Affidavit of Frank Parlato, Jr.
State of Florida
County of Monroe
COMES NOW Frank Parlato, Jr., being first duly sworn, under oath, and states
that the contents of Attachment 1 are true and correct statements of relevant facts
and his opinions, to the best of his knowledge and belief, and that the contents of
the redacted emails in Attachment 2 are true and accurate.
Signature: ____________________________
Date: June 21, 2022
Statement
June 21, 2022
My name is Frank Parlato. I am a resident of Florida.
I am 67 years old. I have no criminal record. Though I stand indicted by the bad faith efforts of the US DOJ and Keith Raniere – starting in 2011.
I am not a supporter of Keith Raniere. I am not now and never was a member of NXIVM. I worked as a consultant for Raniere in 2007-08.
Mark Vicente, filmmaker, whistleblower, former Executive Board Member of NXIVM, said on HBO’s The Vow: “Frank Parlato used to work for Keith and NXIVM. He left on bad terms, and the company went after him. To fight back, he created the blog called the Frank Report, to share news he was hearing about NXIVM.”
I have published around 5,000 stories on NXIVM and Raniere. These stories have had more than 20 million views.
The New York Times acknowledged in their seminal story that I broke the story of DOS and the branding of women.
“Many of Mr. Raniere’s followers learned of the secret society from a website run by a Buffalo-area businessman, Frank R. Parlato Jr. Mr. Parlato had been locked in a long legal battle with two sisters, Sara and Clare Bronfman, who are members of Nxivm, and the daughters of Edgar Bronfman, the deceased chairman of Seagram Company….
“In early June [2017], Mr. Parlato published the first in a torrent of salacious posts under the headline, ‘Branded Slaves and Master Raniere.’”
Sarah Edmondson told her story to HBO. She said, “I told Frank about my branding experience, so that he could expose DOS in time to stop the next session…. We were successful. The word about Frank’s blog spread in the community. And because of this heat, the next branding ceremony was called off.”
DOS ended with my reporting – four months before the New York Times story. No woman was branded again.
India Oxenberg told her story on Starz ‘Seduced.’
India said, “Even within NXIVM, no members outside of DOS were supposed to know that it existed. As soon as the [Frank Report] posts started coming up, there was a ton of questions, and a lot of chatter. My slaves left immediately after that. And none of them had to complete the seduction assignment or be branded. That was a huge relief.”
Her mother, Catherine Oxenberg, first told me of this shocking sorority. She wanted to get her daughter out.
She wrote, “Frank was fearless. And once I’d given him this information, he ran with it. And he didn’t stop…. He was an unstoppable force.”
Vicente from The Vow: “When Frank came out with the news, it set the whole organization into panic. A lot of people began asking questions. And that was the idea – it’s not just to expose what’s going on, it was also about getting people to leave, getting people away from danger.”
The danger was Raniere. I present this to show that I am not a supporter of Raniere.
INVESTIGATING INVESTIGATORS:
The DOJ in their sentencing memorandum of Keith Raniere wrote:
“Raniere’s crimes were difficult to investigate and were uncovered due to more than a year-long investigation that required significant government resources, including interviews of more than a hundred individuals.”
That was a lot of investigating for it all to shift at the last minute and come down from 100 to one.
I am a private citizen without authority. I agreed to investigate the investigation and publish the results.
I am publishing the report, “Analysis of Allegations of FBI Tampering of Evidence in US v Raniere.” I will publish it on http://www.frankreport.com.
Suneel Chakravorty co-authored the report. We have different views of Raniere. Chakravorty is Raniere’s power of attorney.
I am Raniere’s adversary. I am opposed to Raniere and deplore what he has done.
I believe Raniere is guilty of abusing the victim, Camila. He abused her. It was child sexual exploitation.
Chakravorty believes Raniere has been falsely convicted.
Both Chakravorty and I investigated the competency of the evidence. I spent more than one year in my investigation.
For my part, this is an unbiased investigation. I am as interested in exonerating the FBI as I am in proving they tampered. Which is to say there is a lot of evidence.
I do not claim to know the definitive answer. We are not prosecutors who seek only evidence of guilt and wear trial, or truth blinders. Our report will lay out a clear path to finding the answer.
CAMILA:
At a pretrial hearing, AUSA Moira Penza said Camila “goes throughout this case. I mean, there will be almost – there’s very little evidence in this case that does not relate to that victim.”
