In theory, there must a nexus (direct link) between the one who is claiming to be a “victim” and the crimes(s) that the defendant has been convicted of committing. In practice, however, prosecutors and judges sometimes bend the rule in terms of who is allowed to make a “Victim Impact Statement” at the sentencing hearing of a convicted defendant –and/or to submit a restitution claim.

In the case of Clare Bronfman, several people who were not directly connected to the two crimes to which she pleaded guilty were allowed to read “Victim Impact Statements” at her sentencing hearing. Insofar as I can recall, Clare’s attorneys did not raise any objections to any of those people being allowed to make those statements.
The same thing happened in the case of Keith Raniere. Once again, I do not recall Keith’s attorneys raising any objections to any of the people who were allowed to make “Victim Impact Statements” at his sentencing hearing.
In Clare’s case, Judge Garaufis ordered her to pay $96,605.25 of restitution to Jane Doe 12 (Sylvie). He also fined her $500,000, ordered her to pay a Special Assessment of $200, entered a money forfeiture judgment of $6,000,000, and sentenced her to 81 months in federal prison (Per the terms of her plea deal, Clare can only appeal the portion of her sentence that is above 27 months).
In Keith’s case, Judge Garaufis fined him $1,750,000, ordered him to pay a Special Assessment of $700 and a $15,000 assessment pursuant to the Justice for Victims Trafficking Act of 2015, and sentenced him to 120 years in federal prison (In addition to appealing his conviction of committing the seven crimes with which he was charged, Keith can – and likely will – appeal several aspects of his sentence). The judge also allowed those who claimed to be “victims” to submit their claims within 90 days of the date of Keith’s sentencing.

If Judge Garaufis utilizes a narrow definition of the term “victim”, only those people who were directly affected by the seven crimes of which Keith was convicted (and the sixteen predicate acts underlying the Racketeering conviction) will be awarded restitution. If, however, Judge Garaufis uses a broader definition of that term, then even those who were not directly affected by those crimes and predicate acts will be awarded restitution.
Suneel, perhaps you should read the next article about Cognitive Dissonance and how it may have affected the judge’s decision on these matters you are complaining about. It’s a fascinating read. If you don’t have time. let me sum it up for you here:
You see there is this thing called Cognitive Dissonance. And then there are these toasters that vampires bought for $50. But the vampires got buyer’s remorse and would rather have purchased a blender. And then Keith gets set free. The End.
I enjoyed the re-reads! Once again…
…Great legal explanations!!!! Sensational!
Too bad it’s falling on deaf ears.
I love it when lay people explain the law to an attorney. 😂
*****
Claviger is trying to say “shit don’t work that way in the real [legal] world.”
…And the Nxivm don’t get it! 😂
KR, did the prosecution call an expert witness? Who??
Per usual, the NXIVM followers make the same mistakes other activists do.
They confuse the way they think things should be (fantasy) with how things are (reality). They may think Keith was mistreated under the system (fantasy), but how he was treated is the same as anyone else with him actually benefiting more due to his wealth to get better lawyers (reality). If you want to make your fantasy (more fair justice system) with reality (a deeply flawed justice system that screwed many, but poor and minorities the most), then start voting accordingly for those that want to fix it (reality – those politicians do not really exist currently).
So they can point out all day long about how unfair things are. They are not entirely wrong. But it’s the current reality of the system and that reality means that Keith was treated consistently within that system and will not be able to use that reason for a retrial. Again, until they can point to something that is tantamount to prosecutorial misconduct, then Keith is screwed. It’s really that simple. Attempts to make it more complex doesn’t change your fantasy into a reality.
Change can only be made when you truly recognize the current reality of a situation and what impedes it from becoming the fantasy ideal you wish – and then take actions accordingly (say run for office). Until then, all the essays in the world will change nothing.
Ultimately for me, its rich white guy treated unfairly by the justice system falls under “get the fuck out of here with your privilege.”