The opinions of Suneel Chakravorty are his own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the publisher. Frank Report will undertake to provide an analysis of the topic of this story after Suneel completes the presentation of his evidence.
By Suneel Chakravorty
As promised, here is my article on the bias I allege Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis exhibited in the prosecution of Keith Raniere.
As a fair warning to readers who may be upset by my audacity, as an American citizen, in daring to question a federal judge for bias, you may want to stop reading now. I believe that Judge Garaufis was not only biased he was part and parcel of the prosecution’s team, a prosecutor in robes, not an independent judge at all.
That is my opinion. I intend to prove it. Read on at your own risk.
Raniere was captured in Mexico, brought to the US within 24 hours, and arrested on an information supported by an affidavit of FBI Special Agent Michael Lever. He was placed in pretrial detention and assigned to the Metropolitan Detention Center [MDC] in Brooklyn, NY.
Raniere was indicted on sex trafficking, sex trafficking conspiracy, and conspiracy to commit forced labor, along with Allison Mack.
The judge denied a speedy trial request for a trial date in mid-July. Why? Because the prosecution wasn’t ready. They were supposed to be ready because the honest rule of due process requires that the prosecution to be prepared for trial at the time of indictment. You indict a man because you have the evidence against him and are ready to proceed. You don’t indict a man and then figure out how to convict him.
These niceties of due process and fair play did not matter to this judge. He set a trial date for October 1, 2018, well beyond the 70 day speedy trial requirement.
In one of his three separate decisions to deny Raniere bail, Judge Garaufis revealed his bias when he called NXIVM a “secretive, cult-like organization.” That is not for a judge to decide, and certainly not before trial. He could have said “self-help organization” or just “NXIVM.” He revealed bias again when he said, “Nxivm or DOS acolytes.” He could have said, “NXIVM members, or DOS members.”
An acolyte has a religious/cult-like meaning – for an acolyte is a person assisting a celebrant in a religious service or an assistant or follower. The prosecution’s desire was to make NXIVM into a cult, with a criminal enterprise comprised of fervent followers or acolytes of Raniere. This was expressed in such pejorative language by helpful Judge Garaufis, well before the trial.
To further aid the prosecution, Judge Garaufis denied bail three times, ensuring Raniere could not adequately prepare.
It is impossible for a defendant in a complex case to prepare for trial while in custody. He does not have ready access to a computer; he cannot get documents easily, or copy them, or even see all the evidence. The prosecution stated that there were enough documents in this case to fill up multiple floors of a library.
But a man in pretrial custody cannot access these documents; he cannot aid his attorneys in assessing documents, cannot attend meetings with attorneys and his own defense witnesses, or work side by side with his legal team, explaining the facts of his case.
Instead of going to visit attorneys, the attorneys must come to him. Every visit made to prison by attorneys is complicated and burdensome. They have to leave their offices hours early and travel in heavy New York traffic, go to the jail, check-in and wait for the prisoner to come to a cramped room for meetings, while being watched by guards peering through the glass windows, limited to what they can bring to the cell. Having to speak in soft tones so as not to be overheard by the guards. Hours-long visits cannot be made comfortable by refreshments or a chance to get up and stretch one’s legs.
Metropolitan Detention Center, Brooklyn, NY.In MDC, a pretrial defendant cannot just call or be called by an attorney for a simple, quick question that might elucidate an essential aspect of the defense and save the attorney hours of work.
By denying him bail, Judge Garaufis ensured victory for the prosecution.
The prosecution filed a superseding indictment, adding four co-defendants – Clare Bronfman, Nancy, and Lauren Salzman, and Kathy Russell and added other charges, including racketeering conspiracy.
The prosecution did not want to stick, however, with the Oct 1 trial date, arguing they could not be ready, though they should have been since they indicted the defendants.
They asked for a January trial date. Raniere, already in MDC for four months, argued to keep the October date. The judge moved the trial to January 7, 2019.
It wasn’t long before the prosecution sought another delay for the trial, this time to March 18, 2019. Raniere again sought what was by now hardly a speedy trial requesting the Judge to stick to the January date. Judge Garaufis granted the government’s request and set trial for March 18, by which time Raniere would be in prison for almost a year.
The new year came, and none of the co-defendants were in negotiations for plea deals. The prosecution asked the judge for another delay, as they sought to prosecute one of the highest-profile cases in America.
