Camila, the sole underage victim identified in the criminal case against Keith Raniere, has joined the civil suit against him, the deep-pocketed Bronfman sisters, and other former NXIVM leaders.
Attorney Neil Glazer represents Camila along with about 80 other former NXIVM members who are now suing for damages associated with their membership in NXIVM and interaction with its various leaders.
While Camila never testified under oath at the trial of Raniere, by joining the civil lawsuit, she signals she is ready to be deposed and to testify under oath about the sexual relationship she had with Raniere starting, she has said, when she was 15, which was in 2005.
Camila is now 31.
Raniere was convicted in federal court for racketeering which included predicate acts, among others, of sexual offenses against Camila in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 2251(a), sexual exploitation of a minor, and 18 U.S.C. section 2252(a)(4)(B), knowingly possessing visual depictions of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct (possession of child pornography).
In the lawsuit, Glazer does not detail any of the specifics incidents or Raniere’s alleged abuse. He does, however, catalog the state and federal laws he alleges were violated. Many, if not most, of these alleged crimes are beyond the statute of limitations.
One particularly troubling one is Glazer’s allegation that Raniere committed one or more acts of rape in the first degree – which means, if true, there was “forcible compulsion” to have intercourse. It is unclear if she was an adult at the time.
Raniere continued his relationship with Camila from her teen years up until the time of his arrest in 2018, when she was 28. She is reported to have stayed loyal to him as one of his many “sister-wives” until after his conviction in 2019.
Glazer alleges that Raniere’s acts “caused and continues to cause Camila to suffer physical, psychological and emotional injuries or conditions.”
Among the allegations are:
- Raniere engaged in sexual intercourse with Camila without her consent [rape]
- Raniere’s intentional bodily contact with Camila was offensive in nature and constituted acts of battery.
- Raniere’s intentional or reckless, extreme and outrageous conduct was intended to cause and did cause Camila to suffer severe emotional distress.
Neil GlazerGazer wrote: “Keith Raniere repeatedly engaged in conduct against Camila while she was a child under eighteen years of age that constituted sexual offenses.”
He lists them:
New York State penal law,
130.25, rape in the third degree;
130.40, criminal sexual act in the third degree;
130.55, sexual abuse in the third degree
130.20, sexual misconduct.
Not specifying whether she was under the age of 18 when the alleged incidents occurred, Glazer also alleges Raniere committed [130.35] rape in the first degree. By not specifying her age, it suggests to me that the allegation is he raped her as an adult.
Raniere is also alleged to have engaged in conduct against Camila when she was a child under 17 in violation of New York penal law section 263.05, use of a child in a sexual performance.
Exploring some of the crimes Glazer alleges we get an idea of the alleged conduct.
Rape Third and Criminal Sexual Act Third Degree
Rape in the Third Degree and Criminal Sexual Act in the Third Degree share the same factors except that rape constitutes sexual intercourse and a “sexual act” includes oral or anal sexual conduct. Both are Class-E felonies in New York.
It is rape or a criminal sexual act in the third degree when non-forcible sexual intercourse with a person under 17 [the legal age of consent in New York] or when the person is over the age of 21.
Raniere is 30 years older than Camila. If he began having sex with her when she was 15, he was 45 at the time.
Another provision of rape/criminal sexual act in the third degree is if someone has sex with another person without their consent because the victim is incapable of consent for a variety of reasons other than being under the age of 17.
A person is deemed incapable of consent when he or she is, for instance, mentally disabled, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless, such as drugged or sleeping. Camila had some mental troubles which included suicide attempts. It is not known if this is how the element of incapacity is alleged.
Sexual Abuse Third Degree
This relates strictly to the fact that Camila was under the age of consent and Raniere was more than five years older.
It is a Class-B misdemeanor.
Sexual Misconduct
This is a Class-A misdemeanor – and it relates to having sex with someone without their consent, without respect to age, or forcible compulsion, which suggests that Raniere is alleged to have had sex with Camila when she was not able to consent, such as when she was asleep or drugged.
The violation also includes two other types of sex where the other party cannot consent: with “an animal or a dead human.”
Rape in the First Degree
This is, by far, the most serious sexual-related charge – and in New York, it is a Class-B F
felony.
Unless Camila was under 13 when the sexual conduct took place, rape in the first degree requires that she was physically helpless or that there was forcible compulsion.
Forcible compulsion requires physical force or a threat of immediate death or physical injury to himself, herself or another person, or in fear that he, she or another person will immediately be kidnapped.
Physically helpless means the person is unconscious or for any other reason is physically unable to communicate unwillingness to an act.
Sexual Performance
The use of a child in a sexual performance allegation almost certainly relates to the allegation that Raniere took graphic nude photos of Camila when she was under the age of 17.
It is a Class-C felony.
