Suneel: During Raniere’s ‘Show Trial’ Judge Garaufis Did Not Bother to Hide His Blatant Bias

This is Part 2 of Suneel’s dissection of the conduct of Judge Garaufis during the prosecution of Keith Raniere.

Readers say, “What right has a lowly creature like Suneel, a stubborn, foolish follower of the man this judge rightly sentenced to two lifetimes in prison,” to judge of an august, distinguished, impeccable, eminent, esteemed, and unimpeachable jurist such as the Honorable Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis?

Suneel replied: “Even a cat can look at a king.”

And look at him he has done, and look and look again. But where this is all leading to is easy to guess. If Suneel cannot come up with his promised evidence of FBI tampering, all the cat-viewing of blessed and only Potentates, King of kings, and Lord of lords will not make a bit of difference in the outcome: One cat named Vanguard will be living and dying in federal prison. Time is running short.

Suneel already 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 itself.

The Trial of Keith Raniere

Suneel Chakravorty is a supporter and advocate for Keith Raniere.

By Suneel Chakravorty

May 7, 2019

Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis

 

Keith Raniere

Before the show trial began, the judge told the jury, “I may find it necessary to admonish the lawyers, and if I do, you should not show prejudice toward a lawyer or that lawyer’s client because I have found it necessary to correct him or her.”

And correct, he did and admonish did, but only the defense.

Opening statements. Judge Garaufis gave prosecutors free reign to spew utter nonsense and falsehood while intervening and restraining the defense on something obvious and trivial.

It was his signal to the jury of how he, their master, felt.

Marc Agnifilo, Keith’s lead defense attorney at trial

In his opening remarks, defense attorney Marc Agnifilo said, “[Keith] is on trial for his life in a very important, very significant case.”

The judge would have none of it. He didn’t want the jury to think anything but what he wanted.

While it was pretty apparent that what Agnifilo meant was that Keith, at age 59, was facing a life sentence, was on trial over whether he would ever be free the rest of his life.

But too-obvious Garaufis told the jury that Raniere was not on trial for his life — this was not a death penalty case, [duh] and gave the jury an instruction that what defense counsel said, “was a hyperbole because the death penalty is not an issue in this case.”

I don’t know what the jury thought, but it came across to me that the defense attorney said something false and would need to be kept in check throughout the trial for erratic and dishonest exaggeration.

The judge did not respect Agnifilo, perhaps because he was defending a man Garaufs despised and wanted to signal to the jury that it was their duty to convict.

On the other hand, the judge never once corrected or admonished the government.

Compare Agnifilo’s polite, if hyperbolic remark, with the opening statement of AUSA Tanya Hajjar where she issued a slew of outrageous, hyperbolic ad hominem statements, such as Raniere “was a mentor, but he was a predator, “He targeted young girls… to groom them for sex,” “His followers called him “Vanguard.” They called him “Grand Master.”, “[His organizations] were pyramid in structure… and always the defendant at the top.”, and “The defendant started having sex with Camila when she was just 15… At that time, the defendant was 45.”

AUSA Hajjar was full of hyperbole.

The judge could have corrected the prosecutor and told the jury that Keith was not on trial for a charge of underage sex or that he was not charged with operating a pyramid scheme. He said he didn’t want the jury to be misinformed by hyperbole. But he did not intervene.

The trial lasted from May 7, 2019 to June 19, 2019. During that time, Judge Garaufis had a one-sided sense of decency.

When something prurient could help Keith, it was not allowed.

For example, the judge balked at cross-examination about Sylvie having her first orgasm from Keith.

Artist’s sketch of Sylvie, the first witness to testify in the trial.

The judge said, “I don’t want orgasms to be the subject.”.

Yet the judge made no such comment when the government questioned Daniela with questions such as “Did you feel the defendant have an erection?”, “Did you feel the defendant penetrate you?”, “Was there any evidence that the defendant had ejaculated?” and “I didn’t know what to do with the semen … once I swallowed it.”

“I never had an orgasm.”

When it could make something seem consensual, it was denied.

When it made Keith look dirty, it was allowed.

Artist sketch of a woman who looks not unlike Daniela

Another example that shows the double-standard was that Agnifilo wanted to admit a photograph of the leaders of the Nxivm fitness company “Exo-Eso,” where they are on the beach in Fiji where training was being held, and they are in bikinis and smiling.

Agnifilo wanted to show these to challenge Mark Vicente’s testimony that the company was abusive.

