The One Most Important Point: Camila Accused Raniere of Abuse

Camila by MK10ART.

An intelligent and logic-based commenter, who we call Suzanne, wrote about Camila and why it is nonsense to question the FBI on this issue of tampering.

By Suzanne

You don’t think the authorities showed Camilla the pictures and asked her to identify them as herself at 15? For verification?

And Camilla already said that those are photos Keith took of her when she was 15. In court. Publicly.

Eloquently, Camilla said that sexual exploitation from a child predator is something that she could never forget. Sealed into her brain.

With which probably any 15-year-old virgin who came from the kind of background Camilla did would agree.

“The virgin Camilla” as Keith lived to refer to her – was very inexperienced.

Girls don’t just forget at that tender age when they have virtually no experience that some old man is taking pictures of them in extremely explicit, revealing and humiliating poses.

That would be highly traumatizing and a very new and invasive experience and that is not a crime a young girl would misremember.

Also, medical records back up that Keith was sexually exploiting Camilla because he is listed as her only sexual partner and the origin date is at 15 years old.

The texts from Keith verify 15 years old as the date he started sexually abusing Camilla.

Elizabeth Butler, a nurse practitioner who worked at the clinic that provided an abortion to Camila,  testified at the trial of Keith Raniere. She gave the date of Camila’s abortion as October 12, 2010, when Camila was 20.  Based on medical forms she filled out, Camila said she was sexually active since she was 15.   

There is no way the prosecution would have gone forth with that charge of pornography of a child without extensive cross-referencing and finding corroborating evidence.

That would include multiple statements and questioning of Camilla. Many people who were vetted and interviewed for the trial did not end up testifying (an example would be India).

Just because Camilla did not testify in that trial really has no bearing on how much corroborating evidence and testimony and interviews were done to verify Camilla’s truth.

There are multiple reasons prosecutors decide not to bring forth a witness and sometimes it’s not to further traumatize a victim.

Especially when the human was victimized as a minor child.

There could be other reasons Camilla wasn’t brought to testify.

But you can flip around what you said. The defense absolutely had the opportunity to subpoena Camilla and force her to testify or make a statement and they chose not to.

And there’s only one reason they would have done that. Because the defense knew those photos were of Camilla. They knew Keith took them. And they knew Camilla was 15 in the porn photos.

And the defense knew that if Camilla testified Keith was sunk right then and there.

So that was a tactical decision the defense made and are now trying to play it as some kind of thing that was nefariously done to them as opposed to a decision they actively participated in.

Nobody called Camila, nobody subpoenaed her and that’s the way the case went. It’s not always for nefarious reasons or a conspiracy.

This marks the end of Suzanne’s comments.

Now, going forward, begins my comments, just in case anybody is confused:

FR comments starts here and Suzanne’s comments are done.

By Frank

To clarify a few things. I do not think the US Attorney’s Office showed Camila the pictures used to convict Raniere. I do not think she identified them.

Of course, they could ask her to identify them. That would end 99 percent of the efforts of the pro-Raniere forces, especially if she said it under oath, subject to cross-examination.

She said Raniere took photos of her when she was 15. But she did not identify what photos they were. I am waiting for her to identify the photos used as evidence. Neither she nor her sister, Daniela, nor Lauren Salman identified the images. An FBI agent did.

I believe Raniere took photos of Camila when she was 15. I have doubts about the evidence. Maybe the FBI thought he was guilty, but did not have the evidence, and they planted it or changed the metadata. Or both.

Camila could identify the photos under oath. And if she saw the pictures, she never said she did. She has not backed the FBI by saying Raniere took the pictures used as evidence when she was 15.

Text from Raniere to Camila: Sept. 4, 2014; 1:32 am: “It is such a painful, bittersweet thing… The truth of our life together that could have been made real yet now us forever a secret and nullified… I love you so much… I am so proud to have been your husband for 8.75 years… And shared a home for 4… Yet I am also so heartbroken.” 

The prosecution used this text to prove he started a sexual relationship with Camila when she was 15. and Raniere was 45. 

What About Texts?

The texts between Raniere and Camila suggest he started a sexual relationship when she was 15 or 16. But the texts do not prove the authenticity of the photos.

But She Said He Had Sex With Her When She Was 15

If he raped her, it means nothing in federal court. Statutory rape is a state offense.

The government charged Raniere with child porn and sexual exploitation of a minor. They alleged he took photos of Camila with a Canon camera on November 2 and November 24, 2005.

That’s my focus. Not whether Raniere committed statutory rape in 2005. Or if he took photos of Camila when she was 15. He probably did.

Did he take the photos used in evidence on November 2 and November 24, 2005 — the dates the FBI says the metadata shows?

Did the FBI alter the metadata? Again, the question is not whether Raniere abused Camila. He did abuse her, I am sure. The focus is on FBI conduct. Not Raniere’s conduct.

Because he is guilty, the FBI does not have the right to concoct evidence to prove his guilt.

The prosecution moved forward without Camila. That is clear. She did not confirm before or during the trial that Raniere took photos of her. She came forward after the trial was over, in time for inclusion on the list of victims and collecting $500,000. She came forward at the 11th hour. Another day’s delay would have cost her half a million.