Raniere argued to keep the March trial date. His attorney, Marc Agnifilo, wrote, “The Government’s adjournment bag is now empty. There are no more defendants to add, there are no more superseding indictments on which to ruminate. It has to try the case. No more excuses.”
The judge granted the government request, setting the trial date for April 29.
FBI Special Agent Michael Lever “found” nude photos of Camila, taken when she was allegedly under the age of 18, on the hard drive case agents had seized 11 months earlier but had failed to turn over to FBI Evidence Control for months.
The attorneys for the defendants were informed and understood that there would be a second superseding indictment forthcoming.
The case would no longer be a case of white, affluent, middle-class, educated adult “victims,” the case was now about the exploitation of a child incapable of consent. Her name was Camila.
The Government filed its second superseding indictment, adding charges of possession of child pornography and two counts of sexual exploitation of a child.
The defense counsel was permitted only a glimpse at the hard drive that allegedly contained the contraband photos, at the DOJ offices, but could not retain a copy to conduct independent forensic analysis since the pictures were alleged to be illegal.
Raniere moved to sever the newly added child pornography and sexual exploitation charges from the trial set in April, arguing that the defense would need to retain a forensic expert to review the evidence, and the trial was 26 days away.
On the same day, the judge accepted a plea from Nancy Salzman for racketeering conspiracy.
Her allocution had no men’s rea, Latin for “guilty mind,” a requirement for racketeering conspiracy charges.
An element of the crime is intent, a desire to do wrong, to commit a crime. You cannot be a racketeer accidentally. You might commit other crimes without intent but not racketeering. It is plain black letter law: You have to commit more than one predicate act of racketeering, and you had to intend to do harm – at the time of the racketeering. You cannot lack intent when you did the acts then decide retroactively that you did do wrong – because perhaps you are facing 20 years and want to get out of a trial.
But Judge Garaufis did not require the element of intent for Salzman. Here is the pertinent part of what Nancy said to the judge with keywords bolded:
“Judge Garaufis, I want you to know that I am pleading guilty because I am, in fact, guilty. It has taken me some time and some soul searching to come to this place.
“When I began working with NXIVM, I believed that we would be helping people. I still believe that some of what we did was good. The problem began when I compromised my principles and did things which I knew or should have known were wrong. I justified them to myself by saying that what we were doing was for the greater good.
“Now, having had time to step back from the community I was immersed in for nearly 20 years, I accept that some of things I did were not just wrong but criminal.”
March 18 -22
Bronfman, Russell, and Mack filed motions to sever their trial from Raniere, arguing that the Cami charges would make it impossible for them to have a fair trial since child exploitation, which none of the co-defendants were charged with, is considered one of the most infamous crimes in America.
The judge denied Mack, Bronfman, and Russell’s motions to sever, insisting that Bronfman and Russell, who had no sex-related charges, would face the same jury as a man who allegedly engaged in sex trafficking, forced labor, racketeering, and now the exploitation of a child.
Likewise, Raniere’s request to sever the trial on the newly brought child sex charges was denied. His request for a delay, something always freely offered to the prosecution so that Raniere could undertake the time-consuming and complex task of forensic analysis of the Cami photos, was denied.
Lauren Salzman entered a plea of guilty. The judge accepted her plea of racketeering and racketeering conspiracy with no men’s rea in her allocution.
Here is what she said:
“I am pleading guilty today… acknowledging that I committed acts which I knew or should have known were absolutely wrong.
“Over the years… I truly believed that I was helping to empower people to live their best lives. However, I and others engaged in criminal conduct, which I blindly followed and rationalized as furthering the underlying principles in which NXIVM was formed.”
She had no intent to be a racketeer. No, she had an epiphany – after the government threatened to prosecute her for crimes resulting in her spending the rest of her life in prison, and with the child porn and a hostile judge, she knew what she had to do – retroactively commit the crime. But realizing afterward that she committed a crime she did not intend to commit and saying she should have known it was a crime. is not racketeering. It fails on the element of intent.
The judge also accepted a plea from Allison Mack, who pleaded guilty to racketeering and racketeering conspiracy. There was no men’s rea in her allocution either.
Here is what she said:
“I am prepared to take responsibility for acts in which I was involved, some of which I now recognize were wrong.
