As Frank Report readers know, Marc Elliot is suing STARZ TV and Lions Gate, the owners of STARZ, for their allegedly defamatory portrayal of him in the four-part docuseries Seduced.
He is suing for a tidy sum – $6 million plus 25 percent of their profits for the docuseries worldwide.
His main allegation is that the producers of Seduced deliberately falsified their portrayal of him by splicing and manipulating footage out of sequence and out of context.
Elliot has taken to YouTube to show how they did it. In his first of several promised videos, Elliot shows the “before and after” footage.
That is, he shows what “Seduced” showed concerning a so-called endorsement of Keith Raniere’s statement, then he shows that the actual endorsement he made, which appears to be an endorsement for something entirely different.
He calls his video Fake “Documentary” Exposed: Part 1 – Marc Elliot. It is about 19 minutes long.
The video begins with a clip of Elliot as a public speaker and he introduces himself with: “I’m Marc Elliot. I’m an inspirational speaker. I beat Tourette’s Syndrome and I was an instructor in NXIVM.”
He also tells his audience that he has been “an inspirational speaker all across the US for a little over a decade now speaking about tolerance and compassion.”
He launches into the docuseries Seduced, naming India Oxenberg as “one of the executive producers” and that Seduced “is about her experience in NXIVM and that of the secret society known as DOS.”
The best idea I can suggest is to watch the video and judge for yourself.
Below is Elliot’s report on the topic with some slight editing since people write differently than they speak.
[I will also add some comments in brackets and bold]
By Marc Elliot
Despite having no criminal charges against me related to the NXIVM case – I don’t have any criminal charges against me for anything – and I, also, was not in the secret society, DOS – despite all of that, for some reason, particularly in the second episode of Seduced the producers attacked my character and reputation.
When I saw it, it was painful, of course, but I was also just shocked because how they betrayed me was so vastly different from who I am and how I’ve lived my life for the last 20 years, helping people.
The reality is this is not unique to me. I mean, I think character assassination is rampant around the world and you know with globalization and social media somebody’s life can be destroyed in a single instant. The reality is media, documentaries have so much power and control over how they present somebody to the world. They control how people might perceive that person based off of the narrative that they put them in, based on the context in which they show someone and that’s what’s so difficult because there’s so much nuance, there’s so much context in our day-to-day moment-to-moment life and a documentary, a newscast, a media outlet can come into our lives and take a single snapshot of our life and then insert it into a completely different narrative and may either make people love us or hate us
And in the case of what Seduced did to me, it was clear that they did not put me in a good light at all and so I wanted to right this wrong and I did two things: First, about a month ago I filed a defamation lawsuit against Lions Gate and STARZ for how they portrayed me and the second thing I’m doing is this: I wanted to create a series of videos to actually show the public what Seduced exactly did.
I want to show you the raw evidence so that you can see how sophisticated this manipulation is. I mean even me watching it multiple times, there were some things that I didn’t even catch. It was only through meticulously watching and really slowing it down did I begin to see the level of how much they distorted.
In this first video, I’m going to go over one of the main pieces of evidence which is that they used a testimonial of mine and so I figure the best way to start this is to actually show you the original segment that I was in, in episode two.
There are four things I want you to keep in mind.
Here are some screenshots of the video, which you can view here
Here is the video
Frank Parlato 
Janine Morrison 
J.J. O'Hara 
Richard Luthmann 
Marie White 
Paul Serran
Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
Jness taught him how to love women….come on!! Jness was a hunting ground for a PREDATOR. People were conditioned through the “curriculum of growth” in Jness to normalize the horrors of DOS. DOS happened because of years of indoctrination, lead by Raniere painting himself as a scientist, creating a curriculum that was cruel and shocking, brushed off as a “study” or an “experiment” that you as a follower don’t break down and question. He’s totally in awe of Raniere still and has ZERO sympathy for his victims. Let’s not forget there’s footage of him (which Starz so perfectly put at the end of their documentary) of him dancing outside for the prison holding Raniere. I wonder who’s funding this lawsuit of his? Could it be residual funds left over from the “mystery” trust set up for Raniere?
I hope Marc wins his lawsuit. Big media faking a story is just straight up wrong.
I didn’t have to watch Marc’s explanation and pretty undeniable proof that footage was spliced and diced to create or slant a narrative. It was clear to me from watching the show. Are you kidding me? What a load of crap. India and her mom trying to save her ass and keep her out of jail. What a charade.
As someone who suffers from severe Tourette’s, I have to say there is NOTHING out there that helps you completely beat/overcome it. Believe me, I’ve tried. I look at Marc and he clearly did. He also seems to genuinely want to help others who suffer like we do. Your below-the-belt insults are so unnecessary. To call him dangerous is just so childish.
I just finished watching the My Tourette’s doc and have to say holy F. I did not expect what I saw here. The people who overcame Tourette’s are so brave and it was fascinating to watch them beat it without insane and damaging medication. I don’t see any benefit in attacking Marc or saying that he and the others didn’t actually beat Tourette’s when they so clearly did. Watch the film.
I found Marc’s YouTube series pretty eye opening. Shame on STARZ and the Oxenbergs for calling this show a documentary when they manipulated footage in this way. It’s a pretty extreme and undeniable example of you can put your seething hate of Raniere aside and just consider that it is not right to present something as truth that has been doctored and skewed in this way.
I enjoy when the JNESS endorser says, “No one has ever taught us how to relate to woman”.
Psst. Lean in close (whispers) Woman are people.
You treat them like people
Did they honestly spend their whole pre-Nxivm life believing women were not fellow humans? No sisters? Did they think their mom was a robot? They never had female school teachers? Or met a lady who worked somewhere?
Did they ever see a movie? Read a book? Live on Earth?
“What are these creatures – I asked myself? So like men but without a penis”?
If only I had some guidance on how to treat them. Are they aliens? Ghosts? Do they feel? Or think? Can they love? What ARE they?
Oh, Keith help me! Take my money! I don’t know what to do!!!!
This has confounded me since birth!
I would love to ask their parents how they raised their children to adulthood while also keeping them unaware of the opposite sex as just the same exact species but a different gender?
Did they grow up in Rainbow Culture Garden?
Welcome to my intensive: You treat people how you would want to be treated.
That will be $20,000 dollars.
And you should read that sentence 3 more times @ $20,000 dollars each time.
Then sign up for my next class!
Pro-Tip, you cracked me up completely! 😂🤣😂🤣
I don’t think that’s what he said or implied in any way. Get a grip.
Seems to me like Marc meant no one has ever taught us how to relate with women with a deeper understanding and appreciation of our differences
K.R Claviger,
Do you think it’s possible that Sarah Bronfman is helping to finance the Marc Elliot lawsuit against the producers of Seduced?
I only ask because Marc Elliot is a public person, so I believe, and thus if he wins a verdict, the judge will reduce the verdict.
I feel Marc is a public person and, thus, the Producers are protected.
Would you consider Marc Elliot a public person because of his inspirational speaking gigs, therefore not entitled to the same protections as a private person?
Never once did the producers doctor his speech. Michael Moore has done similar things over the years.
Are my assumptions wrong?
****
To All Commenters,
Examples of reduced libel/slander verdicts:
https://www.law360.com/articles/393645/judge-cuts-40m-slander-award-against-girls-gone-wild-boss
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-14/rebel-wilson-defamation-payout-reduced-on-appeal/9868300
To begin with, I do think that Marc Elliot will quite likely be determined to be a “public person”. And while that won’t necessarily cause the judge who is handling his lawsuit to reduce any amount Marc may be awarded by the jury, it will mean that Marc will have to meet the much higher standard for defamation/libel/slander that applies to people who have that “public person” status.
It’s possible that Tully took Marc’s case on a contingent fee basis but even then, there are still out-of-pocket costs and fees that have to be paid. So, unless Marc has not been 100% truthful about his financial status, I think he is likely receiving financial assistance from one or both Bronfman sisters.
Another question to ponder: Did the same sort of things that Marc is complaining about happen in “The Vow” to other people?
