Guest View
By FMN
First and foremost: I am not a NXIAN. I am an outsider, with these caveats:
–I don’t live far from where the NXIVM headquarters used to be and it was always in my face.
–I used to (and sometimes still do) hang out at a coffee shop called Moca Lisa’s, and there was always a group of NXIVM members there–mostly attractive females–with notebooks open, working diligently on their projects;
–My wife is a spitting image in her younger years of one of the women featured in “The Lost Women of NXIVM” (The resemblance is shocking). My wife WAS approached by a NXIVM member to “come check us out.”
–My interest in this is multi-fold. I absolutely love Frank’s reporting and writing style. No one does investigative reporting anymore–it’s a lost art. 60 Minutes doesn’t even do it. So I have absolute respect for the mind-bending journalism featured in The Frank Report.
That aside, let’s clarify some issues:
1. I actually never said Dr. Roberts was in a ‘harem’. I said some followers seemed to be. Harem implies sexual devotion, adhesion, and she said she only was the recipient of a kiss. I have no reason to doubt that.
2. However, I do believe in the general context of an “emotional harem”, which, at this point, I will describe as a blinding adhesion to someone who has spiritual power, real or imagined, bestowed upon them, resulting in blind allegiance. I am not saying this applies to anyone. I am saying I see this as a potential.
3. A cauterizing pen is a medical instrument. I had surgery two months ago, and when I smelled my burning flesh and saw smoke waft in the operating room, I asked the doctor if that was a cauterizing pen.
“Yup,” he said. “It is used to seal the capillaries so you don’t bleed.”
To that end, I agree completely with the Board that Dr. Roberts was using a medical device.
4. As for the “practice of medicine”, that’s not up to me, that’s up to the Board–and the Board said it was. If they say it was, it was–they have the sole authority. If on appeal the Board changes its mind, then “No”, it’s not the practice of medicine. But as of now, it is.
5. In my humble opinion, it was horrible to brand women, in their pubic areas, with the initials of another man and not disclose this.
While some people tout societal views on cults, I ask: Who is there to represent the interest and rights of those “injured” by a permanent scar of a man’s initials,when it was not disclosed? The answer: The Board, and the court system. That’s the system Americans use.
What Is a Cult?
In my opinion, a cult is similar to the Supreme Court holding, “I don’t know what pornography is, but I know it when I see it.”
NXIVM reeks of cult.
One difference between a “cult” and a “religion” is you can leave a religion; you can’t leave a cult. Can one voluntarily leave being a Krishna? A Catholic? If yes, it’s a religion, not a cult.
Can one voluntarily leave NXIVM? That is open to further debate, but there’s testimony in the court proceedings that say “not always.”
There’re swingers, and threesomes and polyamory– not one of these use starvation, sleep deprivation, and blind allegiance to one Vanguard, along with other attributes, and none of them without these practices appear to be prosecutable.
My prediction: RICO was brilliantly and effectively used, and will be upheld on appeal. There’s a lot of case law of criminal RICO.
My next prediction: Criminal RICO has a civil component, and with the convictions in place, subject to appeal, the Plaintiffs’ lawyers have a great case and are going to steamroll the Defendants. Many of the components are the same, and the Burden of Proof is lower.
My next hope: Dr. Roberts dusts herself off, lifts her chin up, and takes herself to higher levels than ever before because I have no doubt she can do it.
Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
I agree on cults and you cannot easily leave them. Lev Tahor is another group which is a cult – utterly removed from Judaism just as the FLDS is removed from the LDS church
It’s K. A. R
it’s Keith’s mark of ownership “All mine” Keith texted. Devil emoji.
The brand was inflicted deceitfully.
There’s nothing subjective about those 2 facts.
It’s Keith Raniere’s monogram.
There was a concerted and conspiratorial effort to lie about the nature of the brand, the DOS organization and Keith’s involvement.
Those are the non subjective facts about the branding.
Perpetrators and those who were branded deceptively with Keith Raniere’s initials have corroborated those non subjective facts.
The brand was Keith’s design. It was his initials. The branding tapes would be used as collateral. Keith is on tape staring that fact. And the women were intentionally deceived.
