Claviger: Does Raniere’s Appeal Have Any Appeal? – Part 8: Hail Mary Pass Incomplete as Time Expires

Keith Raniere, government exhibit photo.

K.R. Claviger

This is the penultimate post in the series that I’ve been writing about Keith Raniere’s pending appeal.

In conjunction with that series, I’ve outlined the general rules and procedures regarding direct appeals – which is the type of appeal he filed.

I’ve also analyzed the first four “legal issues” that Keith’s appellate attorney, Jennifer Bonjean, raised in the appellant brief she filed on May 7, 2021.

Keith Raniere’s appellate attorney, Jennifer Bonjean.

The last post in this series will take a look at what might happen depending on the decision of the three-judge appellate panel that has already been assigned to Keith’s appeal.

Thanks for the many kind remarks about the series – and, along with you, I look forward to seeing how this all turns out.

Quick Recap

In Part 1 of this series of posts, I outlined some parts of the overall process for handling direct appeals in federal criminal trials.

In Part 2, I outlined the remainder of that appeals process – and explained the concept of “preservation” as it relates to the types of issues that can be raised via a direct appeal. I also listed some of the other things that a convicted defendant can do to challenge their conviction and/or sentence.

In Part 3, I summarized the five legal issues that form the basis of Keith’s appeal  – and began a detailed analysis of the first of those issues. Those five legal issues are as follows:

(1). Whether the government proved the Defendant guilty by proof beyond a reasonable doubt of the following offenses: all sex trafficking offenses (Counts 5-7 and Act 10A); conspiracy to commit forced labor and forced labor of Nicole (Count 3 and Act 10B); sexual exploitation of a child (Acts 2 & 3); conspiracy to alter records in an official proceeding (Act 6); and conspiracy to commit identify [sic] theft of Pam Cafritz. (Act 11).

(2). Whether the government proved the Defendant guilty of RICO and conspiracy to commit RICO due to insufficient evidence of: (1) an enterprise; and (2) a pattern of racketeering.

(3). Whether Defendant was deprived of his Fifth and Sixth Amendment constitutional guarantees where the government swamped the jury with a mass of minimally probative yet highly prejudicial evidence related to Defendant’s controversial sex life.

(4). Whether Defendant was denied his constitutional guarantees under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments where the District Court prematurely terminated defense counsel’s cross-examination of the government’s key cooperating witness.

(5). Whether Defendant was denied his constitutional guarantees under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments where the District Court required the parties and the witnesses to refer to individuals designated by the government as “victims” only by their first names or pseudonyms, signaling to the jury that Defendant should be presumed guilty.

In Part 4, I finished my analysis of the first of those legal issues.

In Part 5, I analyzed the second of those legal issues.

In Part 6, I analyzed the third of those legal issues.

In Part 7, I analyzed the fourth of those legal issues.

In this Part 8, I will be analyzing the fifth and final legal issue that Bonjean believes will get Keith acquitted – and awarded a new trial: i.e., whether Keith was denied his constitutional guarantees under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments because U.S. District Court Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis required the parties and witnesses to refer to individuals designated by the government as “victims” only by their first names or pseudonyms – which, according to Bonjean, signaled to the jury that the Defended should be presumed guilty.

MK 10’s portrayal of Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis

For those Frank Report readers who want to able to refer back to the appellant brief, you can find a link to it HERE.

**********

The Name Game Becomes an Issue

Having already requested and been granted extra time to prepare her appellant brief – and having already requested and been granted permission to exceed the usual page limitation for such documents – Jennifer Bonjean found herself in an unenviable position as she set about to draft this section of the document.

She was already near the expanded page limitation – and she had yet to address an issue that was argued before the trial started and that was definitely noticeable to anyone who attended the trial or read the transcripts from it: i.e., anyone who had been deemed a “victim” of Keith Raniere by the prosecution could only be referred to by their first name or a pseudonym (such as Jane Doe 4) during the course of the court proceedings. Others, who were not deemed to be a “victim” were referred to by their full name.

Those women who were deemed to be victims of Keith Raniere were allowed to testify after only revealing their first name or by using a pseudonym.

This somewhat unusual nomenclature rule came about as a result of Judge Garaufis’ ruling on a pre-trial motion that had been filed by the prosecution.

