

          If Scott Johnson and Bangkok had any poorer reading comprehension skills, they’d both qualify for federal disability assistance checks. 😉

          • …Says the guy whose wife has totally emasculated his role in the marriage, LOL, while reducing him to cleaning up around the house and looking after the kids — while she brings home the bacon as the prized breadwinner.

            I couldn’t imagine the humiliation among your male friends, when they razz you about that. 🙂

            Sir, you need to reassert yourself as the dominant male in the relationship.

            You need to start telling wifey how it’s gonna be.

            Don’t ask her. You need to fucken TELL her how it’s gonna be. 🙂

            Be a man. Wear the pants. Tell that Sicilian bitch the way it is.

            Gain back your SELF RESPECT, sir.

            Stop living a life of inferiority.

            Have a nice day. 🙂

    • Claviger, your speeding ticket analogy is incorrect. The proper way to compare the two situations are as follows. K gets a speeding ticket because he was driving 75mph. However, there was never any speed limit sign posted anywhere on the road. The only reason he’s being given a ticket is because a bunch of so-called victims are rushing up claiming that there was a speed limit sign, when they have nothing to prove it. They aren’t questioned at all, the judge just takes their word for it and gives the ticket anyway.

      • You’re talking about restitution — which is a separate issue from his conviction, the issue I was addressing with the 75 mph/45 mph reference.

        But even in terms of restitution, there are established rules and standards that will be applied in Keith’s case.

        Each person who claims to be a victim will have to show how they were directly harmed by one or more of the crimes committed by the NXIVM defendants. And they’re going to need to show how they calculated the damages for which they are seeking restitution.

        Keith will also have an opportunity to challenge each claim for restitution. And he also won’t be “under oath” in terms of whatever he says in his challenges.

        This is not the first case in which Judge Garaufis has had to grapple with claims for restitution. He’ll weed out the “hopeful” from the “deserving”.

    • Hi KR Claviger,

      Yes. This way of handling restitution, although antithetical to due process, has become commonplace, as have many of the previous issues I have raised. But I do not believe that just because they are accepted, we should accept them and not publicly criticize them.

      Also, when I say I believe Keith was treated unfairly, I do not mean unfair in comparison to others who have had the misfortune of dealing with Department of (in)Justice – his treatment is not unique and there are many dealing with far worse.

      I mean unfair in comparison to the ideals of justice and due process.

      Keith’s case presents an opportunity because it has many factors that make it fascinating to the layperson and I intend to seize this opportunity to not only expose the issues in Keith’s case but also the systemic problems.

      • You and I are in agreement that several aspects of the current U.S. criminal justice system need to be improved.

        Where you and differ is whether Keith’s case is the right vehicle for such improvements to occur — and whether Keith is entitled to a new trial.

        I encourage you to keep working to improve the system.

        I also encourage you to accept the reality that Keith is never going to get out of prison.

      • I bet it would be fun to compare the evolution of your intent and the way it plays out after the announcement.

        The layperson is fascinated by the decades in which the man you’re defending perverted the justice system to commit extensive fraud and abuse. Whatever your statements of intent, the end result is that you’re actively defending a convicted felon that has been compared to an ISIS trainer, which is not in any way ethical or humanitarian.

        Keith avoided that thing you’re seeking, by relying on class, and that is the root of the inequity in our justice system, that is where it starts and ends. Where are your critical thinking skills in addressing the statistical inequity? There is no lack of justice for those able to pay for it, and Keith did as a matter of principle. He hoarded it and tortured others by denying it because he could. There is no equality of justice until the least among us have equal representation under the law, and you’ve chosen a con man that bilked millions out of dumb wealthy people looking for a daddy that will fuck them.

        You’re such a good boy. Yes, you are. Yes, you are!

  • Raniere’s conviction is final. The presumption of innocence no longer applies to him. The rule that the judge decides on compensation claims is legally regulated, so it is easier and quicker for crime victims to receive compensation than if they try to obtain compensation in lengthy and expensive lawsuits. And damaged victims probably need this money sooner, and cannot wait for it for years.
    The Raniere trial showed how long everything has dragged on. You can tell by the fact that Raniere’s sentencing was on 6/19/2019, and how long it has taken to get to trial since he was indicted in March 2018.

        • No big deal. I’m just trying to ensure that we all get as much right as possible in our discussions about Keith’s case (I have rarely written the first draft of a post that didn’t need several corrections).