Those are agreed upon facts amongst the actual women involved. And Keith Raniere.
What the brand “means” is a purely subjective question. Some people see initials. Some people see a symbol of the four elements. Some people may see Jesus, Muhammad, Buddha, Krishna or whatever their tribalist worldview biases them to see.
It is called pareidolia.
The law is supposed to be objective, not subjective. It is the “medical” board of tribal ninnies who should be prosecuted and convicted for taking Dr. Robert’s license and livelihood away from her based on their predefined biases.
Hello! Anyone home? It is on tape that he SAID it WAS his initials. Nothing to interpret there. No pareidolia. Prosecuting the medical board? Wowza, what flavor do you like?
It is wrong whether the prosecutors withhold evidence in the Rittenhouse case or altered evidence in the Raniere case.
America now has Communist-style justice.
EXCLUSIVE: Kyle Rittenhouse prosecutors HELD BACK high-def drone footage of Kenosha shootings from defense and gave them low-quality video – sparking them to file mistrial motion that could see teen walk free
Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger initially shared low-quality drone footage from the night of the shooting with the defense.
The defense claims Binger only shared the high-definition footage after evidence had closed on Saturday.
According to a motion filed today by the defense, ‘The problem is the prosecution gave the defense a compressed version of the video’.
‘What that means is the video provided to the defense was not as clear as the video kept by the state,’ the motion states.
Lawyers for Rittenhouse filed their motion for a mistrial with prejudice based on this and several other grounds.
Prosecutors in Kenosha shooter trial WITHHELD evidence from defense.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10210087/Prosecutors-Kenosha-shooter-trial-WITHHELD-evidence-defense.html
It has not yet been adjudicated if any evidence was altered…
Shadow-
“Altered evidence in the Raniere case.
America now has Communist-style justice.”
There’s no proof!
Now you believe Allison and Kieth were framed?
Why it is wrong for the prosecutors to alter evidence and withhold evidence from the defense lawyers.
It is wrong whether the defendant is Kyle Rittenhouse or Keith Raniere.
From the New York Post
Kyle Rittenhouse defense accuses prosecutors of withholding key video
By Lee Brown
November 17, 2021 7:49am Updated
Kyle Rittenhouse’s legal team accused prosecutors of holding back key video footage that is at the heart of their case in a formal motion for a mistrial, court documents show.
Lawyers for the 18-year-old Kenosha gunman already called for a mistrial during the hearing, and filed a formal seven-page request less than an hour before closing arguments Monday, the Chicago Tribune noted.
The motion argues any conviction should be overruled and seeks to forbid any chance of a retrial if Rittenhouse is cleared of the five felonies he faces for the deadly triple shooting at last year’s Kenosha riots.
It highlighted some of the prosecutors’ missteps that already had Judge Bruce Schroeder railing at them, including mentioning evidence they’d been warned not to use and also making a play on the teen’s right to silence.
But it also accused prosecutors of holding back the high-resolution drone footage used to try to suggest that Rittenhouse had been the aggressor when he claimed self-defense before the first shooting.
Prosecutors gave the defense a hard-to-see, low-res version in a 3.6MB file — less than a third of the high-res file they actually had, the motion states.
They only got the better-quality clip, already used by prosecutors, on Saturday, after testimony had concluded, the motion stated.
“The video footage has been at the center of this case,” the defense motion states, further calling it the “linchpin in their case.
“The failure to provide the same quality footage in this particular case is intentional and clearly prejudices the defendant,” the motion insisted.
The defense insisted that prosecutors’ missteps during the hearing were “clearly intentional” — even suggesting they wanted a retrial to “get another ‘kick at the cat’ because the first trial is going so badly.”
“The testimony in this case up to that point had not gone very well for the prosecution,” the motion stated, citing witnesses who appeared to corroborate Rittenhouse’s claim that he was under attack when he opened fire.
The motion to dismiss has yet to be formally addressed in court. It will likely be addressed after the jury finishes its deliberations, which on Wednesday are entering a second day.
I agree with you. But it’s not ” wrong” until it’s declared wrong by a court.