Keith’s attorneys objected to the proposed procedure – but were unsuccessful in convincing the judge that it was going to interfere with Keith’s constitutional rights and/or prejudice the jury against him in some other ways (Marc Agnifilo did preserve this issue for appeal – which is why Bonjean was able to include it in her appellant brief).

MK10 ART’s painting of Marc Agnifilo, Keith Raniere’s lead trial attorney – and Judge Nicholas Garaufis, who sentenced Keith to 120 years in federal prison plus 5 years of probation.

Bonjean’s argument with regard to this issue is that referring to victims via first names or pseudonyms “…impinged on defendant’s constitutional rights, including his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses and his right to be presumed innocent.”

Although she does not really explain why the use of single names for victims interfered with Keith’s right to confront them when they testified, she does make an interesting point that the use of single names could have convinced the jury that certain individuals were victims – and certain other individuals were co-conspirators – even before the trial began.

As Bonjean argues, “By allowing the government to identify victims and co-conspirators before proving its case, the district court implicitly told the jury that it should assume a crime occurred, and because identity was not [sic] issue in this case, this message resulted in a directive to assume the Defendant’s guilt.”

It would have been interesting to see what else Bonjean would have had to say about this topic if she had not run out of space to say anything more – but that’s what happens when you waste precious words in earlier parts of the brief arguing about legal issues that are likely unwinnable.

Jennifer Bonjean

I also think this argument would have had a lot more merit if Keith had called other members of DOS as defense witnesses – and they were forced to disclose their full names in the same way that Lauren Salzman did.

But, of course, Keith chose not to put on any defense – which means he never got to request that his DOS witnesses also be referred to by their first names only – or by pseudonyms – if they had not been charged with any crimes and/or named as a co-conspirator (That would have created an interesting issue for the prosecution and Judge Garaufis to deal with).

All in all, I do not think there is enough in the argument set forth in the appellant brief to warrant the overturning of any of Keith’s seven convictions.

Had she been able to devote several pages to her argument about this issue – and had she explained why such a violation, if it occurred, was not simply a “harmless error” – Bonjean may have been able to be a lot more persuasive than her four paragraphs on the topic were.

But neither of those things happened – and, instead, we got just four paragraphs of arguments that were neither detailed nor persuasive.

And with that, it looks to me like the clock has run out on Keith’s appeal.

**********

Harmless Error Versus Reversible Error

RE: Constitutional Rights

Although many legal scholars believe there is no such thing as a “harmless error” when it comes to constitutional rights and criminal cases, appellate courts routinely rely on this concept to deny the appeals of convicted defendants.

The concept of “harmless constitutional error” allows the prosecution to argue – and for appellate courts to find – that even if a violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights occurred during the course of the trial, there is no basis for overturning the trial court outcome because the purported error did not actually undermine the verdict and/or change the outcome of the trial.

In Keith’s case, three of the legal issues that were raised on his behalf are related to assertions that his constitutional rights were violated.

  • Whether he was deprived of his Fifth and Sixth Amendment constitutional guarantees where the government swamped the jury with a mass of minimally probative yet highly prejudicial evidence related to his controversial sex life;
  • Whether he was denied his constitutional guarantees under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments where the District Court prematurely terminated Marc Agnifilo’s cross-examination of Lauren Salzman; and
  • Whether he was denied his constitutional guarantees under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments where the District Court required the parties and the witnesses to refer to individuals designated by the government as “victims” only by their first names or pseudonyms, thereby signaling to the jury that Keith should be presumed guilty.

But because Bonjean did not offer even one compelling argument as to how the outcome of the trial would have been different had the three alleged violations of Keith’s constitutional rights not occurred, I think the Second Circuit Court of Appeals will either find that no such violations occurred – or that such violations, if they did occur, did not undermine the verdict and/or change the outcome of the trial.

The latter type of finding will likely keep Keith – and his dead-end believers – going for at least another 10 -15 years.

Keith and his original first-line slaves. Some have left but he still a loyal group of followers.

That’s because they will portray such a determination as another aberration of the U.S. justice system rather than recognize it as a common practice that happens in lots of other criminal cases all the time.