AUSA Penza felt a photo like this was too inappropriate for their trial.

AUSA Moira Kim Penza thought these bikini photos were not “appropriate.”

The judge allowed the images but warned, “Before it becomes too much, just stop.”

Bikini-clad adults were not inappropriate, but this is the same judge that allowed the prosecution to submit 145 nude photographs of adult women with their genitals exposed, purportedly taken by Keith, into evidence – even though there was nothing illegal about the photos.

The prosecution wanted them in, saying “it establishes the time frame” of alleged child porn photos taken the same year.

The defense objected that the metadata in the pictures could establish the timeframe without showing the nudes. But the prosecution wanted the graphic nudes to disgust the jurors.

But why did they have to do that?

Metadata was used to date the photos anyway. Yet, the same judge who was offended by bikini photographs allowed 145 graphic pictures of nude women, with their vaginas fully exposed into evidence.

Then-AUSA Moira Kim Penza thought bikini photos were inappropriate but thought 145 legal nude pictures of women and their genitalia were essential.

Another example of this double-standard is that the judge did not allow defense counsel to question Nicole, the alleged sex trafficking victim, about her sexy text message where she wrote that she wanted “hot, rough sex” from Keith, which would have been absolutely relevant to the sex trafficking charge. The texts would have shown she was in a voluntary, desirous relationship with Keith and wanted the sex kinky, hot and rough.

The prosecution objected, and, of course, the judge sustained.

Yet the judge allowed the prosecution to submit an incredible amount of cumulative text messages that were not even authenticated that were allegedly between an adult 24/25-year-old Camila and Keith, which were recited for hours in a dramatic reading, where AUSA Hajjar played Keith, and FBI SA Maeghan Rees played Camila.

Defense counsel objected as to the authenticity of the texts.

Camila did not testify, yet in the trial, she loomed largely.

Yet the judge allowed these messages to come in. There were only a handful of probative messages about how DOS began and the purported underage relationship. What was the purpose of hours of salacious texts between an adult 24/25-year-old and extremely sexually eager Camila and Keith?

How did text exchanges about penis size and taste of semen have any relevance to the charges?

This seemed like theater, devised to dirty Keith up. What is the probative value of the below exchanges (from June 5-6, 2019 testimony of FBI SA Maeghan Rees) between adult Camila and Keith? Messages like these were read for hours:

  • Keith: There will be no talking. You will meet me at the door in the outfit you think I would find sexiest. You will arouse me; we will make love for my satisfaction and pleasure. You will do everything you can to provide that. I will finish and leave. Do you agree yes or no? [the judge recited this text in his sentencing so outraged was he at this legal discussion between two adult sex partners]
  • Camila: can I ask your permission for something? Can I shave the kitty?
  • Keith: Then make it a special pussy shot. Invite me like you would invite nobody else.
  • Keith: Is he circumcised?
  • Keith: Sex is very important, especially now. Coming in you and in your mouth is vitally important, but you have to like everything better about it, and I can’t reconcile that.
  • Keith: Do you like his fluid more than mine?
  • Keith: Did you ever prefer his taste [of semen], et cetera, over mine?
  • Keith: You chose to be with him because you liked the taste of his semen better? ? ???
  • Camila: Taste; he is mild and sweet. Consistency; not too concentrated. Quantity; small amount. Intensity; strong release speed.
  • Keith: He is shorter and thinner penis-wise?
  • Keith: Is he longer when I’m fully hard?
  • Keith: Did he hit the back of you?
  • Keith: I know his penis is 6.75 fully erect and mine is 7.5, so I am looking at how you are slanting things.
  • Keith: It is highly doubtful he was even close to as sweet. I actually have a very strong basis for that. Mild maybe… Less volume definitely, but you put less volume as a plus. It is always a minus because I can put the rest elsewhere. No, most people don’t come because of the back; I was just pointing out I was 7.5 that morning.
  • Keith: I’m sorry to ask this. Did R poke the opening of your vagina with his penis?
  • Keith: Unfortunately, the most intense stimulation requires two or three mouths. But as a single mouth, you’re fantastic.
  • Camila: Okay. I need to warm up to the idea of two to three mouths, but if that were the case, could I be the one to drink you?
  • Keith: I was amazed how your body would pull the energy out of me. It would seem like it searched every corner out of my body and pulled every last bit. Each encounter was so amazing.

