Six Forensic Experts’ Joint Statement: ‘FBI Cheated in Raniere Case’

After my little introduction, you will read a joint statement of six computer forensic examiners. There is little doubt Clare Bronfman paid these experts.

Did she pay them to lie?

All these experts make their living selling their services as experts. Are they willing to lie for the money?

Are they all lying about their opinion that the FBI tampered with evidence? If they are, this will return to haunt them.

It will become evident if there is no substance to their claims of FBI tampering.

As AUSA Kevin Trowell says, they are making “frivolous” claims.

Is Trowell right?

This is good, and it is stark. This is something worth reporting.

For if Clare Bronfman bought six experts — all known in their fields – to lie – then that’s a story. A big story. Six experts – three formerly with the FBI – big in computer forensics – cannot lie and keep it a secret. It would be huge if they lied or made blatantly false allegations.

It will be a huge story and a big disgrace for these six.

On the other hand, if they tell the truth and the FBI cheated, that will be a story. A little story, perhaps, because, after all, we don’t like Raniere.

The six are:

Retired FBI Agent and Forensic Examiner J. Richard Kiper, PhD.

Former FBI senior forensic examiner Stacy Eldridge

Former FBI Special Agent forensic examiner Bill Odom

Former State Constable and Cyber Lawyer, Steven Abrams

Former University of Delaware Police Captain Steven Bunting

Software Engineer Wayne B. Norris.

Joint Statement

We are all qualified as expert witnesses in the area of digital forensics. Together, we have a combined experience of nearly 200 years in digital forensics and law enforcement. All our analysis is based on the information used by the government during trial.

None of us have ever in our careers claimed to have witnessed government tampering, much less the scale of tampering that we’ve seen in this case.

But after examining the evidence presented by the government, we’ve all concluded that the digital evidence devices used to convict Mr. Raniere of child pornography and sexual exploitation of a minor were significantly manipulated.

Additionally, we know to a scientific certainty that some of the evidence was altered while in the possession of the FBI.

Although we don’t know the precise timing of the tampering, we do know someone extensively altered the media card used to justify the charges.

And we know dozens of files, including the alleged contraband photos, were planted on the hard drive and were made to look like a backup.


The following are individual statements

Stacey Eldrich 

I worked in the FBI for about 10 years. It is clear that the photos in this case were planted there.

The alteration of evidence and serious breaches of evidence handing protocols are indisputable. And they appear to align with the government’s narrative at trial.

Additionally, official documentation shows that several FBI employees violated FBI policies, forensic protocols and standard operating procedures during this investigation.

These violations were atrocious.

Therefore, we strongly believe that anyone who has a high level of digital forensics knowledge, training and experience, and who has access to the same facts, would also conclude that the action of a person or persons in the DOJ or FBI resulted in significant tampering of evidence.

Based on the documentation that we’ve received in terms of evidence handling and violations of policy, it’s very clear as to which policies were violated and how they were violated, such as unauthorized FBI personnel accessing digital evidence, giving it to the US Attorney’s office when it was not allowed to be given, and even the conducting of a second forensic examination, which is prohibited by FBI policy.

William Odom 

In 25 years of digital forensic investigations, five of which was with the FBI, the amount of technical ability and premeditation to perform this fraud in the case against Mr. Raniere – I’ve never seen anything like that.

Dr. Rick Kiper 

The technical findings in this case are extensive. But what we can definitely say, in a nutshell… is that the file access dates for files on one of the devices used in the conviction were updated while in the custody of the FBI.

That’s an indisputable fact.

It’s also not in dispute that the evidence handling in this case broke protocol; broke the FBI’s own digital evidence policy guides. It broke chain of custody, where one of the pieces of digital evidence was transported in an unsealed state.

Some other alterations that we see are things like timestamps.

And timestamps in this case were used as the sole evidence to date photographs, which would date those photographs where the subject of those photographs will be 15 years old.