“… I dedicated years of my life to an organization in which I and others truly believed, NXIVM…. I truly believed that I had found a group of individuals who believed, as I did, and who were interested in trying to become better people and, in doing so, make those around them better. And when I came to that realization, misguided though it was, my purpose shifted from trying to help myself to helping other people. Through it all, I believed that Keith Raniere’s intentions were to help people and that my adherence to his system of beliefs would help empower others and help them.
“I was wrong. And I now realize that I and others engaged in criminal conduct. My misguided beliefs and dedication of what I believed were the principles underlying NXIVM, Keith Raniere’s teachings, resulted in my agreeing to support the criminal enterprise that is alleged in the indictment.”
In none of the allocutions, the defendants admit they intended to do wrong. They were trying to do good.
They are not guilty of racketeering, a crime you have to intend to commit. They may be guilty of other crimes but not racketeering. These were coerced pleas, of convenience, to avoid lengthy prison sentences, and they knew they would be lengthy because they knew they were before a biased judge who would sentence them to very long sentences if they were found guilty by a jury he was sure to guide, lead and bring home the bacon for the prosecution.
The attorneys knew this judge, and they knew if they did not want to get fried in the pan, they better take a plea deal, and they did.
Less than two weeks before the trial, the prosecution had not turned over forensic reports of the Cami pictures, despite being asked repeatedly by the defense. This made it impossible to defend against the child sex acts since the defense had more than a reasonable suspicion that these photos might not be authentic.
In a year and two months, the judge had sided with the government on every pre-trial issue of importance, bar none.
Judge Garaufis was unwilling to order the government to provide this vital forensic discovery, delay the trial or sever the child charges. After granting postponements again and again for the prosecution, now that it was slam dunk time for the prosecution, and there was no doubt that Raniere would be convicted, it was full speed ahead and damn the torpedoes.
One Name Means She’s a Victim
With Raniere as the sole defendant, Judge Garaufis added the final pretrial touch on the day before trial.
At the prosecution’s request, over defense objection, and without even addressing Raniere’s objections, the judge required all the parties and witnesses to refer to individuals designated by the prosecution as “victims” by their first names only.
This novel ruling revealed Judge Garaufis’ strong emotions about Raniere’s guilt. He forced the parties to refer to whomever the government designated as “victims” by first names. This would signal to the jury that Raniere was presumed guilty. This bizarre ruling that the government decided who got to be named by first names only would condition the jury from the start of the trial that specific individuals were victims and individuals whose first and last names were used were co-conspirators. This was based on the prosecution’s determination and was ratified by the judge – before the government even proved a conspiracy.
Perhaps the judge thought it would save the jury a lot of time during deliberations if they could just be told in advance that there was a crime and it is legitimized by the requirement by the judge for everyone to use only their first names for the victims and in contrast, co-conspirators would be fully named.
Allowing the prosecution to identify victims and co-conspirators before proving its case was Judge Garaufis’s way of telling the jury it should assume a crime occurred.
Astonishingly the judge even ordered that two famous people who had self-identified in public must be referred to by their first names only. Why?
Why was India Oxenberg referred to only as India when she already planned to star and produce a docuseries on Starz.
Sarah Edmondson was set to star in an HBO docuseries on NXIVM, had starred in a CBC podcast series, was writing a book, and appeared on the front page of the NY Times. Why did the judge require only her first name used?
Easy. Because otherwise, the jury might get confused and think Sarah and India were bad ones, that they were con-conspirators. First names only = victim. It was not about the protection of victims from retaliation. Raniere knew all the names. It was not even to protect them from humiliation, it was merely and solely to signal to the jury who was bad and who was good, almost like different jerseys for different teams, and we know which team the judge was playing for.
Judge Garaufis was a prosecutor in robes. And Raniere was set for his show trial, with his conviction assured.
Next, in this series, I will discuss the judge’s bias during the trial.
Please do not read if your confirmation bias against Raniere is anywhere near what the judge had – but no, I need not worry. No one can have more bias against Raniere than this judge.
[…] be living and dying in federal prison. And time is running short. Suneel published part 1 as Suneel: Judge Was Deeply Biased in Raniere Case- Before He Heard One Word of Evidence. That post took us up to the trial […]
Suneel? I don’t understand your naivete. Of course, there’s a bias when someone is charged with a crime!
