Lawsuit: Glazer Names 34 Jane Does & 15 John Does – Only 10 Seek to Remain Anonymous Now

Mexican actress Veronica Jespeado has chosen to be named in the lawsuit.

The civil case, Sarah Edmondson, et al against Keith Raniere et al, is moving apace – which is to say moving as it should for a civil case of this magnitude – slowly.

It began to develop in 2017. It first took legs in 2018, was put on hold in 2020 until every defendant in the criminal case was sentenced and now is headed for its destiny – settlement, dismissal, or trial.

Judge Eric Komitee directed the plaintiffs at a November 30, 2021 status conference to provide a letter in support of their motion for a protective order for anonymity [for some plaintiffs] and to include circumstances of each plaintiff who requests anonymity.

It is to be understood that anonymity is for the public only and that the defendants would know their identities.

Lead attorney, Philadelphia lawyer, Neil Glazer, filed this letter in December segregating the important plaintiffs with the most serious claims who seek anonymity from those whose arguments for anonymity in a civil lawsuit are less persuasive. They were given the choice to be named or drop out of the suit.

Most apparently chose to be named.

Though the lawsuit previously named most plaintiffs as Jane or John Does – as of now most of them are identified – and not by Suneel Chakravorty or Michele Hatchette – but by Glazer himself.

Glazer has named 59 formerly anonymous plaintiffs in his recent filing and sought to preserve anonymity only for 12.

In what some might see as a blow to the case – two of the 12 women he sought anonymity for – Amanda and Audrey – both DOS victims – both awarded restitution by Judge Nicholas Garaufis – have just dropped out.

Amanda is an attorney and Audrey a business professional. Audrey was awarded $142,017.96 and Amanda $257,617.51 in restitution by Judge Garaufis as victims of Raniere.

The brand was the hallmark or badge of dishonor for DOS. Audrey’s brand was shown in the trial of Keith Raniere.

Audrey was deceived into thinking the brand was the four elements. Later, seeing the brand conceivably could be read as A-M – she thought it was her initials.

When she read on Frank Report that the brand was Raniere’s initials, and possibly Allison Mack’s, she was not pleased.

The DOS victims’ chances of collecting federal statutory restitution are rosier than they were now that the DOJ asset forfeiture experts at the EDNY are working to get the $6 million Clare Bronfman paid as a fine as part of her plea bargain into the hands of Raniere’s victims.

With the dropping out of Amanda and Audrey, Glazer has 10 women whose identity he wants to shield from the public.

Other Jane Does withdrew recently, and, though I do not have the exact count, the number of plaintiffs remaining is I believe in the mid-60s.

With any lawsuit with many plaintiffs with differing claims, some are more important than others – and a large number of plaintiffs’ claims are nothing more than that they spent money on the fraudulent company NXIVM and were pressured into doing free work for them.

Jane Doe 56 who withdrew is one such.

By agreeing to be named, plaintiffs acknowledged that their circumstances are not as serious as the 10 who continue to seek anonymity.

Glazer filed his letter in December ex-parte, which means only the judge, not the defendants, saw it.  It has now been filed publicly so that not only do the defendants see it, but the public has access to the names of the majority of plaintiffs – all 59 who recently chose to be named, as opposed to dropping out, as well as the handful, such as Sarah Edmondson, India Oxenberg, etc., who have always been named.

What remains to be revealed to defendants are the 10 remaining anonymous plaintiffs. Glazer has been directed by the court to reveal them directly to the defendants. The defendants obviously have a right to know their accusers and they have been directed by the judge that they may not name them publicly.

Whether the court rules that the 10 must be named publicly will be decided in the future. There will be arguments for both sides.

Plaintiffs’ attorney Neil Glazer wrote the following

See the entire December letter filed by Neil Glazer ex parte and now filed publicly

Here is an excerpted version.

Honorable Eric R. Komitee
United States District Court
Eastern District of New York

Dear Judge Komitee:

….

3. Plaintiffs No Longer Requiring Anonymity

I. Plaintiffs Identified by Their Full Names in the First Amended Complaint

Jessica Joan

Plaintiff Jessica Joan Salazar, who testified under the pseudonym “Jay” in the trial…  recently chose to publicly share her story using her full name in an audio book, podcast, and media interviews, and thus she is now fully identified…

India Oxenberg

Plaintiff India Oxenberg…  was identified by full name in numerous media stories featuring her mother’s efforts to extricate her from DOS and NXIVM, she was referred to by full name in witness testimony during the trial, and she has written a book, appeared in a documentary, and spoken publicly about her experiences using her full name.