That is the only digital evidence used in the case. We know that particular evidence – those timestamps – is unreliable.

We know from a forensic examination of both devices that that type of evidence was altered extensively. And so that evidence is completely unreliable.

And the FBIs expert witness in this case misrepresented the reliability of that evidence extensively.

Two examinations were done, which is itself against policy against FBI policy, unless you have a very, very high authority to do it, which didn’t happen.

But in this case, there were two examinations done, and the first examination was done by the first forensic examiner, Stephen Flatley, and he came to a certain report, forensic report.

And then Brian Booth did another forensic examination. And in the last week of trial. And his report contains additional information, and those additional files created a stronger relationship between the two devices, which was the goal of the government’s narrative in this case.

So what happened was that Stephen Flatly created his report that didn’t have that stronger connection. And then four weeks of trial went by, and he [Flatley] did not testify, and he did not present his report in trial.

FBI Forensic Examiner Stephen Flatley made a report on the camera card. It had only four files that matched the hard drive. He had testified in US v Galanis that Metadata and EXIF data is easy to alter. He was sent to Ghana four weeks into the Raniere trial.   

And all of a sudden, Flatley received an assignment for overseas, and that camera card that he was examining was transported via other people and delivered to the second examiner [Booth] in an unsealed container. Then, that second examiner [Booth] created his report containing additional information that aligned with government’s narrative.

Now, Steven Flatley had testified three years earlier that the type of metadata that’s infused into the contents of files is not reliable. He said it several times during that previous trial.

And he said emphatically that the FBI would never rely on that type of timestamp data in order to date a particular file.

So, it’s the exact opposite of what Brian Booth testified in this case, where he was saying that the EXIF data was very reliable, very difficult to change.

There are 15 pages in the trial transcript where the prosecutor and this examiner [Booth] were discussing the reliability of this particular evidence that Mr. Flatley three years earlier had disqualified as reliable evidence.






About the author

Frank Parlato


Click here to post a comment

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

  • Did Keith order someone to hack Dershowitz’ emails like he did with E.Brofman so he could find those photos he shared with Epstein and blackmail him ? Im loving this friendship ❤️

      • You still said that you would reply to my email!

        Can you have at least the common decency to do that without making me have to ask you in the comments section, please?!

        Go back and read what I said again and reply back to me via email!

        Thank you kindly,

        • I hoped that we would come here and reason together. And as a reasonable man I’m willing to do whatever’s necessary to find a peaceful solution to these problems.

          • Well let’s reason in the emails without your obnoxious trolls trying to take a toxic bite out of this apple that doesn’t belong to them!

            Thank you kindly,

  • Declare that there was massive jury tampering and a fraudulent verdict and Ranieri was actually acquitted and by a huge margin.

  • I did some background research on at least 2 of the early and principal expert witnesses for hire involved a while back, and they were not particularly prominent and certainly not highly experienced in relevant digital forensics, though they may have done some work in the area. But I’ve noticed that’s pretty typical in these milieu, such as Raniere making exaggerated claims about his own background and experience, or the Bronfman sisters’ websites that proclaim them humanitarians who have accomplished all sorts of things.

  • This Wayne Newton guy 😂😂😂

    His website lists ‘expert’ consulting in 18 (18!!!) different fields, including “Emergencies” and also “Guest Emergencies”. (Ice-nine appreciates that it takes a true expert to determine the difference between the two).

    He shows ‘credentials’ that include how to build a children’s tree fort as an example of his expert project management skills. Seriously, he shows that. It includes 2 weeks for asking kids what they want. 5 weeks buying parts at Home Depot, with an additional 2 weeks to buy a ladder and bug repellant. Just order that shit on Amazon dude.

    I haven’t looked much at most of the other experts on Frank’s but don’t need to. Including this guy is all I need to know.

  • Genuine question.