It became a trial about Camila without Camila.
An FBI SA agent actually portrayed her on the witness stand, reading what she wrote in her texts for hours, as an AUSA read Raniere’s writings.
They presented her medical history. Her sister and others spoke about her. Her landlord, her nurse, and others spoke.
An FBI agent testified he saw so many naked photos that he could identify dates without the metadata.
Another agent discussed the evidence of dating her photos with metadata.
Then there was the most dramatic scene in the trial. An FBI agent walked her photos in, in a red binder – and everyone sat in stony stillness. She opened the red binder before the judge, and he turned away. The jury saw, and then she brought them the binder – of Camila. The jury shuddered. They looked down. They turned away. All the while, Camila was not at the trial.
Her abortion records – her appendectomy scar – were openly discussed. Her extremely private texts were read. The most private personal texts.
Her diary was shared. They had pictures of her and discussed the reasons for her alleged suicide attempt. Pictures, medical records and hearsay.
She was a conspirator when that let evidence in, and a victim when that helped.
Despite being the crucial victim, Camila did not testify at the trial.
This was a trial about Camila without Camila.
And digital evidence supplanted the live witness.
Raniere’s counsel did not get the digital evidence on a timely basis either. The evidence that convicted him – the digital evidence – was withheld until days before trial. Some of it was never provided.
It is understandable that the government might not have wanted her to testify. She was no longer a child. She was 28. She was one of the First Line of DOS. A DOS First Line master.
Camila was part of the scheme that confined her sister, Daniela.
At trial, Judge Garaufis would ask: Is Cami a co-conspirator?
AUSA Hajjar: Your Honor, she was involved – as Daniela and Lauren Salzman testified, she was involved in the confinement of Daniela in the room, and so, in that respect, she was assisting in a criminal scheme. She is, however, a victim in other respects.
The Judge later said, “She is a co-conspirator or alleged to be a co-conspirator.”
The allegation came from the prosecution, not the defense.
And Camila participated in the sex trafficking count when Raniere blindfolded and tied Nicole to a table in her apartment.
There was very little evidence that did not relate to that absent victim.
New evidence suggests the DOJ calculated they did not want Camila to appear as a witness.
New evidence suggests the DOJ could have called her but decided not to.
They might have put in place mechanisms available to federal prosecutors to have a witness come to court and testify.
Yes, She Is a Victim.
I was present when Camila said she was a victim of sexual abuse at Raniere’s sentencing. She spoke after the trial, after his conviction.
I heard Camila say Raniere abused her when she was 15. I heard her say he took pictures of her when she was 15. I believe her.
But the forensic evidence is questionable. Evidence seems to have been withheld from the defense. Expert witnesses seemed to have made misrepresentations. The FBI bungled evidence. There were instances of evasive testimony.
And new evidence contradicts the idea that the DOJ could NOT produce her.
Neil Glazer:
I had many communications with attorney Niel Glazer, as a reporter. Before and during the DOJ investigation, alluded to above.
Sometimes we had conflict. I also have tremendous respect for his advocacy for clients who were victims of Raniere. Glazer is one of the most zealous advocates for clients I ever saw or can imagine.
There may not have been a case against Raniere, but for his efforts.
I have included in my report a few small excerpts from our correspondence. They are probative to the tampering investigation. They show his zealous advocacy. They can also answer if the FBI tampered.
I do NOT think Glazer would participate in tampering or permit a client to do so. One of the best reasons to doubt FBI tampering is Glazer. He represents Camila and her sister, Daniela.
The photos and the digital evidence are at the heart of the allegations.
Glazer would not tolerate tampering or suborn perjury.
Yet, if tampering had occurred, it might have come through other sources.
I have redacted the great majority of the text of the scant few emails Glazer and I exchanged. But they constitute new evidence.
His client Camila stated Raniere abused her and took photos of her. I believe her.
But the question is, are the photos the government used as evidence that they purport were her at 15, found accidentally as they claim?
Are the forensic dates accurate? Or were they tampered with?
Some of his clients may know the answers.
If the photos are accurate, were they found where the FBI said they found them?
I am not interested in proving Raniere did or did not take photos of Camila. I assume he did.
What I want to know is did the government tamper with evidence to convict Raniere of a crime he DID commit?