KR Claviger,
Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions.
This lawsuit reminds me of the Hulk Hogan, and Peter Theil financed lawsuit against Gawker.
Rich people always receive justice and get revenge or so it seems.
****
I do believe what the documentary producers did to Marc Elliot is completely disgusting. He is portrayed as being a utter madman.
The Vow angle, you brought up will be interesting to watch. I hadn’t thought of that at all.
‘I do believe what the documentary producers did to Marc Elliot is completely disgusting. He is portrayed as being a utter madman.’
Cult member defending the actions of a filthy cult with no sign of contrition— no acknowledgement of those damaged by the process he exalts. I think that’s disgusting. I also think it’s mad to suggest he has a cure for tourrettes.
NFW-
I plan on giving you a full explanation tomorrow. Don’t have time now. I know you don’t care. But I’d like to have your input and would appreciate it greatly
NFW-
The producers of Seduced, by being disingenuous in their depiction of Marc Elliot, gave Elliot a platform from which to claim the moral high ground, (not to mention free publicity). If Marc is successful in his lawsuit, “it” will cast public doubt on all of the female victims and the DOJ’s prosecution of Nxivm and Keith Raniere. That’s the optics an Elliot lawsuit win will bring.
The producers of Seduced had plenty of ammunition to barrage Eliot; instead, the producers went for the low-hanging fruit, sensationalistic journalism.
****
I don’t feel that documentarians should twist a story to fit their narrative. It casts doubts on the DOJ and the media as a whole, regardless of the fact documentaries are just a form of entertainment,
I wanted to add that I think Mark Elliott is a danger to innocent people.
Nice Guy, I agree the editorial process in documentary making, like any other, will exclude information, often in favour of the theory or position taken by the makers — an exact and I mean isomorphic copy of the nxivm experience including all concerned’s experience unfolding in a real-time replication — I’ll stop there as I know you don’t think much of philosophy…except to say such inclusive exactitude is impossible, pointless — and viciously circular. Starz made the documentary with India Oxenburg. It’s her show, her take and she’s entitled to it.
Marc Elliot could make his own documentary. He wouldn’t even have to pitch for funding. Just as he didn’t have to for his last production. It’ll be his take and, as with the last, he’ll be entitled to it. Just as we are entitled to our own powers of discernment in judging it. I think his position is just further cultish frivolous and vexatious use of the courtroom.
You and I are seemingly unlikely to ever be misrepresented in a salacious documentary NG, simply because we clearly never made or are even about to make the kind of choices and gross errors of judgement required to earn that level of executive success.
NFW-
I was attempting to have an intelligent dialogue. You don’t have an opinion?
If you told me to F’ off, I’d be less insulted than your lack of response.
You fire a shot across my bow. I answer it – and then you sail away.
****
Note to Frank: I do attempt to have intelligent discourse and no one ever wants to engage.
Boohoo for me. 😉
??
NFW-
“??”
Your post showed up after I posted.
I see…Well, as long as you feel that justifies your little tantrum, it’s all good.
This is unrelated to the merits (or lack of) of this case: the ‘two lawyers’ will pitch in, no doubt. What puzzles me is Marc Elliott complaining about losing his ‘speaking career’. What career? He’s speaking about a cure for Tourette’s and was trying to recruit sufferers. What are his credentials? The fact that drinking Koolaid helped with my critical thinking does not mean I’ve found the cure for woolly thinking. What are the credentials of the people who ‘cured’ him? If ME doesn’t stop going on about this, he’s likely to be charged for practicing medicine without a licence, or selling a bogus cure without verified evidence. ME escaped being potentially charged with perverting the course of justice by staging a talk about the hounding of KR, right in the middle of a trial. He was rightly advised to cease and desist, which he of course took to be further hounding of himself. If you care about Tourettes and your only motivation is to help, then go back to school, conduct proper, rigorous clinical trials, open a practice. Stop wasting your life on magical thinking.
I don’t know what he did during Raniere’s trial, but the point here is a production company used the image of a person without his consent and manipulated an interview he did with another person, with another objective, to show Keith Raniere as a monster. Yes, Raniere is a monster. But the way they used the material to demonstrate it, was completely wrong. Personal data and copyright were infringed. If you are going to do a documentary, you need the explicit authorization of the person being interviewed to appear in your documentary. If another person or company uses that footage without consent, the affected party can sue that company. And the worst part is that the interview he made, was manipulated. If Elliot made wrong things during the trial, that doesn’t enter here. The demand is clear.
What expectation of privacy do you have when you record a testimonial that is to be used for publicity?
Or if you were taped at an event or in a public space where you knew cameras were being used?
I am not quite sure if all the Nexians that were recorded, not only Marc Elliot but all knew the real thing behind their interview. As everybody signed a paper when they entered to NXIVM, that they can be filmed, I don’t think they know the scope of the situation, several people just sign. All the videos recorded in NXIVM were used inside their events, most of them, except of course the ones that can be found over the internet. It was forbidden to take pictures or record videos of the events. The only person authorized to record the events was Mark Vicente with his crew.
Keith Raniere would give the same speeches multiple times. Not just the “hungry fuckie beasties “, the $10 “I piss on your family” to the Mexicans as another example. The two speeches Marc is comparing are from 2 different occasions. Dead-enders so love to insult our intelligence.
Marc Elliot has to demonstrate that the audio used in “Seduced” corresponds exactly to the moment he is mentioning. And it is really easy to review, in Protools you can analyze the frequencies. The other thing, the manipulation of the audio and the editing, is easy to demonstrate.
I am so curious how Keith Raniere – a man (allegedly) knew that only men were hungry fucky beasties?
Maybe the women just didn’t want to fuck him?
And the women were certainly hungry. They all had to be put on very restrictive diets.
And if woman weren’t “fucky” beasties why did Keith have to insist on a vow to ONLY be with him sexually?
The evidence seems to show that the women Keith Raniere knew were very hungry and had to be forced not to be fucky…
And that’s not even accounting for all the women Keith Raniere did not know. Which is a substantial number.
Women Keith Raniere never even met- who could very well be hungry, fucky beasties.
Also. How could all these “adult like”girl children who allegedly love being molested according to Keith – be likened to adult women —
-but at the same time Keith is saying that adult women are not as into sex as men?
Except when they are getting raped. And “enjoy it”. Because as Keith says (so it must be true even though he has no evidence) many women only orgasm while being raped.
So. You don’t really like sex. But when it is forced on you then you really enjoy it? Because most people I know hate something they dislike even more when it is forced…
It’s a lot to ponder.
No wonder the intensives and JNESS courses had to be repeated.
Animus Liber
Here is something to know about Marc Elliot and about the Tourette Experiments and what that says about the people involved, including Marc Elliot’s character and person:
Bronfman’s sentencing memorandum also refers to her participation in “the space of Tourette’s Syndrome, ” Def. Mem. at 20, but ignores that the participants in this “study” have expressed significant distress at their involvement. In a victim impact statement, one participant in the study stated:
When I was told that I was a candidate for participation in NXIVM’s Tourette’s study I believed that it was a legitimate medical study and I was hopeful that this study would help with my Tourette’s. In fact, there was no medical screening in advance of participation, and I was given no information about the study or its risks. …No one informed me that the study in fact required me to take ESP intensives. I had no clue that I was going to be required to take expensive intensives that went fiom 8:00 am to 7:00 pm – 9:00 pm, or that as a result I would be obligated to Clare Bronfman.
I felt like the weight of the world was on my shoulders because I needed to overcome my Tourette’s in order to prove that this treatment worked. I had to resist the urge to tic at all costs because I was so afraid to tic and mess up the study, which they told me would also mess up a cure for Tourette’s and potentially other medical conditions that NXIVM wanted to cure… On two occasions while I was in Albany, Nancy and Marc threatened to send me home. They each mentioned that if I don’t start acting better and trying harder, I will have wasted thousands of dollars of Clare’s money that she had spent on me and their “medical experiment.” It was scary—but I couldn’t show that because showing fear means something is wrong and I need to be fixed.