    What if he’s a horrific sick criminal AND the Prosecution planted and basically created and distributed child pornography in this case and it’s actually now been proven by some of the nation’s top experts?

    Assuming this is true what do the Raniere haters think should happen?

    • Why do you deadenders keep asking the same stupid NXIVM “what if” scenarios wherever you go? Are you people seriously this indoctrinated? This isn’t one of your waste of money intensives.

    • It’s not a genuine question when you call people , “Raniere haters”. It’s clearly rhetorical.

      Don’t care enough about Keith to hate him.

      What if astronauts landed on the moon AND the moon landing was faked? Genuine question. Assuming this is true what do all the moon haters think should happen?

        • Currently, a crowbar is Alonzo’s favorite aphrodisiac.

          “If they won’t give you head – hit them in the head.”

          • Every man wanted to be your friend and every woman wanted to be in your bed. Too bad you wanted the exact opposite. 

          • “Every man wanted to be your friend and every woman wanted to be in your bed. Too bad you wanted the exact opposite.”

            Frank’s paraphrasing:

            “He [Caesar] is every woman’s man and every man’s woman.”

            “Women want to do me! Men wish they were me.”
            -Unknown Rapper

      • Great question. It’s scrambling my mind. Well… I guess I’d have to stop hating the moon…
        I officially forgive the moon for all the atrocities it has committed over the years. I will now move ALL my hate to the moon landing fakers.

  • These experts may be expensive, but they are some of the top decorated experts in the field. They could make a lot of money a lot of different ways.

    It is highly unlikely that they would all risk their names and careers for Clare’s money specifically. Also take a look at the findings.

    They are very much real and point to things that are literally impossible without a series of coordinated events done by humans all while the evidence was IN THE POSSESSION OF THE FBI.

    • Please tell us exactly which are ”top decorated experts in the field” of digital forensics, and preferably also cite information or provide links supporting that.

      My research showed that at least 2 brought in early weren’t really, and I see that Ice-nine above has found that a third also isn’t, leaving only half of them remaining as possibilities.

    • “Take a look at the findings”

      That’s precisely the problem. I have looked at the findings. Ad nauseum. There’s nothing there.

      The “experts” being a clown show is just the icing on this cake of absurdity

  • So this is what an unlimited amount of money can buy: Dershowitz and a statement by 6 “independent” experts.
    What is the definition of “tampering”? an FBI agent examining digital evidence before a forensic copy is made? It’s not according to the protocol, which is bad, but “tampering”?
    Strong words by these “experts” eager to please their client…..

    The FBI had the photo’s of an underage Camilla. That’s undisputed, even by these “experts”. Why bother “planting” them on another device?
    I hear Frank say: because it shows the connection with Keith. That Keith possessed them. There was plenty of corroborating evidence Keith took the photos. He made pictures of Camilla in the same pose as he made the pictures of the other women he had sex with.
    This futile and expensive last ditch effort to free Willy is getting nowhere.

    • It’s not undisputed that they have photos of an under age Camilla.

      It’s very much not only disputed but proven that these photos were planted, and dates were changed to date them to a year when she would be underage.

      If this is not true, how do you account for the fact that photos were dated back to a date before the make and model of the camera even existed?

      What explanation is there for the photos reflecting daylight savings time when that is not a feature of the camera and scientifically impossible timing and creation dates.

      How do explain an FBI agent testifying under oath that it’s not against FBI protocol for evidence to be delivered in an unsealed bag. Really???

      Do you think it’s ok for the most incriminating and important evidence for one of the most heinous crimes with the severest jail time to be transported in an open bag without accounting properly for the chain of custody? Wake up.

      Your government is CORRUPT.

      • “ It’s not undisputed that they have photos of an under age Camilla.”
        Excuse me?
        These photo’s were shown to a jury at the trail. The absent scar of an appendix surgery when she was16 confirmed her age below the age of consent while the photo’s were taken by Keith.
        If some people, like “Wake Up” are questioning the existence of these photo’s, it’s no use to engage in a discussion with them.