My colleague Chakravorty does not believe Raniere is guilty. He believes the FBI tampered.
I have reviewed enough evidence that I believe Raniere abused Camila. And I believe the FBI may not have had the evidence to prove it.
I think it is also likely that the FBI did not “accidentally discover” the evidence as they claim.
Special Agent Michael Lever swore he found the Camila photos accidentally. Some evidence causes me concern. I will address that in our report.
Either the photos in question were there at 8 Hale Drive or they weren’t. Either they were there from the start, or they made a belated arrival.
Either they are Camila when she was fifteen, or they are not.
A non-party may have supplied evidence beneath the nose of official actors.
Or maybe the photos were there for years – hiding in plain sight. Despite evidence contradicting it.
I reject these false equivalences:
Camila said Raniere abused her when she was 15, hence the evidence used by the FBI is competent. Raniere is guilty, so the FBI evidence is competent. Camila said Raniere took photos of her when she was 15, so the evidence must be competent.
The DOJ made this argument. It is illogical.
Camila has not identified the actual evidence.
Due process for those law enforcement know are guilty:
The FBI should not present tampered evidence against a guilty defendant.
If we allow this perfidious camel to nose into the tent of our enemy, we invite his presence in all our tents. He will be our constant companion.
Camila is a victim; Raniere committed the crime. But the FBI has to prove it. They cannot cheat the jury.
If they are innocent, we should find out. Soon.
That is at least partly because Neil Glazer represents clients who may hold the key.
Either those photos were sitting on the hard drive or they came from somewhere else.
Our report will appear on FrankReport.com.
I done with the Raniere Report Rag Blog
Sorry Frank you can say whatever you want, but you clearly have gone to the dark side
Why, maybe someday while your severing time in prison yourself for your own crimes, you can write a report and tell everyone what Raniere had on you or how he was helping you.
Or maybe you will follow his lead and say the FBI planted shit in your case also.
Farewell. Be good. Raniere is not going anywhere neither am I. What remains to be seen is whether the FBI tampered. If they did you don’t need the FR — other media will pick it up after I report the news.
There’s nothing nefarious about not including Camilla in the trial.
Camilla has tried to kill herself in the past.
Camilla developed a severe eating disorder under Keith Raniere’s abuse and control.
Camilla was a victim of child sexual assault
Camilla was subjected to degrading, horrific child pornography sessions.
Camilla was forced to abort a child after her pedophile abuser impregnated her.
Camilla then watched that same man father a child with her older sister.
The same man imprisoned and sexually exploited her other sister.
Camilla watched her brother be exploited by the same man and her father support this pedophile.
Years Camila suffered abuse at the hands of this cult leader. Her late childhood and teen years destroyed. Education denied. Sequestered alone in a pedophile’s secret fuck apartment to wait on his every command. For years. And years. Her family torn apart. Given a sexually transmitted disease that impacts her fertility and health to this day. Struggling with suicidal thoughts and an extreme eating disorder. Alone. Early adulthood still domo aged by this monster. Branded with his intials by her vagina. Blackmailed.
If the court didn’t need Camila to testify (and they were proven correct in this assumption) to get Keith Raniere convicted – why torture Camila further with trial participation?
Seems merciful. Economical. Smart.
Not nefarious at all.
I like your thinking. We just need a constitutional amendment repealing the 6th amendment.
Thanks.
You might not understand the 6th amendment.
“The right to confront your accuser or witnesses”
That burden is on THE DEFENDANT.
If the state or federal government chose NOT to call Cami – Keith Raniere’s defense team COULD call Cami. Subpoena Cami.
They. Did. Not
Keith Raniere and his highly paid lawyers CHOSE not to put on a defense at all or to call Cami to the stand.
The defense had the right. They CHOSE NOT TO EXERCISE that right.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/ghislaine-maxwell-prosecutors-sentenced-30-55-years-sex-crimes
Methinks something is a little rotten in Gold Beach
FBI didn’t tamper with anything. Pervert boy likely fiddled around with the images himself and if the FBI did anything at all, it would have been an attempt to correct the data to a previous point prior to when the images were downloaded and backed up.
Face it, pervert boy took those pics and has no qualms in lying about them. Cami already said so. So much other evidence established it. But when you have no conscience, and a bunch of fools to control, lie after lie means Jack shit to the end goal, which is to get out of prison and to stop using your hand.