While it may be right or may be wrong, Keith wouldn’t have been reported if there wasn’t something stinking wrong with what he was doing. It’s never okay to blackmail and brand women into anything! Let alone, secretive ventures and slavery.
You appear to lack insight and maturity.
I understand this person is/was your friend. I agree that 120 years seems like a lot.
But frankly, you’ve refused to back your opinions with any supporting actions, and we still have zero proof of tampering.
I strongly believe that keith is messing with your mind and carelessly using you because he can’t help it. I feel sorry for both of you.
Even starting with all that, it is perfectly normal that trials are not always started speedily. It has nothing to do with bias. Secondly, to call N cultlike and secretive is not biased. It was clearly a cult, and the judge did not even say cult he said cult-like. It was also secretive.
It is not unusual for young girls who have been raped or imprisoned to have identities masked in court and the bottom line is KR did a massive heap of things that were wrong and broke the law for years and years and years and as with most cults is it very hard to prove anything and we were lucky here he broke the law enough that he was prosecuted for about 1/1000 of his wrongs. There was heaps more – the first girl under 16 who made allegations, the years of bullying litigation, the lack of child support, on and on and on – all sorts.
Suneel is wasting his time with all this defence of KR. Do something else. There are lots of injustices on the planet – go and wash the feet of the poor out on the streets if he has time but don’t keep flogging this dead horse as it will not be good for Suneel or those he knows. There is no point in it. We have in the UK and USA some of the best justice systems on the planet based on English common law. It is not perfect, but it is many times better than most of the world has. It is fundamentally mostly just and fairly fair.
Shout out to my favourite cousins who read here, certainly, and wash the feet of the poor down by the docks every week as members of the Sally Army! Much Love x
Court Name: Eastern District of New York
Receipt Number: 4653163299
Cashier ID: smejia
Transaction Date: 02/22/2022
Payer Name: NANCY SALZMAN
For: NANCY SALZMAN
PAPER CHECK CONVERSION
Amt Tendered: $100,000.00
Total Due: $100,000.00
Total Tendered: $100,000.00
Change Amt: $0.00
Court Name: Eastern District of New York
Receipt Number: 4653163300
Cashier ID: smejla
Transaction Date: 02/22/2022
Payer Name: NANCY SALZMAN
For: NANCY SALZMAN
PAPER CHECK CONVERSION
Amt Tendered: $50,000.00
Total Due: $50,000.00
Total Tendered: $50,000.00
Change Amt: $0.00
Nothing reveals the utter bankruptcy of Raniere’s faux wisdom than the victim narrative he has fallen back on time and time again, proving his #1 dictum “there are no ultimate victims” to be only a mantra to gaslight the targets of his abuse.
It makes me happy to know he will die in prison, reviled by all people of conscience.
It pleases me that his dancing monkey minions and pitiful, pseudo-philosophical apologists will be forever saddened by his lifetime incarceration.
Please keep regurgitating your master’s words, Suneel. Their impotence continually proves that sometimes the better triumphs over the worse.
Vive Executive Success®!!!!!
Viva Ring Dings®!!!!!
So, let me get this right, Suneel. If someone intends to do good despite damaging outcomes, then, are they absolved of their responsibility in the decision of their actions? Lots of destruction had been done throughout the world with good intentions. This is so out of KR’s playbook.
Would you PLEASE just go away already?! You’re embarrassing yourself and you are certainly not “proving’ anything, The whole challenge was for you present “Facts” not opinion
He will not go away as long as he gets attention.
Suneel Chakravorty has not done any research on Raniere’s/NXIVM lawsuit.
This is Raniere’s karma for all the crap he has pulled in his legal battles with his cases against others.
Raniere kept Rick Ross in a legal battle for almost a decade. Costing millions for everyone involved. Everyone but Raniere; Clare Bronfman paid all his legal bills.
Raniere filed motions to delay trial dates all the time. He liked to drag things out to keep people in court as long as possible. The more it cost them, the better.
Raniere lost nothing by having to wait for his trial. In the end, his time at MDC was time credited towards his 120-year sentence.
He was in NYC and closer to his loyalists. He was able to meet with people like you, Suneel, and have you guys dance in front of his home-away-from-home.
Raniere would like everyone to think he has such a brilliant legal mind. He doesn’t.