She is, thus, identified by full name in the FAC.

Sarah Edmondson is the co-host of a podcast called “A Little Bit Culty.”

Also now identified by full name in the FAC are Plaintiffs Bonnie Piesse, Anthony Ames, Tabitha Chapman, and Ashley McLean, each of whom chose to publicly self-identify in the media and/or social media.

Plaintiff Adrienne Stiles was formerly identified as Jane Doe in the original Complaint but chose to use her full name even though she had never identified herself in public.

II. Pseudonymous Plaintiffs in FAC Who Have Made Media Appearances

Souki Mehdaoui

Soukaina Mehdaoui, who was Jane Doe 3 in the original complaint and “Souki” in the FAC, was identified in an October 2017 New York Times article, and she recently participated in a public panel discussion, “Abuse of Power in Alternative and Emerging Spiritual and Cultural Organizations,” sponsored by Harvard University, where she was identified by full name as a “NXIVM survivor.”

While Ms. Mehdaoui has never publicly disclosed the specific circumstances of her time in NXIVM and DOS, and she has at times fought with media outlets to keep her name out of their stories and productions, she agrees that her decision to participate in the panel weighs against her desire to use a pseudonym in this action.

Two other Plaintiffs spoke on the record to a journalist who recently published a book about NXIVM, and prior to
publication they gave permission to identify them by name: Maja Miljkovic (Jane Doe 43) and Jennifer Kobelt (Jane Doe 19).

Jen Kobelt

Two other Plaintiffs, whose injuries derive in large part from their participation in Defendants’ unlawful experiment in curing Tourette’s syndrome, are fully identified in a documentary film about that project and, while the renewed promotion of that misleading documentary is itself a source of continuing trauma for them, their identities in connection to NXIVM and the Tourette’s “study” are a matter of public record, and they will proceed in this litigation using their full names: Carysa Long (Jane Doe 22) and Isabella Constantino (Jane Doe 21).

Marc Elliot and Carysa Long.

 

Isabella Constantino appears on the poster of My Tourette’s.

And two additional DOS victims recently gave permission to a media outlet to publicly broadcast interviews they gave and to identify them by names, and thus agree their use of pseudonyms are no longer justified:

Veronica Jaspeado (formerly Jane Doe 6) and Paloma Pena (formerly Jane Doe 7).

Veronica Jaspeado is a well-known Mexican actress and member of NXIVM

III. Plaintiffs Who Have Not Been Publicly Identified but Who Consent to Disclosing Their Names

There are some Plaintiffs whose individual circumstances may be closer calls with respect to whether they can satisfy the criteria for proceeding with pseudonyms. These Plaintiffs, listed below by name and Jane or John Doe designation, choose to proceed in this litigation with their full names rather than attempt to make particularized showings of need to protect their identities.

They are making this decision for the several reasons. First, identification will not cause them to suffer additional trauma or otherwise exacerbate injuries suffered as a result of the events at issue in this litigation…. This should not be interpreted as a statement concerning the severity of the trauma suffered by any Plaintiff because of their experiences in NXIVM; each Plaintiff reserves all rights to prove and seek recovery for the full extent of their injuries.

As discussed in Plaintiffs’ motion, many Plaintiffs had concerns of being targeted for retaliation by Defendants (and their supporters) if publicly identified, which concerns were shared by Judge Garaufis…

However, Plaintiffs who intend to remain in this litigation will not attempt to make particularized showings of the basis for this fear, other than to point out that several Defendants in this action are part of a group who have been waging a relentless public relations campaign that includes challenging the integrity of anyone who has spoken or taken a public position adverse to Mr. Raniere and the other Defendants, and making veiled threats to expose some critics to ridicule and humiliation.

The Plaintiffs listed in this section – who have never spoken or shared their criticism of Defendants with the media or in any other public venue outside of this proceeding – will voluntarily agree to publicly identify themselves, and will rely on this Court to enforce appropriate constraints on the conduct of parties to this litigation in forums outside of the courthouse.

Likewise, the Plaintiffs in this group concede that the particular facts giving rise to their claims do not necessarily require the public disclosure of highly sensitive and intimate information….

While the humiliation and reputational harm of being publicly identified as a former member of the NXIVM “sex cult” is very real, the Plaintiffs in this group concede that their individual circumstances do not cause them to rise above certain others in this litigation with respect to the kinds of acute risks and harms that may befall them once their names are revealed.