P.S. What’s up with Nicki? Cat got her Tweetie bird tongue, or is Isaac Edwards unable to relay information from her master on what to do, which she’s been so dependent on for years?
Nicki doesn’t want Raniere out of prison
Face facts
She has a taste of freedom she hasn’t had in almost two decades & with men her age & if she chooses, can get it up
Why would she want that fat slob out controlling her life again
Cos she’s brainwashed
Tampered, lied, collateral, ethics, etc., all take on new word salad meanings of a cult.
Hey Frank, I wanted to say I really do respect your desire for the truth and have also found it remarkable that you’ve been so fair to the remaining followers. But I have some concerns.
The first is similar to your argument about false equivalencies. Even if the FBI is found to have tampered with this case, it may not be meaningful whatsoever to yours. (Sorry you’re going through all that, by the way.)
I take no issue regarding your interest and involvement with investigating potential corruption of the justice system. I agree that if it occurred, it should be exposed and addressed.
You’re also older and wiser than me. I can’t imagine with all you know about these people that you’d fall prey to their coercive techniques but something is bothering me about this. I guess if I’m honest, I suspect Keith might be playing another long game. It’s based on my suspicion that Keith himself originally tampered with the files (why would he not play around with his CP? It just easily seems like something he would do).
And if all that might be required is enough suspicion and lack of concrete evidence regarding some EXIF data to affect his ruling, then it might result in all the involved parties appearing to be somehow heroic when in fact, this should have been addressed in the trial. Not after the fact to waste more taxpayer money.
I’m concerned about you getting played by these creeps. And my greater fear is that maybe you’re actually in on part of a bigger scheme!
No doubt Keith would be thrilled to bits to be “the man exposing government corruption”. And all the better if he can stick it to Camilla and cast suspicion on her in the process. Yes, let’s not forget (and I’m so sorry for this Camilla) that it wasnt Keith who assaulted Nicole.
Frank, I hope you don’t forget how twisted this man was regarding the principles of participation and consent. I understand you’re not on his side but he’s still convinced you to participate for him.
Anyway, I digress and suppose we’ll see how the cards fall.
Unless there was some kind of bad actor on the inside, my guess is that a deeper analysis of the EXIF data and the Camilla photos will most likely be inconclusive.
Or maybe and just maybe and wouldn’t it be exciting (and yet so predictable)!? Keith gets caught in another deception!!??? Fact still remains that with or without her photos or testimony, we all still read Camilla’s texts, her medical history etc.
PS: No wonder she wasn’t called. Keith would have loved watching her sit there feeling humiliated (kind of).
I will be so happy if the FBI decides to go detail on this and it’s Keith’s turn, now! Maybe it sounds mean, but this really was his game and in team sports, especially? Everyone deserves their turn. It’s only fair.
I appreciate your honest concerns. I am going to publish my report and then let anyone interested in it, evaluate it. It’s possible Keith tampered with his own photos.
I’m interested to see it.
Why wouldn’t Keith Raniere accept your help when you are working on Keith’s behalf along with Suneel?
And why didn’t you offer Keith Raniere and Suneel your assistance when they needed more erotic dancers nightly outside MDC?
What’s wrong with a little dancing. It’s good for morale.
If it’s erotic dancing in front of the men in a detention center it’s good for Morales.
Detainee Morales. He’s waiting on being a defendant in a rape trial. His second one
Judge Garaufis has said all motions have to be filed electronically
This document must of been dropped off by a Raniere loyalists, most likely Eduardo Asúnsolo right before the stoke of midnight.
It had a time stamp of two days prior? How could that be? When dropping off court documents at a courthouse, they are stamped by the court clears.
Raniere is trying to pull a quick one, is he not.
He couldn’t have his lawyer file a pro se document. That would defeat being pro se now wouldn’t it.
Hopefully he won’t try to pull a hair-brain idea of having his POA of doing any of his pro se foot work interviews either.
If you get a request for such an interview from Issac Edwards, oops Suneel Chakravorty, say no thank you.
A pro se defendant cannot make you travel to see them either.
How does Raniere think he is going to pull this BS pro se motion off? That is if Judge Garaufis even allows it.
Hasn’t Raniere’s clock ran out on new motions?