He never won any of the legal battles he filed against numerous foes.
Now, Suneel goes on and on about how he couldn’t help his legal them win his case.
There was no winning, Suneel. You and your loyalist friends can’t get this through your Raniere-loved-soaked-brains.
Instead, you throw blame at everything and everyone except where blame belongs, at the man who committed those crimes, Raniere himself.
Take blame and responsibility 100 times and start owning your own pair. They are still there. You just forget about them.
Maybe life is better with Raniere holding them for you.
Suneel, your obsession with Raniere is unhealthy.. Also I think Keith needs to pick a new power of attorney/spokesperson because this guy is certainly is not helping his case in any way with his writings.
Does Suneel still have power of attorney?
I don’t believe that is true. With Rainier’s newer lawyer Tully in place (for now, we know how fast the man changes lawyers) Sunell most likely lost that job.
Suneel is working again, which means he blew threw the sale of his company $$$.
Now he has to work his ass off to earn Raniere’s attention by writing these foolish stories.
Still trying to convince yourself based upon unsubstantiated rumors and opinions.
Jussie Smollett’s out of jail. Un-be-liev-ab-le.
Judges are often blown away when dancing cult followers post their Hello Kitty diary entries from days and days of watching their cult leader’s criminal trial.
This blog post was really the right move legally.
Just a stellar choice!
Maybe Claviger can set the record straight about ‘intent’, with regard to the plea deal defendants.
Because I don’t think that Suneel’s claim about ‘intent’ is legally correct.
Suneel’s claim that all of the plea deal defendants are legally innocent simply because they told the court that they had ‘good intentions’ (in their heart) does not appear to be legally correct.
Proving “intent” does not mean proving that they had the intent to do ‘wrong’.
It simply means that they intended to do the specific activities which were against the law (i.e., they didn’t do these activities by honest mistake).
For example, many people feel that breaking certain laws is not a bad thing if done for the ‘right’ reasons (but that’s not an excuse to break whatever law you feel is unjust).
For instance, some bank robbers choose to rob banks with the ‘intent’ to help someone in their family who’s in need of life-saving medical treatments (i.e., these bank robbers had goodness in their heart and never pulled a gun or hurt anybody during the crime; yet they still ‘intentionally’ robbed banks).
‘Intent’ just means that they intended to do the activities which the law forbids. It does not mean that they had ‘intent’ to do bad things, as measured by their own conscience.
I’m pretty sure that ‘ignorance’ is not a defense in federal court, unless somebody has serious mental issues where they can’t rationalize decisions as a typical adult.
If I’m wrong, Claviger can set the record straight and show that Suneel is a legal scholar worthy of being listened to.
—Because I don’t think that Suneel’s claim about ‘intent’ is legally correct.
It’s not. Sunalien is attempting to do the layperson-legalese-dance. Claviger has shot down every single legal argument Suneel has made.
Suneel went to Harvard so he’s way smarter than the rest of us.
He was born smart. Harvard had nothing to do with it.
Your paid for the clicks wether the peanut gallery comments or not, correct?
The peanut gallery need not comment. But I prefer that they do.
You really aren’t Alonzo.
Raniere is essentially admitting defeat through his meat puppet name Suneel. He will die in prison; there is no hope for him. He given up on any chance of winning on appeal so all he has left of the last gasps of a futile PR campaign.
Rot in Pieces, Vantard.
“One Name Good, Two Names Bad” have team jerseys now?!!! I would definitely like a One Name Good jersey if anyone knows where to get them.
So when the victims testified using only one name, like Jay did, which was a fake name, apparently I had presumed incorrectly that nobody would see the point of making up a fake first name and fake last name. But wtf do I know ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Cami, Sarah, Nippy, Frank, and Bonnie might have a bit more bias than Garaufis. If he had any bias at all.
A call against the losing side always seems devastating and persistent through any contest. But unlike a sporting contest, here the videos and photos are the crime and proof of the crime. So no replays.
But also in this criminal case, the defense has access to the photos and videos and can file a Rule 33 motion if the pictures have been faked. After years of review by both sides. Pretty fair and unbiased.
Suneel just think of us as the old women in the Wendy’s commercial……
WHERE’S THE BEEF?
Oh, good. There’s more coming…
CUT TO THE CHASE AND STOP WASTING OUR TIME! You might salvage the few remaining idiots who are reading your articles all the way to the end.