The “study” these people did, did nothing for me except ruin my self-esteem, ruin my mental health, and made me hate myself. It did not cure my Tourette’s in any way.
Thank you for sharing that, Animus Liber. I really feel for this victim, perhaps because my sister, Gina, was used and experimented on in a similar way. This victim’s sentiment helps me understand what they put Gina through, including the pressure to perform as if ‘cured’ — it’s all the same, tragic, underlying pattern to aggrandize Keith as a healer as he destroyed, discarded and accumulated more and more victims and, sadly, partners like Nancy, the Bronfman sisters, the Marc Elliot idiots. I take it that these victims were not sexually molested, as well? If you know. Thanks.
You know someone is a NXIVM cultie when their post begins with some variation of “I’m not a supporter of Keith, but…”
Who do they think they are fooling?
The only place to read the nonsense written by themselves and even stranger hangers-on, is on this fairly obscure website frequented by us hard-core cult watchers.
Lol. JNESS.
That cult got a dude to do a testimonial for a group called JNESS. Giggle. Giggle.
A dude.
I am cracking up typing this comment
“Hi I am Marc Elliot. When my vagina is less than fresh I use JNESS”…
You are wrong Hard-Core Cult Watcher. I am not a NXIVM supporter. I was there a long time ago, but fortunately, I left. Unfortunately, Marc Elliot is right with his demand and that’s what is pissing you off. Not only you, but all the others who are commenting on my post. Elliot can win, no matter if you like that or not. You have to be objective and everybody here is visceral. India Oxenberg really made a bad decision, she decided to include something without consent. These are the consequences: Elliot sued the production company and has the evidence that demonstrates it. Period.
I’m not pissed. I don’t even really care if Marc wins. It’s not my money. Objectively, it doesn’t seem like Marc has a case.
That is my opinion. Based on the available data.
People can have emotionally detached opinions.
Watching the video again, look at Keith, he is not wearing a lavalier, he is talking without a mic. The audio we hear in “Seduced” seems as if he were in a massive event talking inside an auditorium. Again, as I pointed before, the structure is made of wood.
There’s no way to have that kind of audio, and more because the audio was originally taken from the video Elliot is talking about. And yes, Raniere is a monster. Yes, he did awful things, and he deserves to be in jail. What I cannot tolerate is that a DOS woman is trying to demonstrate that he was an evil person, manipulating audio and video. And believe me, I am an expert on that. After this, I don’t believe a word of India Oxenberg. She is as guilty as all the other DOS women.
Anonymously, everyone can claim to be an expert in whatever. But anonymous also means that one evades any examination, that what one claims about oneself also corresponds to the truth. So you should leave such claims alone.
And the correlations you make are not related at all and are not an argument for anything else you claim.
I have the credentials to affirm what I am saying, that’s why I am writing about it. Elliot only needs to call a sound designer, a postproducer and an film editor to win his claim. Because it is quite obvious the audio and image was manipulated. If he demonstrates that in his legal process, he can win. No matter if you like it or not, the real fact is that manipulation exists. And, I am not a NXIVM fan, I was there some time ago, and I know Raniere is really a monster. But this time, Elliot is right.
This is ridiculous. I’ve designed, set up, and run sound for many events. And you can alter any recorded signal after the fact. Did Starz alter it for added drama? Maybe. Big deal – so what. Whatever they did to the recorded signal, it does not alter the words that psycho was spewing. And it wasn’t India Oxenburg doing the spewing. Your argument is specious.
Nope, this is not ridiculous. The producers of STARZ manipulated audio to defame a person, that’s what Elliot is demanding. It doesn’t matter that Jness and SOP are from NXIVM and the same monster created that. No. The problem is that Elliot gave an interview with one intention and in a program that shows what Raniere made, he appears giving the same interview taking out of the context his words. The result? The production used Protools, some sound effects from any platform you like (AudioJungle, MotionArray, Pond5, and a long, etc.), and put applauses to a speech clearly manipulated: again, in the Protools, they use an echo as if he were talking in a mass event, inside a wooden house (without resonance to make that echo effect). If you unite all the pieces, you have a dramatic sequence. Yes, it really impacts, but no, they are distorting the truth and affecting a third person. I can understand you hate Raniere, I also know all the terrible things he did, but understand that Elliot is correct in demanding. He can win, and as I said, if he brings a professional editor, sound design and a post-producer and demonstrates what I am saying, Elliot will win. And this is one of the warnings for anyone who makes a documentary where they use the image of another without asking permission, and defame: they can be sued. Those of us who do this know this. The producers of STARZ should have foreseen this. I’m surprised they didn’t.
Then I’ll look forward to the result of this epic court battle.
I do not support Keith Raniere, but I have to say that Marc Elliot is right when he shows the footage of Seduced.
I have worked in several media projects and I can assure that the audio when Raniere says Fuck Fuck Fuck (the complete audio) has an echo effect. Who made the sound design of “Seduced”? I don’t and I don’t care, but he or she are quite bad doing this job. Also because, we have another audio problem. The house where the audio is heard, is made of wood. The resonance of wood does not give you that echo. And also because all the windows in Albany and in all the Upper NY are design to absorb sound. So, how the hell the echo is heard in a wooden house with special windows?
Finally, as several members of NXIVM knew, the gatherings were very private. You cannot hear a thing out due to all the wood and the windows, and because if they use lavaliers, were only used in the special event in Vanguard Week. Raniere normally talked to his followers without microphone, the clear example is Apropos. He didn’t need a mic. What I know is that some interviews and some of the gatherings were recorded, and the camera man or woman used a mic to record and probably put a lavalier in some special interviews.
But in the gatherings… I don’t think so. So, Elliot is right, the video was manipulated. If he goes with a professional sound design person and a professional editor to court, he may win this point. Is “Seduced” damaging his image? Maybe, it depends. Probably a sum of factors may be damaging his life, not only the documentary.
LOL. Who cares about how the sound was manipulated? Maybe the creators added that for extra impact and effect. It’s the filthy content of what Keith is saying about “conquering a woman” when it juxtaposed against the clip of the claim Marc makes about Jness as the only place where he has been taught how to deal compassionately with women that is the point. On the one hand, you have this supposedly beautiful place of female understanding in Jness (founded by Keith), and on the other hand, you have him speaking in the aforementioned manner to its all-male counterpart SOP (also founded by Keith). The vast majority of viewers don’t give a shyte about audio effects.
No, nobody notices audio effects. The problem here is that he sued the production company because the audio and the video were shown and manipulated without his consent. I don’t know the exact legal procedure, but a judge can call experts and analyze the material. A post-producer, a sound designer and an editor can go and evaluate the evidence. They will certify that the audio and video were manipulated. Then Elliot will still have to prove that he was defamed. The most important thing here is that he appeared in the documentary series without consent. With that in mind, he can win easily. The production company can say: the audio was manipulated for dramatic purposes. Yes, perfect, they give a dramatic effect, but damage the image of a person and that’s why he is demanding the company. The result? Elliot can win and the production company will have to pay the money. What if the company deletes his scenes? Yes, they can do that, but they made moral damage, so they still have to pay.
Nope. I’m pretty sure he will not win his legal case as the material they likely used falls under fair use. I’m sure Starz has some pretty good lawyers on board that will validate the usage of such material before their content is released.
The fact of the matter is that Marc was not directly or indirectly defamed in any manner in the video (except in so much as you can say that his association with NXIVM puts him in a generally bad light). They relayed what he said and then put it side by side what Keith Raniere said to show the contrast. Nothing more and nothing less. They may have clipped things, edited sound effects, etc., but that happens in all forms of media.
Fair use would be if the material was made for academic or for informational purposes. In the case of “Seduced,” these purposes do not apply as the doc series was made to get a profit from it. And it can exist moral damage in the “fair use” material. Elliot has to prove this in the demand.
Anonymous sound expert is firmly in Marc’s camp on this. I sincerely hope s/he will be an expert witness in the epic court battle to come after honing his/her testimony here on FrankReport.