I can just hear them now…

“Even the appellate court agreed that Keith’s constitutional rights were violated during the trial but the Illuminati got to them too – and convinced them not to overturn his convictions and set him free. This is a travesty – and demonstrates, once again, that there will never be justice for Keith Raniere in the U.S. judicial system, blah, blah, blah…”

*****

RE: Other Rights

In addition to the above-described constitutional arguments, Bonjean also raised two other legal issues in conjunction with Keith’s appeal:

  • Whether the government proved Keith guilty by proof beyond a reasonable doubt of the following offenses: all sex trafficking offenses (Counts 5-7 and Act 10A); conspiracy to commit forced labor and forced labor of Nicole (Count 3 and Act 10B); sexual exploitation of a child (Acts 2 & 3); conspiracy to alter records in an official proceeding (Act 6); and conspiracy to commit identify [sic] theft of Pam Cafritz. (Act 11); and
  • Whether the government proved Keith guilty of RICO and conspiracy to commit RICO due to insufficient evidence of: (1) an enterprise; and (2) a pattern of racketeering.

As I already explained when I analyzed those two legal issues, I do not think that Bonjean’s arguments concerning either one of them are going to convince any of the three appellate judges to overturn any of Keith’s convictions.

Once again, the appellate judges will have the option of finding that even if Judge Garaufis did, in fact, make some errors in his rulings during the course of the trial with respect to these two issues, those errors were “harmless” because they did not undermine the verdict and/or affect the outcome of the trial.

And, once again, I am certain that Keith and his minions will scream “conspiracy” –  and all sorts of other things – if that’s how this part of the appeal is resolved.

**********

A Final Word

Hopefully, this series of posts has helped Frank Report readers to understand a little bit better how the appeals process works with regard to federal criminal trials – and provided enough information for them to be able to understand the decision that will likely be rendered by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals sometime next year.

In the final part of this series, I’ll offer my opinion as to why I think Keith’s direct appeal was so weak – and give an overview of what will likely happen when it is decided.

In the meantime, please feel free to ask any questions you may have about anything I’ve written in this post — and/or to point out anything you think I’ve misstated.

As time permits, I will respond to your questions and/or criticisms.

**********


About the author

K.R. Claviger

37 Comments

Click here to post a comment

Leave a Reply

  • Hunter Biden Selling Artwork for $500K Is Totally Not Money Laundering

    According to Crazy Days and Nights one of the Buyers is Edgar Bronfman, Junior Claire’s half Brother.
    Are the Biden’s selling Presidential pardons?

  • K.R. Claviger-

    Yes or no — have you looked at any of Bonjean’s other appeals?

    If yes — is her appeal for Kieth Raniere par for the course?

    I’m positive — I’m not the only one who’s wondering.

    Answer the question! Please not force me to release your collateral.

    • I did read several of Bonjean’s filings in the Cosby case — but those were in conjunction with a motion for parole in a state case rather than a direct appeal in a federal case. Also, in order to truly evaluate an appeal, you must, at a minimum, have read the transcript of the trial ( I did do that in the Raniere case — which is why I was able to evaluate Bonjean’s appellate brief).

      As for my collateral, my mother has already seen all that stuff…

  • In this case, as for studying the predominant basis or platform, as well as the specific contents of the Bonjean argumentation, here’s how it strikes me.

    Quite simply, even if I were an attorney, I would not work this way. No client such as Raniere could hire me at all. Period.

    Anyone can strive to create loopholes and to work, legalistically, to fabricate a potentially unsinkable appeal, try to win.

    That does not make it okay, for some who happen to be in Bonjean’s current line of work, to enjoin their minds and skills into working to help or to come to the aid of such a person as Raniere.

    To come to the aid of anyone who seemed legitimately to merit an appeal process would be entirely different.

    Understandably, others who are qualified to defend clients each might have a different rationale. Some would work for Raniere and any of his plea bargain batch of fellow convicted felons.

    There’s no way I could keep true to my own mind or heart and to ever agree to defend Raniere or any of the Salzmans, Clare Bronfman, Mack or even that Daffy Duck ballerina accountant.

    It would be arranging, resummarizing and twisting up an ugly bunch of crap, to be paid to organize any form of alleviation or mitigation for any of these individuals.

