[Editor’s Note: Below is a compilation of comments that K.R. Claviger has made regarding the current debate concerning the nude photos of Cami that were supposedly taken when she was 15-years-old. Because these comments were made at different times, there may be some overlap and duplication.]
By K.R. Claviger
I hate to burst the big bubble of baseless hope but even if Suneel and the remaining followers of Keith Alan Raniere were right about the point Suneel is trying to make with regard to the possible alteration of Cami’s photo, it would not change the outcome of the trial.
That’s because the photos in question was only relevant with respect to one of the eleven predicate acts concerning Count Two: Racketeering.
That was Racketeering Act 4: Possession of Child Pornography.
The actual charge of Possession of Child Pornography was in Count Five of the second superseding indictment — and that charge was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds and referred to the ‘Hear-No-Evil, See-No-Evil, Not-Indict-Evil’ Northern District of New York.
And even if the same photos were also linked to two other predicate acts — i.e., Racketeering Act 2: Sexual Exploitation of a Child on November 2, 2005 and Racketeering Act 3: Sexual Exploitation of a Child on November 24, 2005 — that still leaves eight other predicate acts that Keith was found to have committed with respect to the charge of Racketeering.
In essence, you’re employing the same strategy that Derek Chauvin’s attorneys used in his recent trial: keep throwing shit ball alternative theories at the wall — and hope that some of them stick. And we all know how well that turned out.
What Were the Charges?
How about you take off the training wheels — and start dealing directly with the seven crimes that a jury of twelve independent people unanimously concluded Keith committed? Just to refresh your mind, those were:
- Racketeering Conspiracy
- Forced Labor Conspiracy
- Wire Fraud Conspiracy
- Sex Trafficking Conspiracy
- Sex Trafficking of Nicole
- Attempted Sex Trafficking of Jaye
I think Suneel understands the points I make but because he can’t refute them, he either ignores them or he deflects them by responding about a different topic. As much as anything, I make my comments to be sure that Frank Report readers can see the holes in Suneel’s arguments: like thinking that the overturning of one predicate act would somehow undo the outcome of Keith’s entire trial.
Keith Could Have Called Cami as a Witness
I can’t recall whether anyone has already raised this point but it should be noted that Keith also had the right to call Cami as a witness. Granted it may have been difficult for Keith’s attorneys to force her to show up in Brooklyn, NY for the trial — but the question is “Did they try to do that?”
And since Cami was being represented by an attorney paid for by Clare Bronfman, did Keith’s attorneys even interview her?
FBI May Not Have Followed Protocol
In the meantime, however, I do want to point out what normally happens when the FBI — or any other police-type organization — has seized electronic evidence. The first step in most standard protocols is to make a duplicate/mirror image of the electronic evidence — which allows forensic examiners to examine the evidence all they want without disturbing its condition at the time it was seized.
It does not appear that was done here — at least not by the person who accessed the camera card on September 19, 2018.
I also want to point out how some of the misrepresentations that are being bandied about by various commenters.
Based on my original review of the trial transcripts — which was back when the trial was going on — here are some statements that I do not believe are accurate:
– The FBI waited six months to log the camera card into evidence. There is absolutely no evidence to support this claim — and the only way to be sure, one way or the other, would be to review the FBI’s evidence logs.
– The camera card went missing. There is absolutely no evidence to support this claim — and just because someone accessed it on September 19, 2018 does not mean it ever left the FBI’s evidence room.
– The FBI tampered with the camera card. There is absolutely no evidence to support this claim — and the fact that someone accessed the card on September 19, 2018 does not prove they tampered with it.
To be sure, it looks like the FBI made a mistake by allowing someone to access the camera card on September 19, 2018 without going through the appropriate protocol steps. But, as of right now, that’s all we have evidence of: i.e., that an undocumented access occurred.
FBI Accessed Camera Card but No Proof Has Been Shown That They Tampered
I think this is a classic example of how people who were part of NXIVM/ESP try to use one fact to prove several different things. In this particular instance, it’s a fact that someone accessed the camera card without going through the proper protocol of signing it out (It’s also possible that this access happened before the FBI made a duplicate/mirror image of all the electronic evidence it had gathered in the case).
While that is unfortunate, it does not mean that “the camera card went missing” or that “someone tampered with the data on the camera card” or that anything else nefarious happened. It means that someone accessed the camera card without going through the proper protocol of signing it out.
And does anyone really believe that if the FBI actually tampered with the evidence, it would have left this sort of electronic trail behind?
Child Porn Was Not a Felony Charge in Raniere Case
Let me, once again, remind all Frank Report readers that the charge of Possession of Child Pornography was dismissed by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis for lack of jurisdiction — and referred to the Northern District of New York for prosecution (The fact that the NDNY will never do anything with this charge is frustrating but irrelevant for the purpose of this discussion).
What the nude picture of Cami at the age of 15 was used for in Keith’s trial was to support three (3) of the sixteen (16) predicate acts that were the basis of the charge of Racketeering. And since the jury found that the prosecution had “Proved” that Keith committed all 16 of those predicate acts, I think it’s safe to say that they still would have found him guilty of committing the other 13 unrelated predicate acts.
Does anyone seriously believe that the jury would have found Keith “Not Guilty” of Racketeering if three of the alleged predicate acts were thrown out? If so, then they probably also believe that Keith is going to win on appeal, be offered a plea deal where he is sentenced to “time served’ or simply not re-tried at all, and that he will return to Clifton Park to resume his mission to save the world.
C’mon people, you’re better than that!