Off topic but on the day that a long awaited UK inquiry report into Asian child abuse gangs was released
https://mol.im/a/10941619
Can you believe the sheer nerve of this animal?
https://mol.im/a/10942871
I didn’t believe I could feel this angry!
I would like to know one thing. How does John Tighe feel about this?
“ I believe Raniere abused Camila. And I believe the FBI may not have had the evidence to prove it.”
That’s pretty weak tea. “You believe” and “may not have”. That’s an opinion and it’s based on nothing more than maybe.
I don’t understand the purpose of this affidavit. Or what Raniere’s rejection / acceptance of it would prove.
Raniere and his minions apparently don’t like this document. Is that supposed to prove its objectivity? Because it doesn’t, not by a long shot.
Those clowns all took Raniere’s course in rhetoric. They know the value of an “independent” voice helping their cause. Ideally, that voice doesn’t even see that he’s helping their cause.
That voice is The Frank Report.
Recall that at the beginning of this saga of bullshit, Chakravorty was claiming to be an impartial investigator in search purely of the truth. If he discovered Raniere was guilty of the crimes he had been convicted of, Chakravorty would condemn him in no uncertain terms. That’s the smokescreen of pretended impartiality.
They played you Frank. They were hoping get you, an independent voice, someone with a record of opposition to their Vanguard, to endorse their baseless accusations of prosecutorial misconduct, of evidence tampering.
Your colleague Chakravorty couldn’t have realistically hoped for a better outcome.
Not that does them any actual good. Your opinion about what might have happened with an incidental piece of evidence in Raniere’s trial will carry no weight whatsoever in a court of appeals.
Camila says Raniere took naked pictures of her when she was 15. The prosecution presented pictures of naked underage Camila that had been found on Raniere’s backup drive in the course of serving a search warrant. Raniere and his defense team didn’t challenge the authenticity of the photos and the jury unanimously accepted their implications.
Chakravorty cooked up some cockamamie alternate hypothesis about these photos and you believe it. Okay so you believe. There are lots of conspiracy theories out there on the Web and your colleague Chakravorty and you have yet one more to add to the pile. I still don’t see the purpose of this affidavit.
Unless it’s one tiny attempt to rehabilitate Raniere’s image on the one hand, and keep the “controversy” going on the other.
Marc Elliot v. Lions Gate Entertainment Corporation (2:21-cv-08206)
District Court, C.D. California
Document Number: 34
Date Filed: Jun 22, 2022
Description: Main Document, Chief District Judge Transferring Case
By rehashing the “FBI tampered” accusations Frank gets to keep his little blog going because without it, there is almost nothing to talk about. 50+ articles about it with nothing of merit to discuss. Keith and his slave Suneel think the FBI cheated so it must be true LOL! I personally don’t mind the FBI cheating a little to put scum in prison like KR…I know I know slippery slope but whatever.
Me too. I like it when the FBI cheats. Saves taxpayers money.
Why does the American public distrust the FBI?
‘I Can’t Answer That’: Asst. FBI Director Refuses To Answer Ted Cruz Questions About January 6
At Tuesday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) questioned Jill Sanborn, Executive Assistant Director, National Security Branch of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Cami victim of Raniere on 16×20. This oil painting captures Raniere taking photos of a very young Cami.
#nxivmart #Keithraniere #artist
https://www.instagram.com/p/CWTDS-xF3ap/?igshid=MDJmNzVkMjY=
That is a lot of self-promotion and very little actual legal content.
Frank, you are awesome. But let other people say it.
Suneel is your “colleague”? How so?
Suneel is my co-author of the “Analysis of Allegations of FBI Tampering of Evidence in US v Raniere.” It is a paper I intend to publish today or tomorrow. Then I intend to go from there.
My policy with Suneel is that he presented evidence but I vetted it. I did my own independent research. We are split on the content of Raniere’s character. I think he raped Camila both in the statutory sense and later in the physical force sense. Suneel does not believe it.
I have a statement from Raniere where he says he started having sex with Camila when she was 20. I will be including his statement in the Analysis.
I love the line in Maugham’s Mr. Know-All — He’s asked, “You believe in blowing your own trumpet, don’t you?” Mr. Know-all replies, “What else is a trumpet for.”
Funny quote.
But a tacky look.
It was a glorious day for fools when modesty became a virtue.