    Sincerely, I would prefer to get paid to wash dishes and to keep up the ability to feel self-respect has not been torpedoed by not remaining true to being a simple human being. That matters more to me. Never would or could I cast aside the suffering of those people who have been harmed by these individuals.

    It might sound daft to some, but that’s just too bad. To defend such ones who have made pain come to others, inevitably, that, to me, is tantamount to kissing the speckled, grotesque ass of an untenable client.

    Not happening. Not now. Not ever.
    Though there may be
    Many miles to go before we sleep, I still pray (my personal lord) my soul to keep.

    • That is why the appellate attorneys are paid big bucks! They have to leave their conscience at the door, while checking their bank accounts.

  • It is mind blowing that this brief is the best that Bojangles and KR could do with all the resources in the world. Equally as baffling is that they thought this would result in a new trial, overturn or reduction in sentence.

  • Awardsdaily
    ‘The Vow’ Co-Director Jehane Noujaim on ‘The Wound’ & Using Storytelling To Convey What It’s Like to Be in a Cult

    “There is a temptation in making a series to get to the most salacious material as quickly as possible in the first episodes, in order to attract viewers.”
    by Megan McLachlan June 16, 2021 in ADTV, featured, Interviews, News
    In this candid interview, The Vow director Jehane Noujaim talks to Awards Daily about her relationship with NXIVM and how she folded innovative storytelling into what would become one of the most talked about true-crime series of 2020.

    https://www.awardsdaily.com/2021/06/16/the-vow-co-director-jehane-noujaim-on-the-wound-using-storytelling-to-convey-what-its-like-to-be-in-a-cult/

  • Why is Claire Bronfman’s half-brother Edgar Bronfman, Jr. willing to spend 500K per Hunter Biden painting?

    Are the Bronfmans trying to buy a Presidential pardon?

    The Five’ question how Hunter Biden’s art could be worth up to $500K

    • The clip did not say anywhere a buyer is a Bronfman, though. 😐

      So, it’s hard to draw that conclusion based on this clip alone. It’s more like stretching reality…

      • Alex-

        stretching reality…

        Our dear friend stretches a lot of things!
        Like human skin to make lampshades.

        • Stretch this:

          Crazy Days and Nights said it was Edgar junior

          Blind Items Revealed #1
          December 17, 2020

          I find it interesting that for the second time in two weeks that the family who financed the sex cult is involved once again in political theatre. The father to the daughter mentioned last time, personally guaranteed he would purchase multiple works of art in an upcoming gallery exhibit in 2021. One that is getting a lot of press right now. The father is the gallery’s biggest customer and is always given private showings involving the gallerist and the artists.

          Edgar Bronfman/Hannah Bronfman/Georges Berges Gallery/Hunter Biden

          POSTED BY ENT LAWYER AT 9:00 AM
          https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2020_12_20_archive.html

      • Crazy Days and Nights said it was Edgar junior

        Blind Items Revealed #1
        December 17, 2020

        I find it interesting that for the second time in two weeks that the family who financed the sex cult is involved once again in political theatre. The father to the daughter mentioned last time, personally guaranteed he would purchase multiple works of art in an upcoming gallery exhibit in 2021. One that is getting a lot of press right now. The father is the gallery’s biggest customer and is always given private showings involving the gallerist and the artists.

        Edgar Bronfman/Hannah Bronfman/Georges Berges Gallery/Hunter Biden

        POSTED BY ENT LAWYER AT 9:00 AM
        https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2020_12_20_archive.html

  • Any updates on Keith’s life in prison? Does he have a roommate? Or is he in a dorm type situation? Has Keith had any visitors? Is he allowed internet access? Does he have a prison job or sex offender classes?

    I get why Keith chose not to travel for his restitution hearing. But 100 plus years in the same location, with the same repetitive schedule and never changing scenery may make him regret that choice someday.

    How’s his health? Keith seemed to have a lot of physical grievances in New York.

    Any prison tats? Maybe the frontline slave’s names and a symbol of ” the elements” burned into his scrotum? Teardrops etched by his eye for the women whose deaths he had a hand in?

    Is Keith rocking cornrows? Who’s he ganged up with?

    Pen pals?

    Any sign in Arizona of the dirty dancers for prison reform? Are ‘Make Justice Blind’ and ‘We Are As You’, and ‘The Forgotten Ones’ even active anymore?