  • It’s an expert OPINION.

    There’s also a fluid and uneven definition of expert in hired legal situations. Pretty much anyone can declare themselves an expert.

    There’s no risk to putting out any opinion. But it’s not facts. It’s an interpetation. At most. One to best help a defense. Or prosecution team. Whomever pays the bills That’s it.

    The claims are completely obtuse. Nothing is even laid out clearly enough to say boldly that a person is lying. It’s a lot of IFS. It’s speculation it’s everyone’s favorite new phrase asking questions.

    So it’s just hired opinions. Obviously they could have done this during the trial. But they didn’t. That alone says a lot about the veracity of the claims. They know they would never stand up in court. Anyone can hire anyone (if they can afford it) to mount a defense for them (including experts). That is their legal right in America.

    And as such there is a certain amount of protection afforded those who will make egregious false claims against law enforcement and legal professionals as the dead-enders and their paid guns are doing in Keith’s criminal case.

    It’s rote. For moneyed convicted criminals. It’s expected.

    There was a “Twinkie defense” for goodness sake. A murder was committed because of ingesting sugar.

    Any hired expert will say what’s needed for the job.

    Why would any person in prison employ experts who are going to say something other than what is going to help them and look the best for them?

    Of course their experts are going to get on board with whatever desperate thing the defense wants to pursue.

    Because if they don’t – the defense team will just find another expert who will make those claims.

    It’s hilarious that people on this blog think that a paid expert agreeing to support an opinion put forth by the defense is somehow proof of the veracity of that claim.

    It’s an expert OPINION.

    This same group of people could be hired and they would argue the opposite way for the prosecution if someone paid them to do that after looking at the alleged tampering. And that is an absolute fact. Many expert Witnesses go back and forth working for either a defense team or prosecution team depending on who has hired them

    It’s kind of b******* to present it like they investigated the case on their own and found this incredible evidence of tampering and now they are dedicating themselves to the cause. It’s actually the opposite.

    They were hired and presented information and told to interpret it the way the defense wanted them to and if the prosecution wanted this sketchy group of Misfits on their side and called them first and paid them first they would have done the same thing for the prosecution.

    So just getting hired to do a job legally is proof of nothing. Literally anyone will take any case if that’s how they make a living and if they believe that all people are entitled to the best defense money can buy

  • If you believe Kieth Raniere is innocent you should be deeply concerned about this. If you believe Kieth Raniere is guilty you should be deeply concerned about this. This level of corruption in the FBI is a threat to every single citizen and must be addressed immediately. If it is not and these crooked prosecutors are not brought to justice then we no longer live in a civilized society.

    • Relax Harold! 99.999999% should not be deeply concerned with the FBI potentially pinning a case on a career criminal/pedophile. Maybe you have something to worry about but I don’t.

      • Right? There’s the child porn and there’s the actual same child, ” That is me in the sexually explicit porn” and there are texts. From Keith. With dates.stating Camilla was 15. And emails. And other children like Rhiannon who told their tragic story. And then there’s Keith’s lawyers in court, “Yep. Keith took those photos of Camilla at 15”

        That’s a lot of evidence going back decades.

        So… Not worried

        Except for fifteen year old girls.

        Pedophiles like Keith make one worry for young girls like Camilla.

        And Rhiannon. And Gina. And Gina H. And who knows how many more?

    • To what corruption are you referring? Even if digital evidence was “tampered” with ( i.e not handled in compliance with protocol), that’s not the same as corruption.

  • What’s even more screwed up is that Keith kept requesting a speedy trial. And yet? Here we are. So many years later and only more litigation.

  • This whole thing is just so shady.

    It seems so obviously manipulative.

    This is not an argument for a man who fought tooth and nail to defend his innocence at his own trial.

    This man has taken a posture of inaction and unaccountability and is now attempting to turn his enemies energy against itself. As if he’s Luke Skywalker or Jackie Chan or something.

