Defense attorney Joseph Tully appeared on the One American podcast hosted by Chase Geiser. Tully spoke about Keith Raniere’s Rule 33 motion, and said if he gets a hearing and a chance to call FBI agents, they won’t testify. They’ll plead the 5th. Here are some edited excerpts from the 49-minute interview.
Evidence for New Trial
My approach for this case, or any case, is five words, “what does the evidence show?”
Follow the evidence. I didn’t take anyone’s word for it. I worked with three top-level computer forensic experts. The evidence shows the FBI tampered with a hard drive and a computer card.
The evidence is overwhelming, but the government may fall back on “this only affects the possession of child pornography and the sexual exploitation of a minor charges.”
I think the better argument is that all charges should be vacated, because child porn and child exploitation charges were the worst charges. These were falsely presented to a jury.
Codefendants
Clearly, these charges tainted every other charge in the case. The co-defendants were united, and, had they successfully presented evidence that their intent in NXIVM was to do good, to make the world a better place, they would have beaten the racketeering charges. All the main, substantive charges, they had defenses for if they had stood together and held their ground.
Once the child victim accusations came out, all the co-defendants accepted pleas. I think the child porn and child exploitation charges affect all Mr. Raniere’s charges and all the charges for the co-defendants.
Why Tamper If You Don’t Need to?
The woman in the photographs [Camila] did not testify at trial. I understand she gave a statement at a restitution hearing, and that’s the extent of her testimony in this case.
All the evidence that the experts found of tampering supports the government’s narrative of [Camila] being underage. If the photos were taken when she was a minor, there would be no need to tamper with the evidence.
Procedure of Appeal and Tampering Motion
Before I came in on the case, a previous attorney, Jennifer Bonjean, filed an appeal. An excellent attorney, she had previously done the appeal for Bill Cosby and was successful. I came in on the case after the appeal was filed, and then I did a supplemental brief.
On the day oral arguments were heard in the appellate court, I filed a motion for a new trial in the district court. The district court is where the jury trial happened. We’re asking for a new trial. It’s called a rule 33 motion.
Motion for Judge Disqualification
In going through the jury trial, I saw substantial evidence that the judge was biased, and our sixth amendment gives us the right to a fair trial, which includes a fair and impartial judge. I think a fair reading of the record shows the judge favored the prosecution.
I think an average person would say the judge had it out for Mr. Raniere.
The law allows you to ask the judge to recuse themselves in a case where there’s evidence of partiality, where they’re not being fair, and that’s what I did.
I didn’t exaggerate anything. I didn’t lessen anything. I didn’t pull punches. I told the truth. I pointed to instances in the record, interpreted it, and said a reasonable person looking at the facts would view the judge as possibly biased.
The judge acknowledged receiving the motions for the new trial based on the tampering and the recusal motion.
The judge said, “Look there’s a pending appeal. We will wait to hear from the appellate court about what to do with these filings here.”
In a sense, it was good, because the district judge didn’t just ignore it, throw it out, or toss it out on a technicality.
Technicalities
Everybody who watches TV or movies thinks the bad guy is getting away based on a technicality.
Again, everything, the law, the rules, how a judge behaves, and how the government behaves, is overwhelmingly stacked against somebody facing charges.
I’ve seen a lot more rulings favor the government based on a technicality than help somebody accused.
No Need for Tampering Motion If Appeal Succeeds
The district judge is waiting for the appeal to be decided. We’re all waiting for the appeal to be decided. Bonjean’s appeal was excellent. I think my supplement raised good issues.
We might never get to the Rule 33, because the appellate court may take the multitude of legal issues presented in the appeal and the supplement and rule in Raniere’s favor.
FBI Agents Will Plead 5th
In some instances, the tampering is to a scientific certainty, so it’s not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. It’s even better than that.
If I can get a hearing, we would be allowed to confront our accusers. I’d be allowed to call them as witnesses and have them testify. Based on the strength of the evidence in this case, my reasoned opinion is that many FBI employees and people who I could prove collaborated with them, would not be able to testify.
They would have to take the Fifth Amendment, or else they would be admitting to evidence tampering or testifying in ways that would be damaging for them in terms of tampering with evidence. If I’m not able to cross-examine these individuals, it puts the viability of a retrial in doubt.
But everything is up in the air at this point.
A worst-case scenario is the judge denies everything. The evidence never sees the light of day in court, where I can cross-examine witnesses, present the experts, put them under oath, and have them testify under oath as to each aspect of the tampering.
Stacked Deck
Normally, when you face charges, anything the government or a judge can do to screw you over is what happens. The reason they don’t have betting on criminal law cases is because if you bet on the government, you would be a billionaire because they always win.
Judges are compliant with the government. It’s like they want to be buddies.
There are good judges out there, but the vast majority align themselves with the government.