    Thanks!

  • It seems as if I have to continually tune into this free website if I want to know if Vanguard is dead yet.

  • Re Bonjean Appeals:

    Claviger, have you taken a gander at any of Bonjean’s successful appeals, to see how this latest appeal for Raniere stacks up?

    It would be interesting to compare and contrast Bonjean’s successful appeals with this latest appeal.

    I am not looking for a new series of articles. I am just curious if this latest appeal is the norm for Bonjean.

    I have wondered if Bonjean is like many other famous attorneys and simply good at self-promotion, along with a few wins.

  • Welcome to Communist Canada

    Canadian Journalist Summoned to Court for Shaking Hands and Laughing
    In police’s own words

    You might recall that last week I reported that I had been served with a summons by an officer from the Peterborough Police Service for covering an anti-lockdown protest in that city back in April.
    (Peterborough is about 70 miles Northeast of Toronto) Shadow State

    The summons simply stated that I was being charged under Section 7.0.2. of the laughably-named Reopening Ontario Act. But it didn’t say what, specifically, I was being charged with. How puzzling — after all, I was not the event’s organizer, nor a speaker, nor even an attendee. I was just covering this peaceful protest as a journalist. That’s not illegal. Well, not yet…

    Well, I just took delivery of the evidence that the Peterborough Police Service is going to present in court against me. There are pages and pages about me and my actions back on April 24. It reads like a John Grisham thriller. So, let’s jump to the chase: the crime I committed that day is that… I… shook… hands… with people.

    And they even have the photos to prove it!

    https://antiempire.b-cdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/article-60c91744cd24b-1.jpg

    No, I swear, folks. For starters, it is noted that I shook the hands of PPC leader Maxime Bernier and MPP Randy Hillier. Apparently, this means I violated social distancing regulations. By the way, there were about 1,200 people there that day. Shoulder to shoulder. Do you think some of those people could have shaken hands that day? Curious that they haven’t been receiving summonses en masse.

    The Peterborough police also noted that I interviewed Mr. Bernier and Mr. Hillier. Shockers!

    Hey cops, I’m a journalist. I interview people for a living. How was I supposed to communicate with Mr. Bernier and Mr. Hillier — by using sign language?

    As for the handshake, that is the de rigueur salutation in the Western world. Perhaps I could have bowed, but what do you wanna bet I would be criminally charged with appropriating Japanese culture?

    But I saved the most egregious offence for last.

    You see, the Peterborough police noted that I was seen… laughing on this day. Merciful God in heaven! Why was I not tasered for this crime against humanity?! Because the super-serious Peterborough Police Service obviously deems laughter to be… sinister?

    (Note to giggle-prone supervillains such as the Joker and the Riddler: do NOT visit Peterborough. The cops will no doubt give you a Batman-style smackdown.)

    But seriously, what makes this incident so disturbing is the political undertone to it. Bernier and Hillier were ticketed because these men are now politicians non grata. Rebel News was targeted because unlike the trained seals toiling for the mainstream media, we are all about publicizing the other side of the story, as opposed to reproducing the government-approved narrative.

    There was plenty of handshaking and laughing occurring on that day, but the cops were not focused on law and order; they were driven by a political agenda. That’s the bailiwick of a banana republic, not a Western democracy.

    Of course, we have no plans to bend the knee.

    We will fight these farcical charges. And you know something? I can’t wait for my day in court.

    And if you would like to help us lawyer up for our latest battle against censorious thugs, please go to http://www.StandWithMenzies.com and make a donation if you’re able to.

    Despite what the Peterborough police think, we still have freedom of the press in Canada. And for that matter, we also have the right to shake hands. And the right to LOL, for that matter — especially when one encounters such a laughable law enforcement operation such as the Peterborough Police Service.

    Source: Rebel News
    https://anti-empire.com/canadian-journalist-summoned-to-court-for-shaking-hands-and-laughing/

    WHAT A JOKE: Handshakes, laughter illegal in the People’s Republic of Peterborough

    • K.R. Claviger-

      Yes or no have you looked at any of Bonjean’s other appeals?

      If yes, is her appeal for Kieth Raniere par for the course?

      I’m positive — I’m not the only one who’s wondering.