The judge also allowed abortion records of Daniela. Yet, abortion had nothing to do with the charges, and the defense already stipulated there was a sexual relationship.

It was apparent – assure his guilt.  In Brooklyn, NY, a percentage of the jurors were anti-abortion. It was purportedly brought in as “evidence of means and methods of the charged enterprise, specifically, the actions of the late Pam Cafritz, an alleged co-conspirator.”

It had no probative value, but it served Judge Garaufis; plan to make the anti-abortion jurors hate Keith.

Lauren Salzman admitted to committing the crimes of racketeering and racketeering conspiracy.

May 22, 2019

The most memorable instance of bias was when the judge, in a stentorian voice, shocked the courtroom when he told Agnifilo, “Okay, that’s it. We’re done,” and ended his cross-examination of Lauren Salzman, whose false plea he had taken.

He explained that it was because she got emotional.

Yet before dismissing her, he asked the prosecution, “Redirect?”, and they said “No, Your Honor,” and he asked again, “Nothing?” then dismissed her, thus revealing it wasn’t about emotion, but rather it was about the fact that she was about to expose that her plea before Garaufis was false, and she did not have criminal intent.

Here is that exchange:

Agnifilo: Was your intention to hurt people, or was it to help people?

HAJJAR: Objection.

Q: What was your intention when you were in DOS?

THE COURT: You may answer.

Lauren: My intention was to prove to Keith that I was not so far below the ethical standard that he holds that I was — I don’t even know how far below I am. I was trying to prove my self-worth, and salvage this string of hope of what I thought my relationship might someday be, and I put it above everything else; I put it above my friends, and I put it above other people helping them in their best interest. That’s what I did when I was in DOS.

THE COURT: Okay, that’s it. We are done.

AGNIFILO: Okay, Judge. Thank you.

THE COURT: You are done.

AGNIFILO: I know. I am done.

THE COURT: No, I said you’re done.

AGNIFILO: I know. I am.

THE COURT: So, you can sit down. Redirect?

HAJJAR: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Nothing?

HAJJAR: No.

THE COURT: All right, the witness is excused. You may stand down.

***

Then the judge explained to Agnifilo that Lauren is a “broken person,” indicating a bias towards believing she was a victim.

The judge also declared, “This is not DOS,” implying he thought DOS to be an abusive organization, even though it was not claimed to be a criminal organization. Finally, at the end of this exchange, the judge metaphorically disrobed and said, “And before I’m a judge, I’m a human being…. I’m done.”

June 5, 2019

The judge expressed disapproval of Keith’s polyamorous relationship with three sisters in a sidebar about the Camila texts.

Agnifilo objecting that Camila, a co-conspirator, had her last name shielded, the judge said, “you can’t use the last name for Camila. I mean, it is just a fact that — you know, this is a choice that, apparently, Mr. Raniere made to engage in this behavior with three sisters. [the judge became a fact finder] That is a creation of your client, it is not a creation of the Government, [though they alleged Raniere had sex with three sisters, the defense had not] so I am not going to have Camila’s last name, even though she is a co-conspirator, or alleged to be a co-conspirator, disclosed because that would end up disclosing the name of a victim [Daniela], or alleged victim So we are not going to do that. Just that’s life, you know. That was Mr. Raniere’s choice; that wasn’t the Court’s choice.”

But it was the court’s choice to fact find mid-trial that Raniere had slept with three sisters and that that was something worthy of disdain.

FBI Senior Forensic Examiner Brian Booth told a little white one.

June 13, 2019

The judge was alert and active throughout the trial, yet FBI Senior Forensic Examiner Brian Booth’s critical perjury lulled him to a sleepy twilight.

We know the judge was alert. During Mark Vicente’s cross-examination by Agnifilo, the judge interjected to ask how long flights to Fiji were.

When Agnifilo questioned Sylvie about people in NXIVM being vegetarian or vegan, the judge was quick to intervene, “Well, just a moment. Vegans or vegetarians?” to which Sylvie clarified, “Mostly vegetarian.. Not everyone was vegan..”

But during his remarkable testimony, FBI Senior Forensic Examiner Brian Booth revealed that the camera card was given to him in an unsealed cellophane bag. He couldn’t remember who gave him this vital evidence.

Then he told the audacious lie that every prosecutor knew was a lie. A judge who has been on the bench for 19+ years and presided over 500 cases knew it was a lie: evidence “doesn’t always come to us sealed” and chain of custody “doesn’t necessarily need to be” maintained.