I don’t believe fair use says anything one way or the other about “profiting” from content where the copyrighted material is in fair use. One is not allowed to profit from the use of the copyright material as it is intended without express permission from the copyright owner as that is what copyright law precisely is. For example, you cannot take course material learned in NXIVM, package it as your own content, and then sell it for profit without expressly written permission from the copyright owner.
Fair use according to Stanford Library content I looked up on the Internet is summarily described as the following:
In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work. Such uses can be done without permission from the copyright owner. In other words, fair use is a defense against a claim of copyright infringement. If your use qualifies as a fair use, then it would not be considered an infringement.
…
Most fair use analysis falls into two categories: (1) commentary and criticism, or (2) parody.
The producers of Starz seemed to do both with respect to NXIVM material, i.e., a video clip of what Marc said about Jness subsequently juxtaposed with a video clip of what Keith said in an SOP meeting to show the stark contrast.
No L, I will not be the expert in this case to testify in favor of Elliot. He must find the people that can help him manage this, he probably already has these people helping him. Remember he went to some festivals with his documentary, so there you can meet lots of experts and maybe some of them will help him. I am just being the devil’s advocate in Frank Report.
Wait…You think sound mixers and producers consult with everyone in a documentary? You believe that’s what happens? And that everyone signs off on their lighting too?
The footage already exists. Wait till the tapes of Marc dancing in front of MDC hit the streaming shows. Public place. No expectation of privacy.
Because they will be making shows about Nxivm for YEARS. There may be a cycle. Interest wanes. Then boom! Back in the news. 10 years. 5 years. But this is just the start.
A lot of the footage had already been put out there by the participants. They are not private people. They are on Dateline NBC. They are holding press conferences.
Remember when Nicki kept whining about her interview? Saying it was all edited? Misrepresented? For NBC? How’d that go for her?
The sound designer receives orders from the producer. If the producer says the sequence should be deleted, he must obey, because if he doesn’t follow the order, he may lose his job or in the future will not be hired for another documentary or any other film or series. The sound designer receives the edited material. He only polishes the sound and makes the mix of the tracks at the end. But, if there’s a dialog to delete, he is the one that should do it. The same as the editor: if a certain sequence is not working, the producer can talk to the editor and tell him/her about the issue. The editor can delete the sequence or edit it again. Editors and sound designers receive orders. Of course, they use their creativity to finish a series, but if precise information or an order is received, you have to do what they say. The responsibility is on the producer, not the crew.
I have to say that you are obviously a NXIVM dead-ender.
Your Vanguard is never going to leave prison except in a coffin or a body bag (I’m not sure how they transport dead convicts).
No, I am not a NXIVM dead-ender. I am an objective reader of Frank Report with the sufficient credentials to affirm what I am talking about. Yes, Raniere will die in prison (unless he wins the appeal), I don’t know if the prisons have their own cemeteries. In some countries once the convict finishes his sentence, the relatives can move the body to another place. Not sure if this applies here.
If a deceased prisoner has a family member that is willing to be responsible for properly disposing of the body, the prison will generally release the corpse to that family member. If not, the body of the deceased prisoner will generally be disposed of in a local graveyard set aside for paupers.
Thank you for clarifying the point about cemeteries, K.R. Claviger. 🙂
Marc,
Nobody 👏 cares 👏 about 👏 you! You’re barely a Nxivm afterthought. Quit embarrassing yourself, dude.
Why aren’t any of the ex-Nx couples suing Starz for India saying “wife” swapping was common in the cult? Why haven’t notable couples–like Marc V and Bonnie, Nippy and Sarah E. or Mark H and Kristin–sued Starz for defamation…unless it’s true?
Remember John Tighe’s report about Necker Island that said one of the items on the agenda was “sex”?
When is Marc going to come out of the closet?
All the men who most publicly support Keith are in the closet. I think NXIVM appeals to them because it has given them the tools to hide their true selves from others and themselves.
This is sad.
I don’t think he will win. Also, both Jness and SOP were run by KR and awfully sexist- and connected things very, very effectively to ensure men feel superior and very different from women and are all as bad as each other and in Jness women are told they are weak and awful and need to improve. Both groups feed into KR’s view of women as lesser and almost owned property of men.
Marc Elliot implies they are very different: e.g., as if he gave a testimonial for Oxfam and instead it was used as if he had endorsed BP.
Oh, man. Other than that, all they did is add a laugh track? I don’t really get it. Okay, your testimony was for Jness but you were also there in the room where nobody was laughing? Huh, what?
Honestly, maybe it seems mean to say, but most of the nxivm people look kind of bad to the average viewer because you were all just pretty much a bunch of jerks trying to “save the world” in secret. With NDAs and success plans to accumulate as much of the worlds wealth as possible. It’s such an elitist mentality and “He who has most joy wins”? Is so gross and unenlightened.
Marc, I think you’re being a bit too sensitive or just after a payout like your group accuses everyone else of doing. I had a pretty good laugh at a chipmunk wanting to fuck everything it sees though, so, thank you for that! Pretty funny! But I’m sorry. I don’t really see the problem here.
Nicki Clyne
@nickiclyne
If you watched “Seduced,” or ANY of the documentaries or media on NXIVM, you must watch this video. It is a crash course on how to deceive audiences through creative editing. This is only the beginning of unraveling the NXIVM narrative. Stay tuned…
youtube.com
Fake “Documentary” Exposed: Part 1 – Marc Elliot
Can you believe what you see in a TV show that calls itself a documentary? A little over a year ago the NXIVN docuseries “Seduced” came out on Starz. For …
12. Nov. 2021·Twitter Web App
429 Too Many Requests
You have been rate-limited for making too many requests in a short time frame.
Website owner? If you think you have reached this message in error, please contact support.
Marc Elliott’s video has a lot of NLP in it with all the bells going off, different colors, circles, etc.
It’s like watching another NXIVM video. Marc is attempting to lay in his argument in many different ways into your brain.
Makes me wonder what NLP expert he had help him put this together?
Just Saying, watchers beware
If STARZ did a poll, I bet they’d find out Marc Elliott wasn’t even remembered in this series except by himself and his family and friends.
I watched the series along with The Vow and didn’t recall him being in it. Why, because he isn’t a main player for NXIVM, IMO.
Elliott has drawn more attention to himself by all his cry baby attention-getting behavior than anything else.
I bet when STARZ asks for his financials of how much Elliott has lost since their show came out and how Elliott can prove it is in direct connection to their show vs his connection of support such as dancing in front of the MDC for Keith Raniere, Marc Elliott is going to have a problem on his hands.
When a cult follower like Marc Elliott supports a child rapist who has a reputation such a Keith Raniere, that is a career stopper for a speaker. Not some short part in a show such as STARZ.
Marc is going to get exposed on the stand for who he really is, a cult junkie.
The producers of the documentary don’t have Marc’s signed consent to use his image. They needed to avoid a demand like this. Also, in The Vow people can demand compensation if they used their image. As far as I know, several people sent requests that their image should be deleted or put a blur on it. Maybe Elliot wants attention. Yes, it can be possible, but India Oxenberg doesn’t have consent. That’s the real problem.
That’s an excellent point!
Via Electronic Filing
Honorable Eric R. Komitee United States District Court
Eastern District of New York 225 Cadman Plaza East Courtroom: 6G North Brooklyn, New York 11201
Re: Edmondson, et al. v Raniere, et al.
Dear Judge Komitee:
The Court has directed the parties to submit letters setting forth their positions on issues raised at the status conference. For the reasons discussed below, Plaintiffs do not believe that the action should be divided, Defendants dropped, or claims severed. Plaintiffs are prepared to move forward with the current Complaint and are ready to respond to the motions to dismiss outlined by Defendants Clare and Sara Bronfman.1 Therefore, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court consider a schedule for the proposed motions to dismiss at the next status conference scheduled for November 30. Plaintiffs present herein a summary statement of the case.