We don’t have these angelic neutral judges that the Constitution tells us we should have. Sometimes, we glimpse judges breaking that allegiance to the government. I see inklings of that. There are good judges and good prosecutors. There are good members of law enforcement. Unfortunately, they’re in the minority.
The vocal majority believe in the us-versus-them mentality, where they wear the white hats. They’re the good guys, and even if they break the rules or the law, they’re doing it for the greater good.
The Role of the Defense Attorney
My job is to pursue truth. Many people think a defense attorney is out there to get their guilty client off. Defense attorneys must follow the evidence. You don’t have to lie, cheat or steal to defend your client. A defense attorney caught lying to the court or the prosecution loses credibility.
I see prosecutors get away with outright lying and judges bend backward to find against the accused, but I’m a defense attorney. I take pride in what I do.
Truth Is on Raniere’s Side
My job is to pursue justice, and in this case, the truth and justice align on the side of Mr. Raniere.
All I need is a fair shot in court. Just get me into court. Let me call people under oath and put my experts on. I can prove to a scientific certainty that evidence tampering happened that all suspiciously favors the government. Therefore, the evidence they used against Mr. Raneire was incompetent and should not have been used against him.
Frank Parlato 
Janine Morrison 
J.J. O'Hara 
Richard Luthmann 
Marie White 
Paul Serran
Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
This Tully guy looks like a pedophile
Great article on Tully — it reads like an infomercial.
Whose dick did Tully suck to get this BS written?
Congrats to Tully and the DeadEnders!
Raniere will be going to Colorado after this appeal.
Tully needs to redo his pictures, he is fatter now
Can you call Sunell? Sunell and Raniere were caught lying to the BOP
Raniere’s Sentencing Memorandum Court document #914 Pg. 55
Raniere has continued to regularly contact his supporters, even entering aliases for them in the Bureau of Prisons contact list in order to prevent detection. For instance, it appears that in July 2020, the Bureau of Prisons suspended calls between Raniere and Mr. Chakravorty for a period of time. On August 11, 2020, Raniere entered an individual under the name “Issac Edwards.” The address provided by Raniere for “Issac Edwards” is fabricated and the phone number provided by Raniere for “Issac Edwards” belongs to a burner phone. Subsequent calls between Raniere and “Issac Edwards” reflect that “Issac Edwards” is Mr. Chakravorty.
Vanguard got busted not because anyone is retaliating against him but because of the shenanigans of Keith and his idiotic followers. They know that. Keith knows that. Frank knows that. But he won’t report on it.
Anybody who is just looking at the situation objectively would have devoted at least as much time to investigating how close the last dead-ender calls and visits were in proximity to Keith getting busted. But it’s more fun to pretend that there’s a whole conspiracy against this one inconsequential sex offender in a prison full of inconsequential sex offenders.
This goes to show who tampers with what
Tully wants to #freeRKelly.
Not his client.
Just another abusive pedophile Tully wants free…
And the truth about his abuse of people and statutory rape of girls like Gina Hutchinson? None of that is tampered, made up, biased, or heresay. Gina’s sister testified to when they met and what happened. Keith is trying to manipulate anything he can to make himself look a certain way because we’ve seen behind the mask he wears, that of a liar and an abuser.
I like the blow by blow story of the search of Raniere’s condo. It made me giggle.
They ran right up stairs by passing other rooms and went right to his desk.
Reaching under the desk they went right for his camera and the camera card.
Definitely a Court TV Lawyer
Say what, was Tully a fly on the wall during the FBI raid?
Tully knew as a kid Timmy was in the river, down the well and tied to the railroad tracks when Leslie was barking.
That’s what lead him into the legal system and makes him a Super Lawer today.
Sounds of thing Conspiracy theories are made of, but it’s the TRUTH, the whole TRUTH, So help us Tully
I bet Tully has video footage of twin towers where planes didn’t fly through them either.
Cause he’s smart and Perry Mason like
None of Raniere’s other lawyers would touch Suneel’s Rule 33. Why, we know why. That doesn’t matter now
Tully to the rescue. It’s not about the endless pot money Raniere seems to have for his defense
Forgot Tully name in the news, podcasts
and exposure for other criminals who’d hire Tully, by gully
It’s because he fight for JUSTICE regardless of how embarrassing it might be in the end
He can always blame “Government Cover Up” and crawl back to California on his belly like the reptile he appears to be
Let’s just hope Tully keeps his bills paid in advance. Raniere has a history of firing lawyers & leaving unpaid bills in the dust
“Tully spoke about Keith Raniere’s Rule 33 motion, and said if he gets a hearing and a chance to call FBI agents, they won’t testify. They’ll plead the 5th.” This is called a ‘double bind’ tactic employed by those who have no real argument. ‘When did you stop beating your wife, Mr Tully?’ All the FBI agents have to do is answer: ‘I don’t recall’ to any question, ‘Was that a drive – as in driving a car?’ ‘oh, ‘clean the drive – as ‘with a cloth’? It worked for someone very important, so there is precedent.