  • I don’t get all these new articles about restitution. Everyone knows Keith has no money and no assets. Heck, if it wasn’t for his clothes magically appearing over the years, he’d literally have been the nude emperor of NXIVM.

    Stop wasting your time, Frank and Suneel. I would call you both morons for not realizing that Keith is broke, but my feelings will get hurt if the goalie redacts me.

  • I don’t find it funny that Raniere might be financially wiped out, I don’t care whether he has one dollar or millions in his bank account. I find it amusing that he won’t get any sex (with a woman) again. That’s hit him where it hurts.

    However, I do agree it is a difficult role, deciding who deserves what and how much and why. It’s a tough job but someone’s got to do it and there is no point losing sleep over it.

    • — I find it amusing that he won’t get any sex (with a woman) again. That’s hit him where it hurt.

      That does hurt!

      I don’t know what keeps a guy going after his appeals exhaust and there are no conjugal visits coming in the future.

      The rest of Keith’s life will be eating crap food, living in a crap cell, wearing crap clothes and hanging out with crap pedophiles…

      …And the closest he will ever get to a woman is a crap transvestite inmate with facial hair.

  • Suneel, you consider Keith and yourself victims. Have you actually completed any NXIVM training?

    I doubt it because you don’t understand: There are no ultimate victims; therefore, do not be a victim.

    All your complaints about the wrongs other people are doing are projections of your own disintegrations.

    Has it been proven in court beyond a reasonable doubt that you have completed a single NXIVM course? NO!

    You previously promised to fully develop 44 points and provide evidence that would provide Raniere with a clear legal case for a new trial. You have failed to even start this. Instead, you mocked Vanguard’s online biography.

    You also said you would very soon write about Vanguard’s math skills and, although this would not help win his freedom, you haven’t followed through.

    Instead, you write this whining piece lacking in data – and instead, use subjective, weaselly words like “almost,” “seems,” “imagine,” “heard,” “dislike,” and “hate.”

    Nothing you have written helps get Vanguard a single millimeter closer to freedom.

    Suneel, you are in an ethical breach against Vanguard.

    This must be why he has retained additional appellate legal counsel rather than hiring you.

    You really need to take a hard look at yourself and decide how committed you are to Vanguard.

    Your actions demonstrate a lack of integrity.

    You are at effect, not cause.

    • I just assumed this was shoddy busywork, because Clare wouldn’t notice the difference.

      That’s what it looks like.

  • At this point, I just assume that Suneel is passing messages from Keith as his own. It just seems like something the “world’s smartest man” would do because, well you know, he isn’t that smart. Much like this silly something. Calling it analysis or an argument are too strong words for it. Whatever silly drivel it is, the pardon didn’t happen. Keith will die in jail. Eventually, Suneel and KR will both have to accept that.

  • I must agree with my respected colleague, Mr. Suneel.

    Toni is lying to the court and Frank is LETTING IT HAPPEN without informing the court of his evidence that she’s lying about her brother.

    Frank is less than a journalist for letting this happen. He has a duty to the court to let the TRUTH be known. So does Claviger.

    I must also agree with Suneel about the rest of the cretins (victims) lining up to get their spin of the roulette wheel, telling their tales of “woe is me” and hoping to get their piece of the pie.

    It’s disgusting how human beings can turn into leeches when money is involved.

    Suneel is correct. Most of these people are not deserving of any money.

    Most of them are nothing but leeches and broke deadbeats looking for a payday cuz they lack the skills to pay the bills.

    I wouldn’t be surprised to see Niceguy show up looking for a payday too.

    I would never lower myself to such a degree. Much respect to Suneel for exposing these leeches.

    Claviger needs to stop hiding and agree with Suneel on this topic. The judge has too much power and the victims don’t have to prove anything. It’s just a big con job. Who can con the judge in the most convincing fashion.

    Where is Frank? Sitting on his ass while doing NOTHING to expose the truth. Get off your ass, Frank. Expose Toni’s BS by sending the judge your FACTS.

  • Suneel, you have really bad arguments. You should really have your Vanguard review these before putting it out there because you are not making a compelling argument.

    Most Americans, like myself, respect our justice system as flawed as it is and you’re not changing anyone’s opinion. Stop making KR a victim, this victimization of your fallen idol needs to stop. No one but the few diehards see him as the victim you make him out to be.

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.” In addition, he was credited in the Starz docuseries 'Seduced' for saving 'slave' women from being branded and escaping the sex-slave cult known as DOS.

Parlato 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 premieres on May 22, 2022.

IMDb — Frank Parlato,_Jr.

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