DEFENDANTS ARE JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY LIABLE
Since the early-to-mid-2000s, Clare Bronfman and Sara Bronfman agreed with Keith Raniere, Nancy Salzman and others to jointly pursue a common purpose through unlawful means, operating largely through NXIVM-related entities. The common purpose was to enhance Raniere’s stature and provide him with everything he desired, while obtaining for themselves financial rewards, free labor, enhanced stature, and power and control over a growing community. This joint effort (referred to herein as the “NXIVM Venture”) was, among other things, a conspiracy to operate or participate in a racketeering enterprise and to engage in human trafficking
1 Three other Defendants have now appeared pro se and have indicated their intent to join in the motions to dismiss that will be filed by Clare Bronfman and Sara Bronfman, and that they may raise additional issues in their motions.
crimes, and the methods it employed were highly destructive. It succeeded. It was continuous over two decades, spanned North America and beyond, and through the unlawful and tortious acts set forth in the Complaint, caused members of the NXIVM community numerous economic and personal injuries. None of these harmful acts were distinct; each was connected to, arose out of and/or was necessary to the operation of the NXIVM Venture, and are thus part of this single case. To divide this case into siloed claims on separate tracks with separate discovery would be inefficient and would unduly restrict the Plaintiffs from being able to prove their claims.
The Complaint alleges that Clare Bronfman and Sara Bronfman conspired to participate in, and participated in, a racketeering enterprise – the NXIVM Venture – in which they each agreed to commit and committed at least two RICO predicate acts. The Complaint asserts claims against Clare Bronfman and Sara Bronfman under 18 U.S.C. § 1595(a), pursuant to which they are liable for acts in violation of enumerated Chapter 77 offenses, attempting and/or conspiring to commit such acts, and for having benefitted from their participation in a venture – the NXIVM Venture – that they knew, recklessly disregarded or should have known was committing Chapter 77 offenses. The Complaint alleges that Clare Bronfman and Sara Bronfman aided and abetted or acted in concert with others to engage in acts – the system and methods of the NXIVM Venture – that are negligent per se under New York law. The Complaint describes what the NXIVM Venture was, how it did what it did, how it injured the Plaintiffs, and each Defendant’s role in this extraordinarily harmful venture. There is no room in a seven-page summary of the case to take on each point of law raised by Defendants, but Plaintiffs strongly disagree with Defendants’ characterizations and mischaracterizations of the governing laws and are prepared to address each point of law in opposition to Defendants’ motions to dismiss.2
BACKGROUND OF THE NXIVM VENTURE
This was an elaborate, destructive undertaking, relying on an unending series of express and implicit false promises, including not only that NXIVM offered a legitimate career path (Compl. ¶ 3), but also (among other things) that the “tech” could cure psychological, medical and psychiatric conditions (Compl. ¶¶ 7, 16, 589, 600), and that Raniere’s teachings were endorsed by (among others) the Dalai Lama. (Compl. ¶ 702). NXIVM’s methods involved relentless emotional
2 For example, Defendant Clare Bronfman argues that practicing psychology without a license is not unlawful in New York State, citing People v. Abrams, 177 A.D.2d 633 (1991). This is incorrect. Abrams was based on an antiquated version of the statute governing the profession of psychology, which was superseded by amendments to Title VIII of New York Education Law enacted in 2002. These amendments not only expressly made the practice of psychology without a license unlawful, but also substantially expanded the scope of Title VIII to include persons practicing psychotherapy, psychoanalysis and mental or behavioral health counseling under a variety of rubrics. The legislative intent was “to protect the public from unprofessional, improper, unauthorized and unqualified practice of counseling and psychotherapy.” 2002 Sess. Law News of N.Y. Ch. 676, § 7 (S. 7727) (McKinney’s). Anyone who engages in any of these practices without first qualifying for and being granted a license – regardless of what label they use – is guilty of a felony, as is anyone who aids and abets such acts. N.Y. Educ. Law § 6512. This law is
“extraordinarily expansive” and it “manifests a legislative intent to proscribe all aspects of the unlicensed practice of any regulated profession” People v. Shnayder, 11 Misc. 3d 1053(A) at *8 (N.Y. Supreme Court, Kings Cty., Feb.
10, 2006) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Plaintiffs contend that NXIVM’s methods violated these laws, and that these violations constitute negligence per se.
and psychological manipulation designed to impart a belief that one’s problems resulted from personal failings and failures that only NXIVM’s system could resolve.
Raniere and Nancy Salzman launched NXIVM as a so-called umbrella company under which Executive Success Programs and other related entities operated. As the “conceptual founder,” Raniere had a ten-percent interest in each of the entities that was not documented or disclosed, because he was promoted as an ascetic humanitarian who had no interest in material possessions or worldly pleasures. (Compl. ¶¶ 54, 595-596). This false image of Raniere was fundamental to the promotion of the NXIVM Venture, and it was carefully managed, his true character and predilections obscured from the view of prospective recruits and most members of the NXIVM community. He was “Vanguard,” and a large, framed photograph of him hung in every NXIVM classroom. (Compl. ¶ 620). He was venerated at the start of every class, his words and teachings were to be unquestioningly accepted and followed and members were required to give him tribute. (Compl. ¶ 639).
Exploitation of humans – extraction of assets and labors by fraud, manipulation and coercion – was central to the NXIVM Venture, and its teachings and methods were crafted to achieve this objective. According to NXIVM teachings, the ultimate goal for members was to attain self-mastery and effect positive change in the world by living in accord with principles taught by NXIVM. (Compl. ¶ 638). Students were manipulated into taking a never-ending series of expensive curriculum that slowly and subtly displaced their values with a warped “ethics” that normalized antisocial and even unlawful behaviors. (Compl. ¶ 8). Paired with these teachings were “EM” sessions in which the values taught in the curriculum were applied to a person’s internal life to identify personal “issues.” An issue could be anything identified as holding a person back from advancement, including resistance to teachings, and students were obligated to work relentlessly on overcoming them. (Compl. ¶¶ 677-681). Failing to work issues was an “ethical breach,” an offense against both a person and the community that could result in punitive consequences. NXIVM students were forbidden from sharing what they were learning or experiencing with family, friends, and other outsiders, depriving them of anyone who might express concerns or offer a different frame of reference. (Compl. ¶ 612). This devastating combination stripped individuals of their self-worth and disconnected them from self-protective emotional responses (“issues” to be overcome), rendering them vulnerable to systematically escalating and destructive manipulation.
Early on, students were informed that if they committed to advancement within NXIVM by working their way up the “stripe path,” they would not only alleviate their problems, but they could join the community and eventually earn a substantial living. (Compl. ¶ 3). However, first they were required to take courses, recruit others, and become “coaches,” which required the provision of labor and services without compensation. (Compl. ¶¶ 632-634). As a member became increasingly immersed in the NXIVM community, they were encouraged to relocate to the Albany, NY area where the NXIVM Venture was based (Compl. ¶ 697), and over time many became financially dependent on the NXIVM Venture and its participants, put to work in severely underpaid and even unpaid jobs, which was justified as the way for an impoverished community member to continue to take the expensive courses they were pressured and manipulated to believe
they had to take. This unpaid work was sometimes referred to as a “value exchange.” (Compl. ¶¶ 12, 642-643).
An ethical breach could result in not being paid or not being paid fully for one’s labor. (Compl. ¶ 763). Many were told that their fear of being broke, going into debt or even having to file for bankruptcy was an issue that had to be overcome. (Compl. ¶ 691). This had a chilling effect on people standing up for themselves and increased vulnerability to the Venture’s coercive pressure.
As they were pulled in deeper and became integrated into the NXIVM community, members were pressured to cut off outside friendships and family contacts or, at minimum, refuse to discuss anything related to NXIVM with them. (Compl. ¶ 612). These members were rendered financially and emotionally dependent on Defendants and the NXIVM Venture, and they no longer even saw a way out. This was extremely traumatizing, and it was all by design, the organized effort by Raniere and other participants in the NXIVM Venture, Clare and Sara Bronfman chief among them. Participants benefitted financially, they received free or extremely low-cost labor, they gained in stature in the growing community, and they expected greater stature, pleasures and material benefits as that community expanded around the world.