Yes it is so transparent that it is a faulty premise and double bind. One of the biggest problems is that people do not know how to think anymore. I think they still have an instinct to smell b******* at times but in terms of being able to take a sentence or statement or Declaration and flip it around and investigate it as a sound Primus there seems to be a deficit.
“All the main, substantive charges, they had defenses for if they had stood together and held their ground.” In this one sentence, we have the measure of KR, the followers and the lawyer: they were going to stand together and lie through their teeth together and back one another through their lies. If they had good defenses individually, why did they not choose to stand trial? T
hey’re supposedly millionnaires, it’s not as if they couldn’t afford top-notch lawyers or ran the risk of being bankrupted, as in the case of John Tighe. All they had to do was say: ‘KR might have been a pervert, but it has nothing to do with me and I plead not guilty to all charges against me’. By the way, Suneel C, how about investigating the John Tighe case, in the pursuit of justice, of course?
The judge in the NXIVM trial was biased against Keith Raniere.
Everyone should be bias against a rapist pedophile….if ur not…ur a piece of shit.
You cannot prove that allegation – which renders it just your opinion. Other people have a different opinion. None of them prove anything either. For they are merely opinions.
It’s very common for convicted criminals, particularly sex offenders like Keith Alan Raniere, to blame a judge or jury or the prosecution, for their criminal convection.
It is easily among the most common allegations inmates state about their criminal case. Right up there with, “I was framed.”
Go to a jail, go to a prison, talk to the inmates: they are all innocent!
This is an exercise in fantasy. The incompetent Tully isn’t going to be calling any witnesses. After the appeals court denies the motion before them, Garaufis isn’t going to recuse himself and will deny the Rule 33 appeal.
The game is over, but Tully gets to make a pile of money because the dead-enders think if he keeps dancing to that tune Keith is playing, there’s some hope.
Frank, you should stop dancing to that tune yourself. Or else change the name of this site to “The NXIVM Clown Show”
Viva Executive Success®!!!!!
🐵🕺👯♀️🤡
Tully: “All the evidence that the experts found of tampering supports the government’s narrative of [Camila] being underage. If the photos were taken when she was a minor, there would be no need to tamper with the evidence.”
This is an extraordinary admission by defense counsel. He’s saying Raniere’s own investigators found Camila is underage in the photos. And that there was therefore no need to tamper. In short, no motive.
Tully has just cut the legs out from under his own appeal. He admits the FBI had no motive to tamper with the evidence.
Is he really that inept.
Well, yeah. Evidently he is. But there’s more to it than that.
I suspect this whole ridiculous evidence tampering narrative was never expected to get Raniere out of prison. Even the dead enders must have enough of a grasp on reality to know it’s just too absurd. What the intent of this fabricated charge of FBI malfeasance is to try to rehabilitate their Vanguard’s image. Win him some sympathy among the guv’mint-hating halfwits who follow Clyne on Twitter.
Tully is transparent about what he expects to happen. The court will reject Tully’s groundless motion as irrelevant (because it is) and Judge Garaufis won’t recuse himself (there’s no earthly reason why he should) and Raniere’s hopeless appeal will fail.
The dead enders then get to screech about injustice and malfeasance and government-media conspiracy, in accord with their existing narrative. Tully will have another paranoid tale of how the courts are out to get us. He can say he fought the good fight and win or lose, he still gets paid.
Tully: “All the evidence that the experts found of tampering supports the government’s narrative of [Camila] being underage. If the photos were taken when she was a minor, there would be no need to tamper with the evidence.”
Well spotted. A nice Freudian slip that says: ‘She was underage, no motive to tamper with photos. (Our experts concur.)’
Why does Mr Tully reminds me so much of Mr Avenatti? Lots of talk, lots of publicity, lots of self-promotion, and strutting …
What if the FBI didn’t Tamper?
“Let me call people under oath & put my experts on” should answer any lingering question.
Only dead-enders have any lingering doubt.
Legitimate concerns about a fair trial have been raised. The 30 minute “stare-off” between the judge and Raniere’s counsel should be enough to show bias. But if evidence of FBI tampering- or possible tampering is found, an investigation is warranted.
Our system is set up against the defendant – so much so that raising concerns or filing appeals brings out anger, sarcasm, and resentment toward those who are merely exercising a persons rights under the law, and demanding accountability from our government.
You are incorrect as to what brings out the kind of comments you don’t agree with is not the filing of anything. It is the bullshit unproven allegations, accusations that have no verifiable proof and caterwauling of the dead-enders. File your shit. Who cares? Let the courts sort it out. Get a job. Stop trying to gin up faux outrage and get a job. You’re not justice advocates. You’re petulant cult followers.
All you’ve got is an “IF”. And not a substantive one.