If keith got hosed, tell us how he got hosed. Keep your angling, posturing, and narrative molding out of the f-ing articles. Give some meat & potatoes and you might get some people like me to pay attention.
I’m one of the idiots who is reading his articles till the end. I’m so insulted.
Unfortunately, I was also talking about myself for this article. Hence the capital letters…
I took the time to read Suneel’s latest article of ‘reiteration’. Shockingly, Suneel actually makes two NEW salient points and, as typical, one incredibly ridiculous point
Here are the points:
•June 20th 2018
Judge Garaufis revealed his bias when he called NXIVM a “secretive, cult-like organization.”
•May 6th 2019
One name makes the witness a victim without any proof.
He (judge) forced the parties to refer to whomever the government designated as “victims” by first names. This would signal to the jury that Raniere was presumed guilty.
•May 25th: The Ridiculous Point
“In none of the allocutions, the defendants admit they intended to do wrong. They were trying to do good.” -Suneel
If the defendants admit guilt, then they admit doing wrong. Clearly, Suneel’s fanatical zealousness blinds him.
The rest of Suneel’s essay is regurgitation, which K.R. Claviger has shot down dozens of times.
Cruel Dipshit Troll wants to be famous.
Cruel Dipshit Troll wants millions of people to buy his songs about LOVE.
Isn’t that hilarious?
Good Luck tonight, Cruel Dipshit Troll.
Oh come on. You are already famous.
You having frozen dinner tonight while watching Murder She Wrote, Allen?
Dude you better stop harassing Chris! I hope you’re joking around.
Dear Allen Stanfield,
My name is copyrighted. Stop using it!
How’d you know I wanted to get famous?
You talked to me a few articles ago about a new commenting board and you said, “If I can figure it out, I will do it”.
I looked it up for you. There are several ways you can do it. I’ll give you two basics
1. Go look up on Google “How to set up a comments section on a personal website” and find the one that’s most suitable for you.
2. You can also hire somebody to implement on your website for you for a price.
When you do, please make sure that you choose one with all the options to reply, edit, delete, and post videos and other media as well. Please get the kind that we can *INSTANTANEOUSLY* reply to others and do all the other things I listed at our whims!
Also, please make sure that the comment board that you choose does *NOT* have a character limit so we can write as much as we want.
What happened to the FR moderators?
1. Overdid the green beerfest and forgot the login to approve comments.
2. BIG college basketball fans.
3. Our constant bickering and trollish behavior has become quite tiresome to them.
March Madness! I bet you’re a Gonzaga or Kentucky fan.
Syracuse baby. That’s why I’m quiet about it…
I keep hearing the now resigned ex lead federal prosecutor, Moira Penza, on the A Little Bit Culty podcast, saying how much ‘due process’ Raniere got. Over and over.
Methinks she doth protest too much.
Alonzo you are such a brilliant man and a great writer to boot. You deserve great respect for all of your Pulitzer level blog posts and insightful comments on this message board. Keith and his supporters should be proud they have someone like you behind them.
Alonzo showers with his mom to save water.
That is…. I can’t believe you wrote that! LOL
That’s a mean thing to write.
Alanzo does not shower.
Viva Executive Success®!!!!!
Viva Ring Dings®!!!!!
Nice Guy Certified® Comedy Double Platinum Award Winner 🪙🪙
If anyone is protesting too much, it’s that Allen guy. Man, talk about diarrhea of the mouth! I didn’t think the library was open that late.
Don’t know why Frank still gives this idiot time of the day. Same old shit like a broken record. Grow up, Sunnel, you have no life.
“This is my opinion, I intend to prove it”.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Your proved nothing other than you disagreed with the Court’s pretrial rulings. Whining about the refs after a loss is what losers do. Oh, and the denial of bail was a done deal when Raniere fled to Mexico when he got wind of the investigation. No judge would grant bail in view of that. Hope it was worth it for him.
So, this is Chakravorty’s hit piece on Judge Garaufis. How shameful.
No evidence, of course, just his nasty opinions. In his opinion, his beloved Vanguard was wrongly denied bail. Which is pretty standard procedure after the accused flees the country to avoid prosecution, as Raniere did.
Then we get Chakravorty’s opinion on what ‘mens rea’ means. It does not mean what he claims it means.