    Why is he even allowed to do this?

    He 100% had his chance at trial.

    Why should taxpayers have to waste any more money ingratiating this spoiled brat? It’s a waste of public resources.

    I actually don’t even care if the FBI did cheat after this guy decided to roll over in the bed he made, fall asleep in it and then wake up demanding everybody better suck his dick now! I’m sure there are many innocent people in prison who can only wish they had expensive lawyers like he did. Who did make their voices heard! Of course, NXIVM/DOS will only mock those people.

    Keith never took any issue with any of this stuff at trial. Why is he even allowed to do this now?

    • He didn’t 100% have his chance at trial. They didn’t release the requested backups to the defense. Gee I wonder why. Also no man has had their chance at trial if the trial involved being framed with planted evidence from the very institutions that are in place to protect the American people and ensure justice for all.

    • He did take issue to this stuff at trial. Through more corruption the prosecution did not provide what they were legally obligated to provide to the defense.

      Do your homework and you’ll see that even if you think he’s a sick monster the trial was one of the most f-ed up ones in history. Completely corrupt from beginning to end. Which is even worse if he is the monster you believe him to be.

      The prosecution risks him walking free because they planted evidence and rigged and dos races the whole system.

      • Keith’s attorneys effectively admitted Keith took the photos and That Camilla was in fact 15. They did NOT argue it.

        Keith’s lawyers agreed that the child pornography photos WERE OF CAMILLA AT 15 and that is why the defense argued the child porn should be thrown out as evidence.

        Because the photos were. “Too old”.

        Not any other reason.

        • Not true, I do also remember hearing the “too old” claim. Doesn’t exactly sound like a man vehemently defending his innocence at all, does it?

      • Felix, I actually have paid close attention to this case.

        It’s just that the more I think about it, the more I believe your statement is untrue. I still invite you to prove me wrong if I’m wrong but the charges clearly included possession of child pornography. If Keith never took any explicit photos of a 15 year old girl then he should have said something about that right then and there!

        Instead, it seems to me that he argued nothing, no contest, but now is trying to turn this around as if the courts are some kind of video game where if your player dies, you just hit restart and play again.

        Initially, I was open to taking a look at possible government corruption but I’ve also always believed it’s far more likely that Keith messed with the images himself. Why wouldn’t he try to corrupt the files? It’s a great idea (albeit criminal) to hide his child porn behind some guise of, “oh, these files were corrupted, couldn’t have been me. Must have been one of my numerous enemies, again”.

        And while I still care about due process in general, the more I read, the more convinced I am that did he receive his due process in the form of a full and fair trial plus an extra $14 million dollars worth of privately paid lawyers. It’s completely on him for spending those millions just to present no defense. What a waste!

        I strongly believe none of these corruption allegations are based on any new evidence that Keith couldn’t have argued against at trial. If he knew that he was never in possession of said photos or even wanted to admit that he was guilty of having taken the pics but that the FBI could not have possibly found them where they claimed, he should have just told the truth like he was sworn to do.

        It’s just my opinion obviously, but I think this whole motion completely reeks of his typical arrogance and grandiosity. Guess we will see what happens next.

    • Great points my2cents
      Raniere must of thought he was going to be found innocent due to his Narcissist ego.
      When he was found guilty on all counts, he looked as if someone punched him in the gut. He looked at his lawyer and said “This is not justice.”

      I had to laugh quietly to myself. The Smartest Man on Earth really did think that not putting on a defense would work in his favor.

      Wrong again bad ass.

      Raniere doesn’t care about spending tax payers money on his litigation. He’s been doing that since his CBI days.

      Raniere (NXIVM) could be in the top three of all Cult leader to have wasted the US tax papers money on litigation.

      Hell he could be #1 now with these criminal charges with him and his RICO crime organization.
      With this case, he cannot fike any new motions. Thank you Jesus.