The judge stayed silent about Booth’s critical perjury, as did the prosecutors.

Here is that exchange:

Q And do you usually receive electronic evidence in unsealed boxes or bags?

A Not always. Sometimes the case agents would have needed to look at the item beforehand, and they might have unsealed it. So, it doesn’t always come to us sealed.

Q And when an agent unseals evidence, a record is made of that?

A Not always.

Q Should a record be made of when evidence is opened or unsealed?

A No, I don’t think so. It doesn’t necessarily need to be.

Q Is it fair to say you have no idea when the box with the camera was unsealed?

A No, I do not.

June 17, 2019

When the prosecution evasively gave their rationale for interstate commerce for sex trafficking, in their closing argument, that it “can be met in many ways, but at least because Nicole took either Amtrak or Greyhound to and from Albany the day of that assignment — Amtrak or a bus, a commercial bus.”  –  yet Nicole testified she was already in Albany the day before and did not travel on the day of the alleged sex trafficking incident – the judge remained mute despite the prosecution’s false statement about jurisdiction.

He did not clarify to the jury as he did when Agnifilo said, in his opening statement, that Keith was on trial for his life, that the element of travelling by bus or train – hence affecting interstate commerce was not met that day.

AUSA Moira Kim Penza perhaps forgot about jurisdiction until the last minute and sort of “winged it.” The judge took no notice.

June 18, 2019

The judge gave a non-pattern jury instruction for commercial sex, which just happened to fit the government’s non-pecuniary and novel commercial sex argument. It seems he had decided on this course of action before the trial.

For example, he allowed a question in the juror questionnaire – Question #80, “Under the law, the facts are for the jury to determine, and the law is for the Judge to determine. You are required to accept the law as the Judge explains it to you even if you do not like the law or disagree with it, and you must determine the facts according to those instructions. Would you have any difficulty following the Judge’s instructions?”

Then, on the first day of trial, in his opening remarks, he told the jury, “ I will give you the final and controlling statement concerning the law to be applied in this case including what the elements of the crimes are”  and “I will give you orally and in writing the final instructions concerning the law which you must apply to the evidence received during the trial.”

“I instruct you that the law as given by the Court in these and other instructions constitutes the only law for your guidance. It is your duty to accept and follow the law as I give it to you even though you may disagree with the law” and “please do not concern yourselves with the legal questions”.

This all flies in the face of the principle of jury nullification yet seems harmless enough, except when we combine that with the judge’s non-pattern jury instruction that changed the sex trafficking law to comport with the government’s novel theory of commercial sex, where anything of value could be construed preposterously as just making someone happy or social status – “A thing “of value” need not involve a monetary exchange and need not have any financial component.”

After the Trial

October 27, 2020,

The judge made biased, conclusory comments at Keith’s sentencing about Camila, who did not testify at trial but who did give an unsworn victim impact statement.

The judge said, “But had she [Camila] testified, it would have taken the jury ten minutes to convict him, because what he did to her, and she is totally believable”

Here’s that exchange:

The judge cut Agnifilo off multiple times during the sentencing in a heated exchange; for example, the judge said, “So I do not want to talk about theory. I have heard enough about Mr. Raniere’s theories. I am talking about the facts.”

Agnifilo says, “Okay. I’m — I’m talking about intent, and so I’m not — I’m not trying to not talk about it —,” The judge says, “How is it — excuse me. Pardon me. What about intent — what do you think the intent is if you have a 13-year-old girl and a 43-year-old man and two years — and that girl is being spoken to, and a development of a relationship is occurring, and then two years later, she is having sex at age 15 with a 45-year-old ….”

The judge sentenced Keith to 120 years, yet there was no violence in the case. No one was threatened to be hit. There were no drugs, no weapons, not even theft of property.

Yet he was sentenced to 120 years.

A final point… the judge sentenced co-defendants differently based on whether they denounced Keith or not.

Clare Bronfman got the longest sentence of the co-defendants despite having the lowest Guidelines range.

The Sentencing Guidelines range for Allison Mack was 168 to 210 months. Lauren Salzman’s Guidelines range was 87 to 108 months, and Clare Bronfman’s was 21 to 27 months.

Judge Garaufis sentenced Allison to 36 months, Lauren to no prison time, and Kathy Russell to no prison time.