The formerly pseudonymous Plaintiffs who have never been publicly identified in connection with the subject matter of this litigation, but who will now proceed in this litigation  using their full names – are:

Soukiana Mehdaoui (Souki in Amended Complaint but was originally Jane Doe 3),

Veronica Jaspeado (Jane Doe 6),

Paloma Pena (Jane Doe 7),

Lindsay MacInnis (Jane Doe 17),

Jennifer Kobelt (Jane Doe 19),

Margot Leviton (Jane Doe 20),

Isabella Constantino (Jane Doe 21),

Carysa Cottrell (Jane Doe 22),

Deanne Brunelle (Jane Doe 24),

(Jane Doe 28), (Jane Doe 29),

Pamela Cooley (Jane Doe 30),

Rosalyn Cua (Jane Doe 31),

Brieanna Ingram (Jane Doe 32),

Shayna Holmes (Jane Doe 34),

Polly Green (Jane Doe 35),

Andrea Hammond (Jane Doe 36),

Yan Huang (Jane Doe 37),

Tanya Hubbard (Jane Doe 38),

Sara Lim (Jane Doe 39),

Ariella Menashy (Jane Doe 40),

Elham Menhaji (Jane Doe 42),

Maja Miljkovic (Jane Doe 43),

Michelle Saville (Jane Doe 44),

Susan Pratt (Jane Doe 45),

Alison Rood (Jane Doe 47),

Katie Shaw (Jane Doe 48),

Hannah Vanderheyden (Jane Doe 52),

Juliana Vicente (Jane Doe 53),

Susan Patricia Vieta (Jane Doe 54),

Susan Wysocki (Jane Doe 57),

Kayla Grosse (Kayla in Amended Complaint but was originally Jane Doe 58),

Stephanie Fair-Layman (Jane Doe 60),

Gabrielle Gendron (Jane Doe 62),

Sarah Wall (Jane Doe 63),

Scott Starr (John Doe 3),

Philip Akka (John Doe 4),

Alejandro Balassa (John Doe 5),

Madeleine Carrier (John Doe 6),

Rod Christiansen (John Doe 7),

Owen Giroux (John Doe 9),

Jeff Golfman (John Doe 10),

Ashley Harvey (John Doe 11),

Rees Haynes (John Doe 12),

Warne Livesey (John Doe 13),

Anthony Madani (John Doe 15),

Chad Williams (John Doe 19),

Christopher Black (John Doe 20),

Robert Gray (John Doe 21)

Ken Kozak (John Doe 22).

Several Plaintiffs who have not been publicly identified in connection with the subject matter of this litigation decided to terminate their claims rather than risk the kinds of harms they believe they may suffer as a result of public identification.

On November 5, 2021, a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice was filed for: Jane Doe 51 (No. 114), and on December 15, 2021, Notices of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice were filed for: Jane Doe 13, Jane Doe 23, Jane Doe 26, Jane Doe 33, Jane Doe 55, John Doe 2, John Doe 16, John Doe 17

4. Plaintiffs Who Request to Continue Using Pseudonyms or First Names

I. Daniela, Camila, and Adrian

The FAC identifies Daniela (formerly Jane Doe 1 in the original Complaint), Camila (added as plaintiff in the FAC) and Adrian (formerly John Doe 8 in the original Complaint) by first name only, as they were identified by first name only in witness testimony and/or exhibits introduced during the criminal trial. They have never self-identified with respect to NXIVM in the media, social media or any other public outlet….

Daniela, Camila and Adrian are siblings, a fact that is in the public record. However, considerable efforts have been made for years to protect their full identities from disclosure. Their family name was kept out of the record in the criminal proceedings.

Counsel have worked with media outlets to prevent public exposure of their family name and the places where they reside, and those efforts have been largely successful. Their full identities were disclosed in two books about NXIVM published exclusively in Mexico and one news article written by the author of one of those books.

One publicly accessible blog [Frank Report] published their full names until mid-2018 and has reported on NXIVM using only their first names since then, although several anonymous commenters disclosed full names in the comments section in that blog. No other media outlet has fully identified them.

Not only does each of these siblings have strong individual circumstances warranting protection, but there is no way to protect any one of them without protecting all three. In other words, there are no alternative mechanisms for protecting their confidentiality…

Defendants systematically subjected them to extreme abuses starting when they were teenagers, destroying their entire family in the process. Consequently, they suffered extreme trauma, for which they will likely require therapy for the remainder of their lives….

