He Admitted to Possessing Photo of 27-year-old Camila That Did Not Have Appendectomy Scar
Suneel Chakravorty has retained Deborah J. Blum a New York City attorney, to represent him to comply with a subpoena ordered by Chief Magistrate Cheryl L. Pollak in Edmondson et al., Plaintiffs, against Raniere et al., Defendants.
Chakravorty is not a defendant in the case.
Judge Pollak ordered Chakravorty to produce photos of Camila and “any other woman” who was a member of DOS in his possession, custody, or control by April 25.
Judge Pollak will review the photos without showing them to the plaintiffs or defendants until she determines if they are relevant to the case.
Chakravorty must also submit an affidavit that he does not possess any additional photographs of DOS members and provide the names of those who provided the photos to him and those who received copies.
On April 20, Chakravorty called the court requesting clarification of the order. He later retained Blum.
A hearing is set for May 5 at 12:15 PM before Judge Pollak to clarify the order for Chakravorty and his attorney. As a result, the April 25 deadline will not apply.
Glazer Wanted the Photos
The plaintiffs, represented by Neil Glazer, filed a motion to serve a subpoena on Chakravorty. Calling him “a former NXIVM member and associate of Defendant Raniere,” Glazer sought to compel Chakravorty to provide the adult nude photographs of Camila to him.
Glazer claims the photos are collateral and “significant evidence in this action.”
Plaintiff Camila is a former First Line DOS master.
The magistrate granted Glazer’s request to serve the subpoena but denied him access to the photos.
Glazer speculated that Chakravorty might have access to more collateral because he resides with Nicki Clyne, a former DOS First Line master.
Asserting that Chakravorty “shared these images” with others, he wrote, “the mere possibility of its dissemination is a continual source of anxiety and trauma for all DOS” participants” and alleged a “high risk that [the nude photographs] may be transferred to others or destroyed.”
On October 30, Chakravorty sent a letter to Judge Komitee asserting that he possesses “redacted nude photos [where the breasts and genitals are blurred] of a 27-year-old Camila, taken in 2017.”
He said these photos are not collateral.
In her decision to authorize the subpoena, Judge Pollak wrote that “Whether or not the photograph is ‘collateral’ is a fact issue to be decided by the jury.”
Chakravorty indicated that the photos are evidence to support a Rule 33 motion that will claim the FBI tampered with evidence in Raniere’s criminal case. He is Raniere’s power of attorney.
The photos will “not… be otherwise disseminated,” Chakravorty wrote.
Camila’s sister, Daniela, at the criminal trial, testified that her sister had a prominent scar on her abdomen from an appendectomy operation performed when she was almost 17. The absence of a scar on Camila’s nude photos helped the prosecution establish that she was underage when Raniere took her pictures.
Metadata on the image files showed she was 15. The jury found that Raniere had sexually exploited Camila and possessed child porn in the criminal trial.
The Scarless Photo
Last October, FR inspected but did not possess a redacted version of a photograph of an adult Camila. There is no visible appendectomy scar.
Chakravorty informed FR that an expert conducted a forensic analysis of this “scarless” photo to verify it was unaltered.
Chakravorty explained that the purpose of his possessing the “scarless” photo of an adult Camila was to have the image forensically evaluated as Raniere’s power of attorney and, if proven to be unaltered, to provide it as evidence in the criminal case.
FR questioned a former DOS member closely associated with Camila who said she definitely had an appendectomy scar.
Raniere’s argument is that the absence of the scar on a photo of Camila is not proof she was underage, as evidenced by this adult, scarless photo of Camila.
The scar or lack thereof is not likely to be relevant to the civil lawsuit.
Some 70 plaintiffs filed the civil lawsuit in 2020 alleging various claims based on events that occurred while plaintiffs were members of NXIVM.
The defendants are Raniere, Nancy Salzman, Clare Bronfman, Sara Bronfman, Lauren Salzman, Allison Mack, Kathy Russell, Karen Unterreiner, Dr. Brandon Porter, Dr. Danielle Roberts, Clyne, NXIVM Corporation, Executive Success Programs, Inc, Ethical Science Foundation, and First Principles,
NXIVM is no longer operational.
Raniere was found guilty of sex trafficking, racketeering, and possession of child pornography, among other charges, and subsequently sentenced to 120 years in prison.
The plaintiffs include Edmondson, Toni Natalie, Mark Vicente, Jessica Joan Salazar, Nicole, Daniela, Camila, India Oxenberg, Bonnie Piesse, Anthony Ames, Maja Miljkovic, and other DOS and NXIVM members,
Camila is the only First Line DOS master who is a plaintiff.
On February 25, 2022, the plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint. It runs more than 200 pages and contains 936 numbered paragraphs.
The claims against the defendants include
- sex trafficking
- human trafficking
- forced labor
- malicious abuse of legal process
- “unauthorized human research”
- intentional infliction of emotional distress
- negligence per se
- gross negligence
- failure to report rape or other sexual assaults
- claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”)
Of the other seven First Line DOS Masters, Clyne, Mack, and Lauren Salzman are defendants.
All Mexicans, the other four First Line Masters, Loreta Garza, Monica Duran, Daniela Padilla, and Rosa Laura Junco, were initially defendants. However, due to their lack of residency in the United States, the plaintiffs dismissed claims against them.
Chakravorty’s attorney, Deborah Blum, offered a legal analysis of the NXIVM case four days after Raniere was convicted on her YouTube channel.