In Clare’s supplemental appellate brief, her attorneys write, “Ms. Bronfman’s conduct is far closer to codefendant Kathy Russell’s than it is to anything Ms. Mack or Ms. Salzman did. Ms. Russell… like Ms. Bronfman, did not participate in or plead guilty to racketeering. Like Ms. Bronfman, Ms. Russell was a nonviolent, noncooperating, first-time offender… Yet unlike Ms. Bronfman, Ms. Russell received a sentence of no prison time, while Ms. Bronfman sits behind bars for years to come….” What’s the difference? Clare didn’t denounce Keith. If you denounced Keith, you got a lesser sentence.

The six NXIVM defendants, “Eeny, meeny, miny, moe, whoever denounces Raniere, I will let them go.”

Conclusion

You may think I selectively included the above examples. Still, I challenge you to go through the entire court records and find a single instance where Judge Garaufis was biased towards Keith Raniere.

About the author

Suneel Chakravorty

37 Comments

Click here to post a comment

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

  • Oh man. One day when I’ve got a bit more time, I’ll write my final statement to the nxivm hangers on.

    120 years does seem pretty excessive until you consider the ideas keith raniere was trying to sell.

    • Ideas should get you time in prison?

      Please take the time to explain, My2Cents.

      I’m not saying you’re wrong.

      I’m saying it’s a very interesting point to make in the world of cults vs anticults.

      Alanzo

  • Suneel, can you find a similar case to use as an example where the judge was not biased, as you allege Garafulus was? It might make your argument more convincing if we could see another judge acting more impartial in a similar case, for contrast.

  • Suneel is now in massive ethical breech against Vanguard.

    By claiming that Vanguard was fighting for his life and lost this case means that Suneel is calling him an Ultimate Victim. This is in complete contradiction to the first point of the NXIVM pledge which Suneel has sworn to many times.

    You must make amends, Suneel. Why don’t you start by adopting a water-only fast and locking yourself in a bare room for two years?

    Furthermore, Suneel, you neglect the words Vaguard wrote to Nicole on April 19, 2016:

    “True freedom in the physical world comes from absolute commitment to a principle with no tolerance for excuses. Only then do we find freedom does not depend on being able to do what we want; it depends on not being able to do what we want yet still experiencing self. Love is only measured through pain. Our ability to feel human pain determines the depth and strength of our love.”

    Judge Garaufis is not victimizing Vanguard, rather he is generously offering Vanguard the opportunity to demonstrate the depth and strength of his love for the NXIVM community through his life of suffering in prison.

    As for Suneel’s psuedo-philosophical cult apologist wanna-be friend and Damon’s new BFF…

    Damllen has been obsessed with Moira Penza and her high heels for a while now. He’s also demonstrated time and time again that he’s a model of projection: accusing others of behavior that he exemplifies. Now the truth comes out.

    Damllen wants nothing more than to lie cowering at the stilettoed feet of Penza, collared and chained–to be her sex slave.

    It is a reasonable inference that Penza has replaced Clyne in his nightly fantasy sessions of self-manipulation.

    Viva Executive Success®!!!!!
    🐵🕺👯‍♀️🤡

    Viva Ring Dings®!!!!!
    🍩🐳🤡🍩

    Nice Guy Certified® Comedy Triple Platinum Award Winner 💿💿💿
    😂🤣😂

    • “True freedom in the physical world comes from absolute commitment to a principle with no tolerance for excuses. Only then do we find freedom does not depend on being able to do what we want; it depends on not being able to do what we want yet still experiencing self. Love is only measured through pain. Our ability to feel human pain determines the depth and strength of our love.”

      What a bunch of gobbledygook, a good example of his use of word salad to sound profound, but which only further serves to exemplify his self-serving nature.

      What if the principle you uphold is hedonism? Or to “do whatever you want”? Or something on the opposite end of the spectrum, i.e., stoicism?

      How is freedom dependent upon not being able to do what you want? That is literally the complete opposite.

      What the hell is “experiencing self”? Literally, we’re always experiencing ourselves, and the self is the one form of being that we are most certain about.

      Love is the opposite of pain. It is the loss of love or of a loved one, or it being unrequited in another, that is pain.

      And our ability to feel human pain is not what determines the strength of love. It is the depth of love that is proportional to the depth of pain upon its loss or non-requital. We don’t need sadness to feel happiness. We merely can know it more profoundly through its opposite.

      How did people fall for this buffoon? They must have been uneducated or under some self-delusional beliefs (of his greatness), mind-altering, or “devilish” effects in his presence.