Two members of their family may still be supporting Raniere – their older sister [Mariana] has his child, and their father submitted a bitter, angry letter to the court in support of Raniere at his sentencing, which heaped public scorn on his children in a way no child should have to experience, no matter what his or her age. This is a family very much divided, and Camila, Daniela and Adrian should not have to choose between some vague hope of someday healing divisions within their family or pursuing their claims.

II. DOS Plaintiffs

Plaintiffs Nicole, Audrey, Amanda [Audrey and Amanda have dropped out of the lawsuit] and Camila are DOS victims whose identities were shielded from full public disclosure by the court in the criminal proceedings, and they were identified by first name in the FAC.

Nicole (formerly Jane Doe 4 in the original Complaint) testified on a first-name only basis at trial. Audrey, Amanda and Camila were identified by first name only in the trial. Several of the Plaintiffs referred to as Jane John Doe herein were only identified by first name in brief passing references.

Although Jane Does 10, 11, 15, and 50 were identified by their first names in the trial, they would like the court to
consider permitting them to shield their identities in light of their individual circumstances….

Each DOS Plaintiff is a victim of sex trafficking and related offenses. “…

First, the allegations for the DOS plaintiffs are of a highly sensitive and personal nature. Each was coerced into giving “collateral” that was intended to have cumulative coercive effects over them. They were required to create and provide materials that would be extremely damaging to themselves and others if released. Some were
branded, and those “ceremonies” were captured on video and held as additional collateral. Some were required to pose for nude group photographs for Defendant Raniere, which were also added collateral. Some were sexually assaulted or coerced into sexual relationships….

Cumulatively, what the DOS plaintiffs went through tips the scale of anonymity in their
favor.

Furthermore, each of them has suffered extreme emotional trauma and harm, which will be exacerbated by revealing their identities….,  revealing their identities will generate the same harm that the litigation is seeking to
rectify.

The DOS plaintiffs all provided highly personal, humiliating collateral and materials that could harm themselves and others and were threatened with the release of that collateral, which has not been recovered….

Jane Does 8 and 9 have never been identified by first name and would also like to continue to shield their identities….

Should their identities be revealed, they will experience the same harm that the release of their collateral would cause…

I. Defendants will suffer no prejudice

Defendants of course have a right to know the identities of their accusers, and Plaintiffs have already proposed disclosure of their identities subject to an appropriate protective order.

Defendants cannot articulate any possible prejudice if the above-listed Plaintiffs are permitted to proceed in this litigation with their identities partially or full shielded from public disclosure….

In this case, there are only twelve [now 10] Plaintiffs who continue to seek leave to partially or fully shield their identities at this stage in the litigation. They have already been severely traumatized and still struggle with that trauma. Their circumstances involve highly sensitive information, including specifics about collateral that could traumatize them and damage third- parties. They have avoided publicly identifying themselves and have undertaken considerable efforts to keep their full identities out of the public domain. And for the most part, they have been successful.

While some have been identified on an internet site [Frank Report], one would have to first know their names and association with NXIVM to find those references through an internet search engine. They fear more than generalized or hypothetical consequences should they be required to now identify themselves…. at this juncture, these Plaintiffs should be permitted to continue protecting their privacy and that of those closest to them.

 

About the author

Frank Parlato

25 Comments

Click here to post a comment

Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us! (Email & username are optional)

  • Hey Frank,

    What is the actress Veronica Jaspeado suing for?!

    Don’t tell me that she got raped by Keith Raniere too?!

    Also, can you please post pictures alongside the names of all the people who have chosen to be named so we can recognize them?!

    It would also be nice if you could investigate or if you already know, then reveal what each of these individual people are suing for!

    In conclusion, post pictures beside the names of the people who have been chosen to not be anonymous anymore and what they are trying to sue for!

    Thanks,

    • Pea Onyu, just be honest with me!

      Are you Nicki Clyne?

      If not, are you any of the people that has been discussed on Frank Report and if so, who?

      Did you ever have sex with Keith Raniere?

      Are you a romantic partner of Keith Raniere’s or do you just have a crush on him and want to be with him?

  • Well? So much for this group being a bunch of cowards (or whatever names they were called).

    Appears that the vast majority aren’t too worried about throwing their names behind their claims, after all.