“Justice Holmes famously illustrated the concept of intent when he said “even a dog knows the difference between being stumbled over and being kicked.
“The mens rea requirement is premised upon the idea that one must possess a guilty state of mind and be aware of his or her misconduct; however, a defendant need not know that their conduct is illegal to be guilty of a crime. Rather, the defendant must be conscious of the ‘facts that make his conduct fit the definition of the offense.’”
If you kicked the dog thinking the dog deserved a kick, you’re still guilty of cruelty.
So, the confessions were perfectly correct in form and content. Unsurprisingly since they were drafted by the co-defendants’ expensive legal teams. They were nicely crafted to pass muster as legitimate legal admissions of guilt while making the miscreants seem as nice as possible. What one Nxian dead-ender thinks of these confessions is irrelevant and unimportant.
His opinion of Judge Garaufis is likewise irrelevant and unimportant.
I did enjoy finding out about Justice Holmes and the dog though.
Not going to read it. Clicking straight to leave a comment.
Let me guess:
-One name good, two names bad
-Trial wasn’t speedy enough
-Raniere was denied bail illegally and couldn’t properly prepare
-FBI planted the photos
-“Pyramid” and “cult” means the whole case has to be thrown out
How many did I get right?
What did I miss?
You missed Suneel being nice enough to give us a date by date recap of everything that’s happened since Adam and Eve.
Tsk tsk, Nutjob.
Don’t dive into the Bible to hide from uncomfortable facts.
Embrace all facts, whether they benefit your “side” or your enemy’s “side”.
(Quotes used because there are no “sides” to facts)
He gave a factual timeline of events.
—Embrace all facts, whether they benefit your “side” or your enemy’s “side”.
Follow your own advice, you, schmuck!
Schmucko gives you 4 out of 5 schmucks: 🤡🤡🤡🤡
That he did. And I said it wasted my time reading it. (which it did)
Let me put it a different way. If an independent person was so inclined to sift through Suneel’s articles and gift us some Cliff Notes, I’d be all over it.
I did that! I’m so insulted! I outlined it:
but I bet you nailed it on the Bobblehead’s topics. Always the same song, second verse with that guy 🙄
Top shelf! Comedy Gold! LMAO!
The water had long been poisoned, which influenced the judge’s perception of the case.
1) Nxivm was identified as a cult. Cults or even the word “cult” is a hated in the USA. People are scared of cults
2) Sensationalist headlines in the NYT that featured “branding of women”. Branding is associated with cattle, not human beings and freaks people out.
3) The “Me too” movement was fresh in the headlines taking down many celebrities. No one wants to take on a group of organized, angry women.
The judge decided he wanted no part of the bad publicity that Raniere and Nxivm brought. Guilty was the only option available for him. He wasn’t going to be crucified as a liberal, a leftie, a commie, or a libertarian. He was going to a righteous defender of women. He was going to be a hero for women’s rights. He made every decision influencing the trial to ensure his reputation as a defender of women would be upheld. He did not care about Raniere because he had already made up his mind about him.
Raniere and Agnifilo for their parts did not help matters. Raniere was arrogant, presented himself as beyond reproach and sent the judge a video of how he and Nxivm helped cure phobias. He needed to be humble and admit where he screwed up and get that message out into the media. Agnifilo was passive in the face of the outrageously biased and bullying judge. Agnifilo needed to take this to the media and turn the judge into a villain in the same way that William Kunstler turned Judge Hoffman into a villain in the trial of the Chicago 7.
Lastly, I understand the judge’s position. I, myself, would not want the bad publicity a fair trial would have brought. I’m reluctant to use my own name here because of my own standing in the community and don’t want shit from all the crazies on this site.
The. Jury. Found. Raniere. Guilty. Not. The. Judge.
Even though what you have claimed is very debatable and we presuppose what you say is true…
It sucks for its retributive “victim” when it sets up the perfect slew of events in an environment conducive to what it wants.
Raniere got what he deserved as a result of the sum accumulation of misdeeds in his life. I’m sure both Rhiannon and Cami (and many others) were smiling from cheek to cheek after they heard/read about that guilty verdict and his sentence.
Moral of the story: don’t be a big fucking dick.
All good points.
You forgot that during the hearings the bailiffs led Raniere in last. An act that presupposes his guilt.