  • Suneel-

    Alanzo has defended you for over a year. Please publicly acknowledge Alanzo, here, on the Frank Report. All the haters make fun of Alanzo and say you think he’s a loser. Please prove them wrong!

    Thank You!

  • Alanzo
    March 22, 2022 at 6:45 am
    Can we get the artist Marie White to create a sketch of Moira Penza in nine inch heels, standing over Judgey G, who’s on all fours, tugging a dog collar around his neck?

    Fact:

    Moira Penza is of Russian heritage.
    Her family name is also the name of a Russian city 388 miles from Moscow.

    Penza (Russian: Пе́нза, IPA: [ˈpʲɛnzə]) is the largest city and administrative center of Penza Oblast, Russia. It is located on the Sura River, 625 kilometers (388 mi) southeast of Moscow. As of the 2010 Census, Penza had a population of 517,311, making it the 38th-largest city in Russia.
    Penza was founded as a Russian frontier fortress-city,
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penza#:~:text=Penza%20(Russian%3A%20%D0%9F%D0%B5%CC%81%D0%BD%D0%B7%D0%B0%2C%20IPA,38th%2Dlargest%20city%20in%20Russia.

    Who do you believe?
    A Russian like Moira Penza of a good American like Suneel Chakravorty?

    • Shadowstate1958 has never said peep to Alonzo until today!

      This is what preceded Shadow’s comment:

      “…Moira Penza in nine inch heels, standing over Judgey G, who’s on all fours, tugging a dog collar around his neck?”
      -Alonzo

      I wonder, has the S&M taxidermist found a like minded friend. Spring is the season of love. Two chubby, strange white men find their soulmates on the Frank Report. Amore!

  • CNBC.com

    POLITICS

    Porn star Stormy Daniels loses appeal in Trump case, owes former president almost $300,000

    PUBLISHED MON, MAR 21 202211:53 PM EDTUPDATED 5 HOURS AGO
    Dan Mangan

    KEY POINTS

    Porn star Stormy Daniels must pay ex-President Donald Trump nearly $300,000 in attorneys’ fees, a federal appeals court said in a ruling upholding a judge’s order in her failed defamation lawsuit.

    The ruling likely ends a yearslong legal feud between Daniels and Trump related to her claim that they had sex one time in 2006.
    The amount Daniels owes Trump in the case is about the same amount that she was swindled out of by Michael Avenatti, her former lawyer.

    “I will go to jail before I pay a penny,” Daniels tweeted.

    Trump’s own former attorney, Michael Cohen, pleaded guilty to crimes that included ones related to hush money payments he facilitated to Daniels and another women before the 2016 election.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/22/porn-star-stormy-daniels-loses-appeal-of-trump-case.html

  • Before any further reading of Suneel’s thoughts, let’s remember he finds beheadings of humans as “edgy”. This tells all that’s needed to know about Suneel’s psychiatric state hence the veracity of any argument whatsoever coming from his direction.

    Yes, Alanzo, I know you are very upset! What sort of idiot would find behedings of humans anything other than a “curiosity”, right? In objectivity such footage is quite amusing, isn’t it?

    The more talk there is about this “trivia”, the more banale it becomes, right?

    I look forward to a contribution by Suneel prefaced by Alanzo, on the therapeutic benefits of actually peronally engaging in human beheadings!

    Why not? Remember what Keith said… God bless him!

    • Notice how these anticultist dipshits can’t address anything that Suneel actually writes?

      They have to distract from the facts Suneel presents with made up bullshit like “Suneel thinks beheadings are ‘edgy'”.

      No one is actually fooled by this unless, of course, you’re another anticultist dipshit like “Alex”.

      Alanzo

      • People aren’t obligated to address flat earth claims.

        Most of these opinions of Suneel’s have been made on Frank Report for years. No need to rehash ad infinitum.

        It’s no different than the mentally impaired man in front of the grocery store. You only need to hear him talk about the spaceship that is landing soon – one time. After that you just wave and go inside to shop.

      • Alanzo-
        Defend Suneel Chakravorty all you want! He’s never hanging with your loser ass.

        Stick with the maniacs Brink and Hatchette.

        FYI: You are 61 and never contributed to Social Security during your 16 years in Scientology, by my calculations, you won’t be able to retire until your 92. Fortunately, you have been overweight your whole life. Normal life expectancy in the US is 76 for healthy men, but you’re looking at 68.