  • RE What Sucks:

    Once the civil suite ends, it doesn’t take a genius to realize Michelle Hatchette is going to all the names of the anonymous plaintiffs….

    …..Or Alonzo will on his crap website.

  • Warne Livesey is a “music producer” who produced fellow NXIVM cultist’s Mark Hildreth’s terrible excuse for an album no one bought or listened to. What is she suing for?

    And why on Earth is Juliana Vicente suing!?

    Remember when John Tigue revealed she was involved with the money laundering with the PO box scam?

    It would seem NXIVM coward Olivia Cheng has taken herself off the list to avoid being exposed, which she already has been here.

    She has some level of fame and privilege and wants to preserve it. She can’t be that much of a victim then? Her fame privileges are more important than “justice”

    Sound familiar? Kristin Kreuk comes to mind. Was she on this lawsuit? Did she remove herself to avoid being further publicly linked to her cult she joined, promoted, and expanded?

    Why are Sarah Edmondson and Mark Vicente suing? They were a part of the leadership of the NXIVM cult. They promoted it and profited from it. They recruited and encouraged the very bitch (Nicki Slime) they are suing! They are just trying to get as much out of your own bullshit as possible.

    NXIVM attracted cunts and cunts they shall all remain, even after allegedly turning. They are all still weak, pretentious, smug cowards.

  • What about Hollywood TV actresses and certain stars you were going reveal besides Alison Mack. One in not saying her name that her child KL might be Keith’s. Are they hushing you because they don’t want be revealed, Frank?

  • How come Redditt reported on Marc Elliott’s SLAPP motion with the complete filing 15 days ago but you can’t report on it, Frank?

    I thought you said the Truth is Always Fair!!!

    Why are you not reporting on Loins Gate SLAPP motion, Frank

    Why are you playing favorites?

    Your last response sounds too much like something the DOSsier and NXIVM Five would say.

    More important matters!!!!

    It’s always their comeback when they don’t want to take in information.

    How about you give it up and give equal reporting and be a true journalist as you say you are.

    • I will get to it — I’ve been busy with other things. The story is not much of a story – naturally Lionsgate is trying to get it dismissed. So is Sara Bronfman on the NXIVM case. I have not had time to report it yet.

      • Hey, Frank,

        What is the actress Veronica Jaspeado suing for?!

        Don’t tell me that she got raped by Keith Raniere too?!

        Also, can you please post pictures alongside the names of all the people who have chosen to be named so we can recognize them?!

        It would also be nice if you could investigate or if you already know, then reveal what each of these individual people are suing for!

        In conclusion, post pictures beside the names of the people who have been chosen to not be anonymous anymore and what they are trying to sue for!

        Thanks,

          • Can you investigate this as well as all the others and do articles on it?!

            This would actually be something interesting for once in a long time because let’s face it, you’ve really been off your game lately with the NXIVM articles and you just keep milking the same recycled bullshit over and over again that we already know and just keep posting up family court drama!

            You need to seriously get your mojo back! It’s getting to the point of being frustratingly boring!

          • I am prepared to investigate this thoroughly. There is only one topic I want to veer away from — The Mad Spanker. I do not want to earn his wrath. Can you blame me?

          • The Mad Spanker?

            He is too busy causing himself penile tissue injury and in need of a skin graft.

            Is or was his “dream spank princess” suing?

            If so, for what?

          • Who is the “Mad Spanker”?! Damn! Somebody with common sense tell me and without being a trolling dick for me not knowing either!

          • The Mad Spanker is a gent who chivalrously defends a celebrated Vancouver actress

  • When can we expect Suneel’s response to this article about how these victims are not “victims” and where he will *accidently* reveal more Jane/John Doe’s names?

  • This is the list of 59 cowards who want think they are being brave by going after those in much less privileged positions than them.

    • Correction: This is the list of 59 cowards who think they are being brave by going after those in much lesser privileged positions than them. They should all be ashamed of having become just like Keith Raniere. Congratulations you cowards, enjoy your victory.. you now have a part of the same kind of psychopathy that Raniere has, inside you as well. Enjoy!

Frank Parlato

About the Author

Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist.

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

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

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

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

Parlato is a consulting producer and appears in TNT's The Heiress and the Sex Cult, which premieres on May 22, 2022.

IMDb — Frank Parlato

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Parlato,_Jr.

Contact Frank with tips or for help.
Phone / Text: (305) 783-7083
Email: frankparlato@gmail.com

Archives