What a meteoric rise to executive success Suneel is having! From Bronfman ass-wiper to Frank Parlato’s co-author of a, book report is it?, on FBI evidence tampering in this llustrious case, not to mention his new paralegal post with Tully’s office. Congrats, Suneel!
And, way to play ’em, Frank!
MAY I suggest you both take an insanity plea, I mean IF that’s in the offing?
So sue me for caring.
“I have reviewed enough evidence that I believe Raniere abused Camila.”
Yes, Frank, but do you believe this beyond all reasonable doubt?
Yes. What I doubt now and intend to find out is did the FBI have the evidence of it.
You have a statement from Vanguard? Did you get a statement from Cami? Not the ones that already exist. Did you get a new statement? From Cami?
No. Her attorney will not permit me to contact her.
So it will not be a fair and balanced report. You can blame her attorney but that’s the right move on the attorneys part for their client.
But no matter how you look at it – this is going to be a biased review without her participation
Why not wait and read it? The report is not about whether Camila was raped. It’s about evidence -forensic.
I am confused. Why do this, Frank? You clearly believe this will help him since you gave it to him to file.
Regardless of your personal feelings toward Raniere, I do believe you want to find the FBI guilty of wrongdoing here.
Personally, I do not believe the government has tampered with any evidence. Suneel maybe, but not the FBI. For the simple reason that Raniere never challenged these photos on this basis at trial. It was not until Suneel, a tech guy, started scheming with Raniere that these ludicrous allegations began.
The reason I don’t believe you want the FBI to have tampered with evidence is that any claims of corruption against the government help you in your own criminal case. I believe this is the same reason you keep pushing the Connecticut court corruption angle despite the fact that every mother you have presented has obvious mental illness issues.
So, I don’t believe you when you say you would like them to be found innocent of corruption. You are clearly furious at the government for continuing to pursue your case even after Clare’s allegations were dismissed. If you are innocent, I can understand your anger. If not, just accept responsibility and plead guilty, instead of joining foolish pursuits with Raniere and his left-overs.
Put simply, you lose credibility when you search so hard for corruption, especially with Raniere. He taught his followers it is ethical to lie if it is for his or the cult’s benefit. That should be all you need to know about the credibility of the left-overs.
You also appear to be more corrupt the more you associate and advocate for the left-overs. It absolutely does not help your case since NXIVM was deemed a criminal organization by the court. It paints an ugly picture of you conniving and scheming with the left-overs. There is a reason they are not respected or trusted. You are simply giving the world a reason, or maybe more reasons, not to respect or trust you.
So, again, I have no idea what you are trying to accomplish with your notarized statement other than to assist Raniere, who will never file it since you also state you believe he raped Cami.
Transparency is a good thing, Frank.
I stated right at the top of my affidavit: “I stand indicted by the bad faith efforts of the US DOJ and Keith Raniere.” That’s transparent. I won’t veer from the truth. I am not a prosecutor. Prosecutors put on trial blinders. FBI agents put on investigator’s blinders. They are truth blinders.
I saw how the government lied in my case. They had no desire to know the truth.
Read my report I am about to publish: “Analysis of Allegations of FBI Tampering of Evidence in US v Raniere.”
Then judge for yourself.
Why not spend your time and use your blog to disprove the allegations against YOU?
Why Keith? Why not yoyrself? Prove that “corruption”
That’s next. Thanks
Good. But prioritize yourself over Keith my goodness. Are you auditioning to be the Virgin successor or something? How on Earth could vanguard’s case take precedent over your own?
Sherrizy it’s not fair to say the mothers have mental illness. Karen is my friend and is not mentally ill. You on the other hand I question.
Trixcy, then Karen needs to stop behaving like she’s mentally ill.
“Trixcy, then Karen needs to stop behaving like she’s mentally ill.”
Exactly. Based on her reported education, I don’t think Karen is stupid. So the way she is behaving in such a self-harming, self-sabotaging way throughout this divorce and custody case makes her look very much mentally ill and out of touch with reality. It’s like she doesn’t understand basic cause and effect.
@Trixcy, you need to stop enabling Karen in her delusions.
Seriously! If I was going through a divorce and went to my friend and said, “Holy shit! Those a-holes gave my ex temp custody with no contact for 90 days.”
Would any sane person advise:
“Whatever you do, DO NOT go to supervised visitation on day 91 or EVER.