At Raniere’s sentencing hearing, Camila said he started taking pictures of her when she was 15. Her statement was not under oath. She will have to make the same claim under oath in the civil case.
Apparently, she is prepared to do so.
Frank Parlato 
Janine Morrison 
J.J. O'Hara 
Richard Luthmann 
Marie White 
Paul Serran
Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
So why leave off statutory rape?
Seems like emphasizing her age at the time only helps his case. I do not see the strategic value of not hammering that point home at every opportunity. Makes me wonder that the lawyer, after interviewing Camilla, concluded it was not a viable path.
These are criminal statutes. What tort is he using? Battery? Emotional distress?
You go, Camila!
Let the mental midgets prepare to get their minds right.
[…] See Glazer Lists Camila Sex Offense Crimes Against Raniere in Civil Suit; Includes Forcible [Not Statuto… […]
Makes me wonder if Camila has received any of that government deprogramming.
I hear it’s good stuff.
Alanzo
Dear Pious Alonzo,
Bless you Alonzo for sharing your infinite wisdom! Glory be! The deep-state has corrupted the chaste Cami!
“Makes me wonder if Camila has received any of that government deprogramming.” (Alonzo)
Only a deity such as yourself would dare MOCK a woman, who was allegedly raped when she was a minor. Surely the Government brainwashed Cami into making these scandalous accusations!
///////////////////
The pious Keith Raniere would never rape a juvenile — besides the other 3 girls he raped.
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Only Mike Rinder and and God are wiser than you. 5G Fred is a close second.
Alonzo I hope you have a blessed evening! I will drink a libation(cognac) in your honor.
Well said, Nicest Guy
Thank you 😉
Alanzo, have you ever experienced intimate partner sexual abuse? I have. I can confirm from firsthand experience the shame is overwhelming and it can take years before you’re ready to talk about it, much less file charges, which is why it’s significantly underreported. A deposition is not a walk in the park. It’s hours of questioning where someone has to go into minute detail about what they experienced and then field potentially humiliating questions from the opposing side. No one that’s experienced trauma takes that decision lightly. To make a flip statement like this is callous at best and victim shaming at worst.
Never experienced anything like that, and I can see what you say is true for yourself.
But there is room to be genuinely and sincerely skeptical about all sides of this case, especially when the government “deprograms”their witnesses to “make them more understandable to a jury”, as prosecutors admitted to in court during the criminal trial.
You may feel that how you see Cami is the truth. But you don’t know.
You project your feelings and personal experiences onto Camila and they make you feel like you know why she didnt testify under oath during the criminal trial – she wasn’t ready.
Why dont you just wait for the evidence to come out?
I genuinely would like to know what kind of deprogramming Cami got, along with all the other government witnesses. How exactly did it make them change their stories?
I’m not here to watch a Hallmark movie, altho thats what it seems like Herr Glazer is getting ready to put on for us.
So Im skeptical. And will remain so until I see the evidence.
Alonzo-
“Makes me wonder if Camila has received any of that government deprogramming.”
Deprogramming? Please forgive me, but I previously believed you were the gentleman who claimed “brainwashing” was fiction.
My good, Sir, how can deprogramming be true if brainwashing is not? I feel there is a great paradox. I am befuddled and flummoxed.
Please explain!
If you really want to understand this, just remember the Salem Witch Trials.
There, the judge and the prosecutors all believed in witches, just like the judge and prosecutors believe in brainwashing today in the Raniere case.
In the Salem Witch Trials you could be accused of being a witch carrying the death penalty. But the judge and the prosecutors allowed you to redeem yourself by publicly admitting you were a witch, and by accepting Jesus Christ into your heart. You could avoid being hung as a witch by doing this.
In the same way, the judge and the prosecutors’ belief in brainwashing caused them to offer deprogramming services to NXIVM members.
You could avoid being charged if you accepted their deprogramming services. And if you changed your story enough that they could use your testimony to gain a conviction, you could even end up being an accuser, and even make a bunch of money in the civil trial.
Like witchcraft, none of this means that brainwashing or deprogramming does anything – it’s just a belief that the prosecutors and judge use to get you to change your story so they can get a conviction.
And always remember this too: If the prosecutor wants you to say it, it isn’t perjury.
Alanzo
Alonzo-
Thank you for taking the time to explain!
I enjoy being told to be genuinely and sincerely skeptical about all sides of this case by someone who is certain Cami was “deprogrammed” by the prosecution. Hypocritical much?
Glad to be a reflection of your projection here on the Frank Report.
Alanzo, if you’re maintaining genuine and sincere skepticism about all sides of this case, shouldn’t you also maintain an equal amount of genuine and sincere skepticism about whether the prosecution was “deprogramming” anyone?
Anonymous 8:35am-
Alonzo believes himself beyond reproach. He will never truly admit/apologize when he is wrong or hurtful. Any time he is caught saying something wrong or hurtful he explains it away — like a BUT at the end of an apology.