DEFENDANTS CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS
Defendants’ arguments are inconsistent. On the one hand, they argue that the Complaint alleges too much, is too sweeping, tries to lay the blame for everything at their feet; and on the other hand, they assert that it does not allege enough for them to understand the claims against them. They understand perfectly well what Plaintiffs’ claims are, they have the short and plain set of allegations necessary to understand what they are accused of doing and what roles they both agreed to play and played in the NXIVM Venture. Their liability does not turn on being directly connected to (or even knowing about) each unlawful or harmful act. Nor do they have to have known each participant’s specific role in the venture or the particular acts each would commit in furtherance of that undertaking.3 They agreed to participate, and did participate, in a joint venture that, through the commission of numerous unlawful and tortious acts harmed numerous individuals, including Plaintiffs. They did so with the expectation of deriving benefits from this venture, which they did. And they knew, recklessly disregarded or should have known the NXIVM Venture was systematically engaging in acts of human trafficking that left members of the NXIVM community devastated.
The fact that the Complaint alleges many facts and legal claims is reflective of the scope of the NXIVM Venture. The Defendants in this action are not a random set of unrelated people who did unrelated things. The individual Defendants named in the Complaint lived, met, and worked out of a few residences and commercial buildings in Clifton Park, New York. Nor were the companies they set up and ran separate entities with their own independent boards of directors, managers, operations, and finances. Few, if any, formalities were followed, moneys were
3 See Salinas v. United States, 522 U.S. 52 (1997) (explaining the broad scope of the RICO conspiracy statute § 1962(d) and that “[i]f conspirators have a plan which calls for some conspirators to perpetrate the crime and others to provide support, the supporters are as guilty as the perpetrators.” Id. at 64.
commingled, the companies were rife with self-dealing – they were mere instrumentalities used to serve Defendants’ needs in furthering the common purpose of the NXIVM Venture. (Compl. ¶ 615).
CLARE BRONFMAN AND SARA BRONFMAN WERE LEADERS OF THE NXIVM VENTURE
Soon after taking their first “intensives”, the Bronfmans relocated to the Albany area. Raniere had two uses for women: as objects for sex, or as partners in his project to control a growing population of acolytes, from whom money, and labor could be extracted. Clare Bronfman and Sara Bronfman zealously pursued those latter roles in the NXIVM Venture. After taking a few courses, Raniere personally elevated each to the heights of power and authority within the NXIVM Venture and the expanding community it was building. Sara was appointed “Director of Humanities,” and took a seat on the Executive Board. (Compl. ¶ 702). She and Clare Bronfman set up several non-profit entities to further the NXIVM Venture’s purposes. Clare Bronfman headed NXIVM’s “legal team,” and was appointed to the Executive Board in 2009, serving as the conduit between the Board and Raniere, consolidating her power, effectively ousting Nancy Salzman and taking control of legal, administrative and financial operations for NXIVM, among other things. (Compl. ¶¶ 703-704). Clare Bronfman and Sara Bronfman were not unwitting donors to the NXIVM Venture; they both committed specific unlawful acts that furthered the Venture, including the following examples alleged in the complaint.
Clare Bronfman and Raniere brought together six women (including Plaintiffs Bonnie, Adrienne and Jane Doe 17) under the pretense of launching a company called exo/eso that would open centers around the world teaching a new form of bodywork. They subsequently used the power differential to groom these women for Raniere’s “harem,” applying many of the same methods that would be used on other women in DOS. The exo/eso women were falsely promised an ownership share and profits while, in reality, Clare Bronfman owned the company, and had no intention of affording these women a meaningful business and career opportunity, or even a living wage. (Compl. ¶¶ 751-765). After a launch event on her private island in Fiji, for which the women were compensated, that compensation dried up. They were required to provide exo/eso trainings to other NXIVM entities and prospective recruits for free. Clare Bronfman justified the lack of compensation with a reason based on NXIVM’s central tenet: they weren’t entitled to be paid because they were failing to adequately resolve their supposed issues. When the women complained, she brought in Defendant Lauren Salzman, NXIVM’s director of education, to scold the women for having a sense of “entitlement,” accuse them of “ethical breaches,” and force them to retake NXIVM’s “tribute” module of the curriculum, which taught that, before being entitled to compensation, they had to learn to willingly work for free. (Compl. ¶ 763). Years of destructive, misogynistic curriculum had stripped them of their self-esteem, they were physically and mentally exhausted, and they simply did not have the wherewithal to push back against two of the highest- ranking authorities in NXIVM. This was, among other things, forced labor and attempted sex trafficking per 18 U.S.C. § 1589 and 1591.
Jane Doe 17’s experience with Clare Bronfman and exo/eso had another exploitative dimension: Clare Bronfman induced her to leave her home country and go to work within the
NXIVM community in Albany by false promises of a position and salary detailed in a letter submitted by Clare Bronfman to U.S. immigration authorities. Once Jane Doe 17 was in the U.S., however, Clare Bronfman and Raniere informed her that she would work directly with Raniere and Clare Bronfman in an underpaid job in exo/eso and a second underpaid job as Clare Bronfman’s personal assistant. (Compl. ¶ 768). When she complained about her circumstances, she was reprimanded. After months of persistently reminding Clare Bronfman of the promised salary, Bronfman begrudgingly began to pay her monthly sums. Later, however, Bronfman told Jane Doe 17 that the payments were just a loan, and that now Jane Doe 17 was indebted to her personally and needed to pay or work off that debt. (Compl. ¶ 769). Recognizing that she had been brought into the U.S. under false pretenses and fearing legal trouble if she challenged Defendants, Jane Doe 17 returned to Canada, taking a job as a yoga instructor. But Clare Bronfman harassed Jane Doe 17, threatening her with legal action and insisting that she was obligated to return to the U.S. and go back to work for her to pay off her debt. (Compl. ¶¶ 770-774); see also Complaint ¶ 729 (“Raniere and Clare Bronfman lured unsuspecting women from other countries to enter the U.S. to work with them on developing exo/eso, including Jane Doe 17.”)). This was, among other things, peonage under 18 U.S.C § 1581 and fraud in foreign labor contracting in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1351(a).
THE BRONFMANS’ DECEPTION AND INTIMIDATION TACTICS
Clare Bronfman and Sara Bronfman engineered an event featuring the Dalai Lama so the NXIVM Venture could falsely portray Raniere as a world-class ethicist, honored and endorsed by one of the world’s greatest spiritual leaders. After some conniving and outright lies to the Dalai Lama to assure him that Raniere was the victim of a disinformation campaign by his enemies, Sara Bronfman donated one-million dollars to one of the Dalai Lama’s charities in exchange for him appearing at their event, which was subsequently used to perpetuate a falsehood: that the Dalai Lama traveled to Albany to honor and endorse Raniere. (Compl. ¶ 702). He didn’t. Clare and Sara Bronfman organized and financed this event to promote the falsehood to persuade people to ignore negative media reports and continue as members of, and join, the NXIVM community. This was, among other things, fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343.
Led by Defendant Clare Bronfman and supported by Sara Bronfman, the NXIVM Venture’s ‘legal team’ hired investigators to rummage through peoples’ garbage, monitor their communications, and obtain their financial information. (Compl. ¶ 701). They paid one investigative firm approximately one million dollars to dig up financial information and “dirt” on a list of NXIVM enemies that included public officials and even the federal judges presiding over their various cases. (Compl. ¶ 701). These were disturbing attempts to obstruct justice, interfere with federal legal proceedings and corruptly influence government officials.