      Once the 2nd Circuit comes down with their decision, the motions before Judge Garaufis will be decided on.
      Judge Garaufis can either hear them or deny them.

      Will Raniere get another complete trial. I doubt it.

      Child porn wasn’t a major RICO charge. Raniere dead-enders are making this out as if it was the cornerstone of his arrest and the trial.

      Let’s not forget what really took the Cult of NXIVM down. It was DOS. Remember the sex Cult within the Cult

      • Hey, The sex Culrwith? Thank you and I’m hoping it’s thrown out.

        Dude wasted $14 million more of Clare’s money to put on no defense!

        I’d like to see an end to this financial abuse before she ends up completely bankrupted. So sad.

  • Are digital data experts working for the FBI paid to lie by government money?
    The government can easily outspend the Bronfmans when it comes to purchased testimony.

  • Keith Raniere also said he owned the rights to a AT&T and Microsoft patent and sued them for millions of dollars.

    Lied his ass off in courts saying he would produce the evidence but never could produce the real thing.

    We haven’t seen what the EDNY has to say about this.

    Raniere has never won this kind of lawsuit. He is good at smoke & mirror litigation BS.

    Six, ten, twenty experts, it doesn’t matter if it’s all made up.

    Bottom line, he is a criminal. Raniere has a history of taking pictures of his victims.

    Why would he not take pictures of the 15-year-old?

    Out of the 120 year sentence, how many years did he get for those pictures?

    It doesn’t take away the rest of his RICO crimes.

  • “Are they willing to lie for the money?”

    “Are they all lying about their opinion that the FBI tampered with evidence?”

    “It will become evident if there is no substance to their claims of FBI tampering.”

    “to lie – then that’s a story. A big story… It will be a huge story and a big disgrace for these six”

    The idea here is that these people can’t be lying because it would cost them too much. They’d be ruined.

    Really? First of all, several of these people don’t have much reputation to lose. At least one of them advertises himself as pretty much an expert opinion for hire.

    Second, “lying” is hardly how they’d see it. They’re offering their expert opinion. If the appeals court isn’t convinced that doesn’t mean they lied.

    Do you think any of these people feel guilty about offering an expert opinion that happens to be pleasing to the people who hired them? So maybe they stretched the truth a bit…

    Lawyers “lie” like this all the time. It’s arguing their client’s case. They present shaky arguments based on highly questionable pseudo-facts and do it with the utmost appearance of sincerity. This does not ruin their reputations. On the contrary.

    Another point to keep in mind is that it can never be “proven” that the FBI didn’t tamper with evidence. For the simple reason that you can’t prove a negative (simple logic).

    That’s important to keep in mind with this “controversy”. The dead-enders will never drop this. They’ll never stop beating this dead horse.

    The case of Mike Lindell (the MyPillow guy) is instructive in this context. He’s a Trump devotee obsessed with proving the 2020 election was “stolen”. He has an elaborate conspiracy theory involving the Communist Chinese and insists he has computer forensics evidence that “proves” it. He, like Bronfman, has spent millions. He, too has his hired experts. One problem is, in many of the counties where he claims vast blocks of votes were altered, they use paper ballots. Hand counts of the paper ballots match the original election night tally. Trump lost.

    Do you think this made Lindell say, “Oops my bad. I guess I was wrong. Never mind.” Nope.

    Lindell wants to make the 2020 election the election that never ends. Keep it in dispute forever. He’ll never admit that Trump lost.

    Same with the dead-enders. They’ll never admit Raniere’s guilty. There will always be “questions”. They pretend they’re just after the truth but what they’re doing is trying to keep his guilt an open question. Keeping his trial forever in question.

    And the FR is aiding and abetting them in this.

  • And he said emphatically that the FBI would never rely on that type of timestamp data in order to date a particular file.

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,_Jr.

Contact Frank with tips or for help.
Phone / Text: (305) 783-7083