K.R. Claviger
He would still be convicted on all seven charges he was convicted of, and he will still be serving a 120-year sentence.
The Cami Photos Are Only Part of the Racketeering Charge
Let me start by reviewing some basic facts regarding Keith’s case – and then move on to some other options that the EDNY prosecutors could have utilized in putting together his indictment:
– As I previously noted, federal prosecutors included 16 predicate acts to support the charge of Racketeering – and the jury unanimously determined that the prosecutors had “Proved” that Keith committed all 16 of those acts (“Proved” is the box that was actually checked on the “Verdict Sheet” that the jury handed in after its deliberations).
– Three of those predicate acts – i.e., Racketeering Act 2: Sexual Exploitation of a Child on November 2, 2005; Racketeering Act 3: Sexual Exploitation of A Child on November 24, 2005; and Racketeering Act 4: Possession of Child Pornography – are the ones that Suneel and other NXIVM diehards believe involved evidence that was tampered with.
– Had those three acts not been included in the second superseding indictment – or had Keith’s attorneys successfully challenged them during the trial – the jury would still have found that prosecutors had “Proved” that Keith committed the other 13 predicate acts – which would have been more than enough for him to have been convicted of Racketeering (The minimum number for such a conviction is two predicate acts).
Difference Between Exploitation and Possession Charges
It should also be noted that the elements of Racketeering Act 4: Possession of Child Pornography are very different than the elements of Racketeering Act 2 and Racketeering Act 3. That’s because Racketeering Act 2 and Racketeering Act 3 have to do with Keith’s alleged taking of the pictures of Cami on the indicated dates. Regardless of what Keith did with them afterward – and regardless of whether they were transferred to some other device – merely taking nude pictures of a child in the way that Cami was posed constituted Sexual Exploitation of a Child.
The prosecutors could have also omitted the predicate act of “possession” of child pornography – and replaced it with the predicate act of “distributing” child porn – in which case the mere fact that Keith moved around the naked pictures of Cami from one electronic device to another would likely have resulted in the jury finding that the prosecution had also “Proved” that predicate act.
The bottom line is that regardless of whether the Prosecution “Proved” that Keith committed 16 predicate acts, 14 predicate acts, or even as few as 2 predicate acts, all those outcomes would have been sufficient for the jury to have convicted Keith of the crime of Racketeering.
That is why I think this whole kerfuffle over the pictures of Cami is a waste of time.
I want to clarify for Frank Report readers that Keith Raniere was not charged with the crime of possession of child pornography or with the crime of sexually exploiting a child. Instead, those were just some of the “predicate acts” that were cited as part of the charge that he committed the crime of Racketeering.
This is a major distinction – especially as it relates to what may happen regarding Keith’s appeal of his conviction. It might also impact his Rule 33 motion.
The prosecution alleged a total of 16 predicate acts with regard to the Racketeering charge against Keith – and the jury found that all of those were “Proved” during the course of his trial (The minimum number of such acts that needed to be “Proved” in order to sustain the Racketeering charge was two). Thus, even if the two predicate acts that you believe were based on evidence that had been tampered with by the FBI were thrown out, that may not be enough for Keith to get a new trial or to have his sentence reduced.
More Than Racketeering
I think the very best that Keith can hope for, if his attorneys can prove that the evidence regarding the photos of Cami was tampered with, is that his conviction for Racketeering would get thrown out – and he would get a new trial on that one charge.
But because I don’t see any connection between the alleged tampered evidence and the six other charges of which Keith was convicted (i.e., Racketeering Conspiracy, Forced Labor Conspiracy, Wire Fraud Conspiracy, Sex Trafficking Conspiracy, Sex Trafficking of Nicole, and Attempted Sex Trafficking of Jay), I think those convictions will likely stand unless his attorneys can convince the Second Circuit Court of Appeals that there are other reasons to overturn those convictions or unless the Court just finds the issue of the tampered evidence to be so abhorrent and egregious that it orders a new trial on all the charges, which is extremely unlikely.
The bottom line is, even if Keith’s attorneys can prove that the nude pictures of Cami were transferred to the hard drive after the hard drive was in the FBI’s possession – which will be an extremely difficult thing to do – that will not ensure that his Rule 33 motion succeeds.