The NXIVM Venture abused the legal process to punish critics and perceived enemies. Directed by Clare Bronfman, the Venture reportedly hired 50-60 lawyers from 30 or more law firms to file lawsuits, interfere in bankruptcy proceedings and abuse the legal system, not for legitimate purposes, but to set examples to others of the consequences they might suffer if they spoke to anyone against NXIVM. (Compl. ¶¶ 36). Plaintiff Toni Natalie was persecuted in one case after another, civil and criminal. Not a single case or claim against her had the slightest merit,
but that was never the point, and some were supported by false statements and other wrongdoing by Clare Bronfman. (Comp. ¶¶ 741, 745-748). The Venture sued NXIVM critic Rick Ross, who posted truthful information about Raniere and NXIVM on his website, along with several other individuals. (Compl. ¶ 742). Defendant Nancy Salzman pleaded guilty to conspiring to operate or participate in a racketeering enterprise that, among other things, altered evidence in that federal proceeding. (Compl. ¶ 842). That conspiracy and enterprise is the NXIVM Venture and the legal team that altered that evidence was run by Clare Bronfman. Sara Bronfman contributed millions of dollars to these efforts, knowing that the purpose was to make examples of some to silence the rest.
The intimidation and retaliation against victims and witnesses continued even after the existence of DOS had been publicly exposed and several critics, including at least one outspoken DOS victim, Plaintiff Sarah Edmondson, were calling for law enforcement to investigate the NXIVM Venture. Multiple women, including several Plaintiffs, wrote letters to Clare Bronfman and other members of NXIVM’s Executive Board, describing their collateral (compromising photographs and documents) and asking that it be returned or destroyed. Clare Bronfman, and the rest of the board, ignored their pleas. Instead, she flew to Vancouver, Canada and lodged a false criminal complaint against Ms. Edmondson. (Compl. ¶¶ 106, 837). Beginning in the late summer and fall of 2017, Clare Bronfman and Raniere authored several letters to former DOS members, including several Plaintiffs, threatening legal action and demanding silence about DOS, some backed by more false criminal complaints. (Compl. ¶ 749, 884). Shortly before Raniere’s criminal trial, Sara Bronfman attempted by false pretenses to financially induce Plaintiff (and potentially key prosecution witness) Adrian to leave and remain out of the country for the duration of the trial. (Compl. ¶ 855). These were acts of attempted witness tampering and attempts to obstruct and interfere with enforcement of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1590 and 1591.
All these overt acts were taken by Clare and Sara Bronfman in furtherance of the NXIVM Venture. Clare and Sara Bronfman knowingly and willingly participated in the affairs of the Venture, not merely as generous donors or foot soldiers, but while occupying top rungs in the organization. Their proclamations of innocence and ignorance strain credulity, and the Complaint offers a wealth of factual allegation to support Plaintiffs’ claims.
Respectfully Submitted,
Neil L. Glazer
NLG/csm
cc: All counsel via ECF
Mr. Elliot, I’m confused at how you were done a disservice by being portrayed as speaking in support of “JNESS” – one of NXIVM’s allegedly innocent non-slave, non-branding, women’s groups – when you were rather referring to the NXIVM “men’s” group, “SOP,” that reportedly wore cow udders and held circle jerk sessions spewing insults at KAR’s “fuck toys” to, albeit as you explain, cultivate empathy for females and release your primal male instincts?
It’s not as if anyone (but you) suggests that you stand steadfast by a pedophile convicted of multiple sex crime felonies or anything. Btw, is there any etiological correlation between “Tourettes” in adolescence and adult mental illness? Can Tully use an insanity defense?
RE Elliots Frivolous Lawsuit:
Marc Elliot has no real damages. The lawyers will likely advise their client to settle with Elliot and payout $10,000 so they don’t waste money going to court.
Is this the opinion of your wife, Nice Guy, or your own?
Alanzo-
This statement is pure 100%, “straight from the horse’s mouth(me).
***
Extended Answer:
Some time ago, my wife said, something to the effect of the following:
“I am serious, do not ask me another [redacted] legal question which has to do with that [redacted] cult blog you’re always on. You’re ALL in your own cult following a cult. You don’t see that? This Frank , whoever, probably feels like he’s babysitting a bunch of LUNATICS.”
That’s what she said in a nutshell. My wife has issued this statement dozens of times over the years.
Now, if I ask her any legal question, she sighs, shrugs her shoulders says, “Google it, I don Know.” 😉
I hope you, Alannzo, enjoyed the full extended ‘Director’s Cut Answer‘
LOL
Sometimes we give you a hard time, Nice Guy, but we like you overall and think you are funny when you aren’t playing footsie with Allen.
Shalom!
A dank!
Nicki Clyne
@nickiclyne
·
29m
I just spoke with someone in prison who was hospitalized after getting the vaccine and had to be put on steroids to reduce the inflammation in his tonsils that made it hard for him to breathe.
Does anyone know if there’s legal recourse for something like this?
From Shadowstate
No, Nicki, there is no legal recourse.
Congress has banned lawsuits against vaccine makers.
From CNBC
HEALTH AND SCIENCE
You can’t sue Pfizer or Moderna if you have severe Covid vaccine side effects. The government likely won’t compensate you for damages either
Under the PREP Act, companies like Pfizer and Moderna have total immunity from liability if something unintentionally goes wrong with their vaccines.
A little-known government program provides benefits to people who can prove they suffered serious injury from a vaccine.
That program rarely pays, covering just 29 claims over the last decade.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/16/covid-vaccine-side-effects-compensation-lawsuit.html
In short, take the vaccine at your own risk.
Make sure that the incident is reported to VAERS
VAERS Logo
About VAERS
Report an Adverse Event
VAERS Data Resources
Submit Follow-Up Information
Have you had a reaction following a vaccination?
Contact your healthcare provider.
Report an Adverse Event using the VAERS online form or the downloadable PDF. New!
https://vaers.hhs.gov/
Now you understand why I am against the Fauci injections.
I think Mark is missing/ignoring the point of this part of the documentary. Yeah, sure, videos were clipped, spliced together and somewhat decontextualized. But it appears to me that it was done because the documentary’s creators wanted to show the stark contrast between what was being taught in jness — the female group that supposedly taught men how to compassionately relate to women — and its male counterpart SOP, and they did so by showing what was said by Mark about jness and the SOP clip of what was said by Keith Raniere that evidenced the opposite. Keith may have mentioned that the “primitive” part of man wants to do those things, but where was the evidence that he provided for it? Where is the evidence that this is a general condition of men that they just want to ‘fuck, fuck, fuck it, conquer it and have women enjoy that conquering’? I doubt he provided a single shred of it. So, we can presume that it was only his thoughts that he was spreading and revealing of himself to others. To me, if Keith could openly act like Genghis Khan, he would. But because he can’t, he mixes truth with falsehood which keeps the shell game going, tells women what they want to hear, because underneath it all, he’s just a mini Genghis hiding behind a lot of buzzwords and New Age lingo.
Aren’t we supposed to be waiting for “Part 2: How Carysa was cured of Tourette’s in four hours” ?
If Marc Elliot loses his $12 million lawsuit against Lionsgate, Lionsgate will probably seek reimbursement of its legal fees. If that is granted, Marc Elliot may file for personal bankruptcy. I assume that Elliot will certainly not be able to raise the money for this.
It’s like saying, I support Hitler’s nicer concentration death camp.
Marc supports a criminal organization. It doesn’t matter which branch he supported in one video. He still praises keith separate from this seduced issue. Marc still supports a whacko.
Usually, when you have an active lawsuit, a lawyer wants you to stay off of social media and away from doing stories.
Wouldn’t want to give the other side any more information to defend themselves.
Not Mr. Tully or Marc Elliott
Marc can’t stop talking about himself or his now-on YouTube movie.
He blames everyone but himself for why he lost his speaking career. No one wants him because of his continued support of Raniere and NXIVM is the truth.
He got away with it until the legal case broke and a member of the audience did a Google search and blew his cover for a bigger company. Marc got caught with his pants down for not disclosing his connection to Raniere and NXIVM and blew himself up
Hum… Let me see if I’m understanding this right
This guy, Marc, is suing this company for a shit load of money and 25% of their continued profits over how they manipulated footage
This is coming from the NXIVM program that was a pack of lies and whose leaders went to prison.
A group whose leaders manipulated the crap out of people to get what they wanted for its main leader, Raniere – sex, money, and power.