Here is how to proceed:
File a lawsuit against the Governor of Connecticut.
DO NOT show up to court anymore, NEVER!
Disappear, preferably out of state where you can’t be reached or found.
Align yourself with a virulent anti-semite who makes death threats against the CT judiciary.
Wage an online smear campaign against your children’s father. Enlist the kids in obtaining his private information from his phone, and publish it online, in as highly visible and harmful a way as possible.
Contact this ex-social worker who had her license revoked who specializes in kidnapping kids in custody disputes and pay her to instruct your kids to post porn to social media so dad looks bad.
Spends wads and wads of cash filing pointless motions, but then plead extreme poverty and destitution to that same court.
Insist that your lawyer accuses the court of a jewish conspiracy in child trafficking.
THAT, my dear friend, is how you regain custody of your children.”
WHAT IN THE F@CK
That is exactly how NOT to regain custody of your children!
Hmmm. Usually, it’s the defendants who put on truth blinders. This way they can sound more convincing when they lie.
Yes, I agree. prosecutors are as the driven snow. I know.
Never said that, Frank, but definitely more honorable than the majority of defendants.
Thinking all prosecutors are corrupt and all FBI agents are dishonest is as flawed as believing that none of them are corrupt. Or dishonest. There are lots of good prosecutors. There are prosecutors who prosecute correct attorneys.
There are some fair prosecutors. But the power imbalance leads easily to corruption.
Nailed it Sherizzy. And now Frank can say that HE is being targeted legally “because he wrote about the tampering blah blah”.
Just like the dead-enders claim.
Good thought. But I do not think that will be the case. I intend to solve the matter once and for all. Did the FBI tamper or not?
“Not” is the answer. They did not!
The FBI did not tamper.
Glad to hear it.
Not just “fair” prosecutors. Good prosecutors. Your inability to accept that fact as true is as flawed as any person who won’t entertain that there are “bad” prosecutors.
If you’ve ever had a loved one murdered. Been violently assaulted. Had a child who was raped. A wife who was kidnapped. A son who was maimed. A husband gunned down.You come to value a good, thorough and vigorous prosecution.
And again – whom do you think brings a corrupt attorney to justice?
You got it! Another attorney. A prosecutor.
There might be good prosecutors. Possibly. Suppose you name some.
What degrees and professional licenses do you hold Sherizzy?
I do no share my career on online blogs.
Well written and exemplary analyses. I agree wholeheartedly with your view of Frank’s motives. It think Frank is on a sliding slope here and he is damaging his legacy. He was instrumental in bringing down Raniere and he deserves a lot of credit for that, but I’m not with him on this one.
“Raniere never challenged these photos on this basis at trial. It was not until Suneel, a tech guy, started scheming with Raniere that these ludicrous allegations began.”
Exactly. Some other problems with the ludicrous accusations: why would the FBI fake evidence for this crime of child pornography? Raniere was neither charged with it nor sentenced for it. It was merely a predicate act on the racketeering charge. A surplus predicate act.
It seems to me that if the FBI was going to fake evidence to “get” Raniere, it would be evidence of a crime he was actually charged with!
Where did the FBI get the images? Did they fake them? Are they just really really good drawings? Or do they have a time machine, to go back to when Camila was 15 and talk her into taking off her clothes?
The hypothesis of tampering doesn’t even make any sense. It doesn’t bear up under the most superficial scrutiny. It is, in short, impossible.
I notice that when Nicky Clyne posts this baloney about evidence tampering on Twitter, she just says the FBI planted child porn on Raniere’s computer. She carefully leaves out that the images were of a specific person, a Nxivm member and Raniere’s underage plaything. Sounds plausible that way, random kiddie porn stuff easy to plant. Because if she admitted these pictures were of 15yo Camila the immediate question is, how the hell would the FBI get those?
In fairness to Nicki (and I am not a fan) she does explain this in her various interviews – “Camila was a friend of mine…she’s now much older than the photo…blah blah blah” Her point is that she claims the photo was taken much later when she was of age etc etc. She also claims the text messages cannot be accurately dated because they were stuck in a Word file and might have been manipulated. Personally I don’t believe a lot of what she says, but she comes across as eloquent, articulate and persuasive to those unfamiliar with the details of what happened. She’s also highly adept at right wing hate speech. In the times we live in not to be underestimated.