      ***
      BTW: do you happen to know if POTUS Biden has cankles? I’m trying to figure out why Shadowstate is obsessed with him.

    • In case you haven’t noticed: the world is in the middle of a pandemic. In the US alone nearly 600.000 people died. So, we have to take measures to make sure as few people as possible get infected. Therefore the government has installed social distancing rules and travel restrictions. If you break these rules (handshaking is one in Canada as I understand) you get fined. Sounds pretty logical to me. Relax Shadow, when this is all behind us in a few month’s time, you can shake as many hands as you like.

    • Pretty bad in London too where it is illegal to sing in church even in a mask (yet nothing is done about thousands of Scottish football fans singing in English pubs whilst drinking last Friday simply because there were too many of them to prosecute whereas ladies in churches are supposedly easier to seize I suppose).

  • How common is it, in cases involving sex offenses, for alleged victims to be granted anonymity? If there is precedent for Garaufis’ ruling, it seems unlikely to win his appeal.

  • Q for Herr Claviger:

    Are you aware of any case where the defendant had no previous criminal record, and no record of any violence, which resulted in a sentence of 120 years in prison?

    • Easy lol. Bernie Madoff got 150 years for a ponzi scheme.

      Were you trying to make a point that keith got too harsh of a sentence LMAO? Using Madoff as a benchmark, I’d say he got off pretty light. Nice try.

    • As several Frank Report readers have already pointed out, there are lots of such cases.

      Just like everything else about Keith, his sentence is not unique.

      • Claviger,
        Please show some effort at avoiding cracking Alanzo’s precious crystal bubble. More care, Claviger!

        I fear I might be convinced to join the dancing five, if Alanzo keeps opening his mouth for matters other than put something into it.

        • I am sorry, Alanzo. I should have been more diplomatic. I now feel guilty, bearing in mind you are responding so elegantly. Sorry! 😐

    • Alanzo-

      Rainier was sentenced within the sentencing guidelines…..

      I can help you with the addition if you like.

      😉

  • Setting the record straight about Nicki Clyne’s supposed nose job

    “Inquiring minds want 2 know
    June 14, 2021 at 11:03 am
    Nicki Clyne looks so much more attractive after her nose job. It appears to be a soft tissue fix. Talking in the sides to narrow it and tampering her nostrils. This kind of adjustment can go largely unnoticed but completely transform a face.

    I’ve never heard the Nxivm stance on plastic surgery. It seems that they had unconventional views on medical procedures and Western medicine in general.

    Did Keith believe one could transform their physical features with their mind? Or was that different than “giving yourself breast cancer for attention”?

    Reality

    Nicki Clyne
    @nickiclyne
    ·
    12h
    Just discovered an online rumor going around that I got a nose job and I’m rather flattered lol

    Nicki Clyne
    @nickiclyne
    ·
    12h
    Thank you. The only way I’d get a nose job is if I took a slap shot to the face

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E3989yEXwAM9t6y?format=jpg&name=small

    • The only record set straight is that Nicki Clyne pays VERY close attention to Frank Report.

      She practically responded in real time.

      • Nice Guy, right?!

        Nicki had a fake marriage. She puts out misleading information all the time. And lies. Keith was “kidnapped” for example. She’s still telling that tall tale.

        The only factual information learned from this exchange is that Nicki obsessively monitors the Frank Report. And that Nicki is the one who, “spread” the rumour about herself. It would never have left Frank Report without Nicki helping.

        It’s odd that out of all the questionable information about Nicki on this blog – it was the nose job that she felt must be addressed STAT.

  • They could have called Nicki and seven other women to testify and used their full names. But keith did not. One name, good. Two names, bad. No names, more bad.

    The irony about Nicki is that she keeps complaining about being silenced (which she absolutely hasn’t been), and the person that silenced her the most was keith lmfao.

  • The ‘name’ issue is interesting.

    It’s like Massachusetts and its death penalty cases: It was found ‘inherently prejudicial’ to have a defendant in a murder case sitting at a death penalty trial to be housed in a plastic box.

    ” He’s so dangerous he needs to be confined to a glass cage.”

    Those plastic cages were ruled to be prejudicial!!!

About Frank Parlato

Frank Parlato Investigates

Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist.

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

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

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

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

IMDb — Frank Parlato

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

Got A Tip?

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

Archives