Am I understanding what this clown Marc is upset about? You belong to this horrible group that you want to make good so you look good, ain’t gonna happen Elliott.
He still belongs to the frickin cult, loves the leaders so much he’s got his nose up their ass to this day, crying “Watch my movie, its God’s gift to the world” if you’d only free the criminally insane child molester so I can continue my thing with them.
Elliott is worried about how Starz makes him look! WTF
Bahahahahahaha
What a moron, he keeps coming out with these mini-infomercials about how great he and his project are, but only if it’s attached to the world’s greatest Cult Leaders
Marc, we can see right through your BS and your lies. And you’re doing exactly what you say STARZ is doing.
Isn’t that right out of the Shifter module?
I can’t wait for a jury to hear this story. That’s if it gets that far. I’m sure Raniere, Salzman, Bronfman and others are dying to go through discovery in your case.
A good defense attorney is going to eat you up Elliott and make you look like the fool you are.
Wake up, you make yourself look way worse every day Elliott with your sad sob story and your continued support of Raniere.
The Shifter module is Keith in a microcosm. I can see him cackling crazily to himself as he played hide & seek while devising the module.
There were a couple times I was creeped out as I listened to Marc. Especially at the end, if there wasn’t video I’d have thought I was listening to Vanguard himself.
I hope all these dead-enders learned from the mistakes of the first inner circle. Watch your backs and your drinks. You do you. Just know Keith isn’t looking out for anyone other than Keith. And even that he does poorly.
How many times did Marc say he took the jness tracks course? 5? 7?
LOL
He’s like Scientologists who spend $$$$$ on the Cause Resurgence Rundown, i.e. running around a lighted pole in a dark room for hours on end to learn that they can move their bodies, not just once, but multiple times.
Cultie ingrates are a source of amusement.
Someone will always be ready to fleece the sheep like Marc.
DOSA JISM just reached out to Marc to let him know of the level and quality of our support for him.
We encourage everyone to do the same. It is important for him to know we are thinking of him.
https://www.marcelliot.com/
If I were this guy, I’d be running as fast as I could to dissociate myself from the organization. I damn sure wouldn’t remind people via litigation that a) I was in the group; and b) I still see merit in its programs and teachings.
Ask any lawyer about a liability lawsuit and they will tell you that even if you win it will be a ‘peppercorn ruling”. In other words, the judge might say: “Gee, Marc, you’re right, you’ve been slandered. I award you one dollar plus costs”. Litigation is a rich man’s sport.
Rich women like the Bronfmans enjoy that sport as well. Hence, this lawsuit.
When Suneel, Marc and Alanzo get together for circle jerks, do they practice social distancing?
Do they taste each other’s output?
The first seven minutes of the video is Marc Eliot telling you how to think about all this. Skip to 7:00 if you just want to see it for yourself. It’s clear Marc’s remarks were part of a promotional video for which I would suspect he signed permissions. So depending on how those are held, his complaint of no permission to use video of him may be baseless. I didn’t see anything that I would characterize as “attacking Marc” in those clips.
What I do see is someone praising a NXIVM program – Jness, SOP, whatever – it’s all under the same umbrella. And I see/hear a sociopath gleefully expounding his inner mental trash to a group that thinks they are not allowed to be appalled at his diseased mind because he is their master/guru/vanguard. So I guess Marc is suffering another angle of the same buyer’s remorse that has been laid at the feet of DOS deserters.
If, in hindsight, you are feeling uncomfortable with your own zeal in promoting the philosophy of a “great man” who actually speaks like a loathsome, fetid psycho, that’s on you. Man up. Deal with your own naivete, and move on. Man, these proponents of “There are no ultimate victims” really are just the biggest whiners with no ability for self-reflection. You don’t need an EM – figure out your own shit and own it.
L.
You are awesome. I noticed that too. Being coached by Marc on what to think. What I will see, hear and come to believe.
Oldest trick in the book. The longer someone does that “Let me tell you what you are about to agree with me that you will experience”… Voodoo… the more wary you need to be!
Like, if everyone in Albany keeps telling you are about to meet Vanguard the compassionate, a celibate genius with the world’s highest IQ and he is the most ethical and everyone knows it and now you will know it too…RUN!
Straight up good sense elegantly stated, as per usual, from L. Marc should do himself a favour and pay attention.
I can hear Raniere say, “primitive self” in Seduced. Because he swallows words, it’s on Keith if it is more of a throwaway.
There’re really much worse things they could have legitimately put into the show.
Overall, Marc is the one pulling the spotlight onto himself. No one really cares about or notices him in “Seduced”.
This lawsuit reflects really poorly on Marc. It also brings more eyes to the very disturbing parts of Nxivm and Keith.
And why can’t one of the top 3 problem solvers in the world figure out how to keep his gross tongue inside his mouth.
Ugh. Keith is so reptilian.
I watched Seduced and thought neither more nor less of him. Having read this article, I consider him irrelevant. He’s just not a compelling person.
Yeah, a vain and silly man drawing attention to his ‘irrelevance’ as you put it. So true.
I’m shocked, shocked! that a docutainment TV series like Seduced takes stuff out of context and promotes a dramatic take on events.
Here’s a head’s up, Einstein: everybody knows that. Documentaries present a POV.
Here’s another head’s up: suing a major entertainment platform for presenting you “in a bad light” will net you nothing but trouble.
STARZ is under no obligation to present you in a good light. They have the Constitutional right of a free press on their side. Which gives them wide latitude. The Constitution doesn’t say anything about the press having to be unbiased or fair or even truthful. Of course the press is biased. The Founding Fathers knew that. They weren’t naive.
Seduced edited you to make you look like an idiot? Too bad. They didn’t ask your permission? Tough tamales. You feel they weren’t telling the truth? Well neither are you: “ SOP is a training and a company that is all about teaching men character and honor” Don’t make me laugh with that bullshit. That’s your viewpoint. You’re entitled to spout your viewpoint, true or not, and the producers of Seduced are entitled to spout theirs. That’s how this shit works.
If you got the short straw in all this that’s because you’re backing a sex trafficking sex cult that blackmailed women, some of them semi-beautiful actresses, and branded them on their pussies. It’s the sort of thing that garners you notoriety, and not the good kind.
Aristotle, you started off fine with a “Casablanca” quote – and then went off the rails. Yes, documentaries present a POV, but if they lie or distort, they are “hit pieces.” “Seduced” (according to Marc) didn’t merely take his words out of context, they put them into a completely different context. Would it seem fair to you if your actual words supporting some issue were attached as comments to a different issue, like Keith advocating pedophilia?
You said, “The Constitution doesn’t say anything about the press having to be unbiased or fair or even truthful.” True, but the law does say that: They can not knowingly defame a person, if so it is slander or libel.
That said, I doubt Marc will win. I personally want to sue Seduced for saying that India learned that there was a lot of “partner swapping” going on in NXIVM — then not giving any details!
Yes, press liberty is important, but when you affect a third person, moral damage may be caused. You can write whatever you want of someone, but if that someone is damaged in his image and can demonstrate it, he can sue that media.
In order to show an interview in a documentary, you must have a signed consent form. If the production company doesn’t have that letter of consent signed, the person interviewed can sue them. If that documentary puts the person in a bad situation, like this one, the other party can seek damages. The production company can delete his scenes, but the moral damage will still have been done. If Marc can demonstrate that the audio and image were manipulated and everything was out of context, he can win. The audio was clearly manipulated, and so the image.
On his first point.
As a complete outsider to the workings of Nxivm, I followed what Seduce outlined easily. Yes. jness ( God what a stupid name) and SOP were separate. But at one point they did overlap workshops.
It was very simple to follow.
This was an example of evolving curricula. To demonstrate a slow boil or departure from earlier teachings.
Again. So easy to follow. Where readiness drills came from originally etc.
“ jness ( God what a stupid name)”
I think “jness” is inspired from “jeunesse”, which in the French language means “youth”. Yes, it is a stupid name for a stupid organization populated by stupid women.
Do you think Marc’s Croat “wife” thinks he’s done nothing illegal?