I wouldn’t care if it wasn’t for the fact he routinely ridicules women. I wouldn’t call it outright misogyny, BUT he positively has issues with woman.
A perfect example of what I am talking about is Alonzo’s followings comment on 8/27 9:30am
///////////////
“But [BUT] there is room to be genuinely and sincerely skeptical about all sides of this case, especially.” -Alonzo
Alonzo is never wrong or sorry.
//////////////////////////////////////////////
Alonzo is the only individual to be fired and asked to leave the Church Scientology.
Let’s see how the”True Believers” spin this one. Wake Up!
They’ll spin it just fine. They have decades of practice.
But truth be told – they couldn’t care less if it’s true. If it happened, they’re fine with it. Vanguard said it’s cool.
I’ve always said that too, Nutjob.
The followers are fine with it.
When Frank responds to the negative calling out of Nicki Clyne comments by stating that he respects Nicki for standing by her belief in Raniere – I call bullsh×t.
If Nicki truly was taking a stand and being honest she would say, ” I don’t care if Raniere had sex with underage girls. I don’t care if Raniere took pornographic photos of a 15-year-old. I do not care about any of it because my belief system does not deem it wrong. I think it is acceptable behavior”.
That would be brave. That’s standing by your beliefs – misguided or not.
But it is too late. The dead-end followers have already said that they would reconsider their stance on Raniere if they saw evidence he did these things (He did – and there’s evidence. But no proof will ever be enough. They just keep moving the target).
For example, negating Camilla because she wasn’t under oath. Well, now she will be. Watch the Nxivm dead-enders move that goal post.
Good points. This whole dog and pony show is for one reason – to try and free Keith. Not coincidentally, Keith is the one who told them how to think. In the past, everything Cami is accusing Keith of doing, Keith has rationalized as acceptable behavior.
Totally agree on what actually would be brave for Nicki to do. But, Nicki is standing by her belief in Raniere. Part of how Keith told her to believe, is “it’s ok to lie if it helps the greater good.” Of course Nicki is lying whenever it helps get her desired outcome of “freeing Keith” – aka to Nicki, “freeing the greatest good on the planet.”
NutJob-
Nicki didn’t have a true relationship with her father. The only adult male role model she mentions is her Hockey Coach.
FYI: I’m not going full Shadow or Sultan on you. No yet anyway. 😉
It’s interesting Shadow and Sultan inhabit the same spectrum of obsession . One at the lust end and the other at loathe end.
Love/hate. Pain/pleasure. Sometimes the lines are blurred.
Branded like cattle/tattooed like a drunken sorority sister. Internet research on her Hockey coach/rumaging through her trash bags.
“If Nicki truly was taking a stand and being honest she would say, ” I don’t care if Raniere had sex with underage girls. I don’t care if Raniere took pornographic photos of a 15-year-old. I do not care about any of it because my belief system does not deem it wrong. I think it is acceptable behavior”.
That would be brave. That’s standing by your beliefs – misguided or not.”
This is an excellent comment!!! FACTS! Well done!!
To be fair, Suneel articulated their official stance, which was that they feel any proven sex with minors is reprehensible but would still fight for his due process, as they would for anyone. If I had to guess Nicki’s private thoughts, I would guess Nicki knows the relationship started while Cami was a minor but thinks it was consensual and Cami is now being pressured to say it was abusive. Nicki probably doesn’t think a relationship that started when Cami was 15 was morally wrong, but for the obvious reasons can’t say that publicly. But that’s just a guess.
“The dead-end followers have already said that they would reconsider their stance on Raniere if they saw evidence he did these things (He did – and there’s evidence. But no proof will ever be enough. They just keep moving the target).”
That’s because they’re liars, especially Nicki. That she can so freely lie for her master shows just how deep-seated her indoctrination is. Deny and lie. Or selectively omit and ignore.
Mark Vicente released a number of videos on Instagram and YouTube on cult modus operandi. In it he pointed out that the cult leader and the mission is considered the highest “ethical value”. Therefore, anything he says or does, or anything that is said or done to support, protect, help, free, etc., him is also considered “ethical”. This means that even typically considered unethical behavior like lying for the master (or sleeping with minors) can be deemed “ethical”.
[sarcasm on]
After all, we dead-enders are just like those brave souls who stood up for the truth and hid the Jews in their homes and lied about it to protect them from certain death due to the Nazis during World War II, risking their lives and limbs. Can’t you see how keeping a sex-obsessed grifter out of prison is so similar that? And if you can’t, then it’s you who have the problem because we’re the critical thinkers!
[/sarcasm off]
So accurate. Once Suneel realizes this, he will (for his sake, I hope) slowly slink off. Queue up Homer Simpson backing into the bush.