        Therefore you don’t have to save or plan for retirement….Awesome news! Have a great day!

      • Comments about Alanzo from around the web:

        “He got big mad at us when we looked into the whole Steven Mango / Karen De La Carrier incident. He accused us of lying before we even did our live stream about it. In our view, the dude gets worked up super easily and you might want to take what he says with a grain of salt.”

      • Alonzo, you are a pathetic, sad man.

        How you think calling anyone “dipshits” and other names will bring anyone to your side amazes me. Work on making your life more meaningful and maybe you will find happiness.

        PS.

        Suneel, Nikki, etc. don’t give a hoot about you.

      • Alanzo, you’re trying so hard to defend poor Suneel. You should remember, Suneel is a genius, fabulously wealthy, and banging a former television star. He does what he wants, when he wants to, no work just play. You’re the poor one who needs defending. Did you know you fit every definition of the word “poor”. That’s some accomplishment! Not even NiceGuy can pull it off!

  • He measured the dick size of other NXIVM guys. Man, he must have low self-esteem. He should be glad to be in prison now where he can study a wide variety of the (prison) population. Taste and volumetric tests are definitely a huge bonus.

    That sounds like a very useful exercise for one of the smartest men in the world. Maybe he will find a way to identify prostate cancer…

  • I find it hilarious reading the obvious dead-ender comments and no one outside of their little world giving a fuck. They think they are going to bring their own laughably perceived “justice” to their sex-addicted, statutory rapist, one-trick pony MLM conman pretending to be an ethical guru and world’s greatest problem solver, through articles on this website via a kind of pseudo-PR campaign.

    This is just VandFraud trying to rip off something that has already been done here — raise public ire for an alleged social injustice — except it was used by Frank for the opposite — to send him to prison. Oh, the irony!

    That was literally lightning striking in an environmental milieu conducive to his detriment. “The Universe” practically conspired to send his fraudulent ass to prison. Theirs is a Bizzaro world inversion that is bound to fail.

  • Won’t read anymore Suneel. He lost his good faith opportunities to actually produce something of substance.

    While scrolling past to the comments, the newest whine fest seems endless.

    If there were actual evidence, it would be presented succinctly. And without so much editorializing.

    Frank Report readers, Spring has Sprung!

    Enjoy the flower-scented air, birds singing and your freedom to choose wisely and well how you treat others every single day.

    Eat something delicious just because you can. Play with a dog. Hug those you love. Run on a beach. Stay healthy and happy.

    • Magnolia trees in full bloom, crocuses in Kensington Gardens, first day out without downy coverings ! Spring! Yay!

  • Agnifilo was defeated before he started. In conversations with him during pre-trials hearings, he admitted to being depressed about the case.

    He seemed intimidated by Garaufis and refused to take him on; in addition, he refused to fight for Keith because he admitted he did not fully believe in Keith. He had deep doubts about Keith’s innocence. I was shocked about his admissions to me.

    I’m not sure what all this means right now. At the time of Agnifilo’s admissions, I believed he was telling me it was his hope to seek a plea deal as the best alternative.

  • Can we get the artist Marie White to create a sketch of Moira Penza in nine inch heels, standing over Judgey G, who’s on all fours, tugging a dog collar around his neck?

      • Anonymous@1:26 pm

        And who is “we”?

        He likes to give demeaning nicknames to lawyers and judges. Maybe it makes him feel better about having no career himself.

        • Is this a new pronoun freedom ? that a person can identify one’s self as a crowd?

          or just the old chestnut of an over inflated ego indulging pomposity?

      • “Who is we.” I assume it is Alanzo. He uses the majestic plural.

        The royal we, majestic plural (pluralis majestatis), or royal plural, is the use of a plural pronoun (or corresponding plural-inflected verb forms) used by a single person who is a monarch or holds a high office to refer to themself. A more general term for the use of a we, us, or our to refer to oneself is nosism.

        nosism:
        With reference to an individual: the use of the word ‘we’ in stating his or her own opinions.

        The plural equivalent of illeism is nosism (from Latin nos, we), referring to oneself as we, something not much heard even from royalty these days (“We are not amused”).

        • — Who is we.” I assume it is Alanzo. He uses the majestic plural.

          We — are the individuals who reside in Alonzo’s head, when he skips his daily meds….

          …..Other times it’s visiting Thetan dignitaries from the planet Uranus.

          😉

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