The government could have compelled Camila to testify, but they chose not to call her as a witness. They knew where she was. They interviewed her in Mexico.

The DOJ had no trouble rousting Raniere from Mexico — overnight. 

A trial that focused on Camila without the main witness?

This matter is not about texts, gynecological reports, abortions, or anything else. This is not about whether Raniere raped and photographed this woman when she was a girl. The focus is on the method the FBI used to prove it.

Do you think law enforcement should cheat because they “know” a guy is guilty?

A defendant has the right to confront his accuser. Camila did not accuse him until after his conviction. The DOJ chose not to call her. It was not up to the defense to call Camila. The defense could not force her to testify. The prosecution could force her. They did not want Camila at the trial. Maybe Raniere’s defense team did not want her either.

But the burden of proof is on the government.

The photos are most likely of Camila. But the FBI may have altered the metadata. The FBI “knew” Keith took them. They “knew” Camilla was 15 in the porn photos. And maybe they needed to prove it any way they could. Even by cheating.

And maybe the defense knew that if Camilla testified, Keith was sunk.

So why didn’t the prosecution call Camila and sink the varmint?

The government withheld forensic data from the defense and changed metadata. That is suspicious. Much of that was not found until after the trial. There is enough suspicious stuff to warrant an evidentiary hearing.

Lead prosecutor, AUSA Moira Kim Penza

The lead prosecutor said the child porn charges are “the heart” of the racketeering conspiracy. She also said Camila was involved in every aspect of the case. The most significant person in the case. Due process and justice require the main victim to be heard.

Even though Raniere is likely guilty, I do not want law enforcement to decide that and then create evidence. I want a jury to decide with all the true evidence.

It is difficult to explain. People think if a guy is guilty, it does not matter if law enforcement cheats. That’s a recipe for disaster.

Maybe they did not cheat

But what harm in making sure? If the government did not cheat, then Raniere sinks forever. And the poor fools who follow him will have nothing to hope for, wish for or believe in. They will move on and start a Raniere-free life.

And on the odd chance the FBI cheated, it would be wise to nip that in the bud.

So before some rabid commenters get upset, let me say that I 100 percent believe Raniere abused Camila when she was 15. However, I wonder if the FBI proved it fair and square.

I also doubt that even if the FBI cheated to convict Raniere, he would roam free. A new trial will prove unsuccessful for Raniere, and he will remain where he is – in custody – for the rest of his life.

So this is my position. It puts me in the unenviable position of upsetting Raniere haters and Raniere lovers.

Raniere lovers dislike me for saying he abused Camila. They live in a fools’ paradise, thinking their man is innocent. He is not. He abused Camila for years – starting when she was a child.

His supporters have Raniere derangement disorder. It makes them blind.

And Raniere haters think I sold out to Raniere supporters, just because I share their doubts about the FBI. Even pointing out that the FBI could cheat to convict a dirtbag disturbs them. They have Raniere derangement disorder. It makes them blind.

It blinds them and they cannot consider that if the FBI cheats to convict dirtbags, they can cheat the innocent.

MK10ART’s painting of Keith Alan Raniere where he presently resides.

They have to turn a blind eye to anything that does not support Raniere being evil. There can only be good and evil. And anyone who hurts Raniere is good, even if they cheat.

And they have to hate anyone who might ever say that anyone who hurt Raniere might not be 100 percent good.

The derangement cuts both ways.

And if I may, I think Raniere is deranged as well. Thinking he is going to get out of prison. He is sunk and time will pass, and he will be forgotten, and all his deeds washed away by the sands of time. And no one will care whether he or the FBI cheated or if anyone cared. His day is done.


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. To leave a name, click on the email icon)

  • So the fibbies chartered to provide an investigative focus to the fed effort to bring down organized crime spent quite a bit of effort in creating a set of files that for some reason helped keep Vivian Vance in the directors chair of the bureau regardless of who’s admin came into office These files were so interesting hillary copied so many it became filegate and another admin with roots in the windy city that had already made real strides in digitizing records and paperwork may have digitized said files according to Maxine Waters so there’s that Then there’s the investigation bit the bureau’s not particularly good at Compare the timeframes needed to investigate hillary’s private server emails and then Weiners but as to straight up cheating check this out

  • The NXIVM civic complaint is a concise narrative from the plaintiffs view and worth reading.
    From the complaint re Camila:

    “ 39. Numerous Plaintiffs suffered in silence for years, even avoiding cooperation with law enforcement authorities once it became known that the federal government was investigating Defendants. Some were even led by Raniere, Clare Bronfman and others to believe that they were targets of the federal investigation and that if they came forward and voluntarily cooperated with the investigation, they would themselves be arrested, charged and prosecuted. One of those victims who Defendants successfully silenced is Camila, who was repeatedly told that if she did not remain in hiding, the FBI was going to have her kidnapped and sent to the U.S. for prosecution, even though Defendants and their counsel (and Camila’s counsel) knew that Camila was identified as a crime victim in government filings. Only now, after the guilty pleas and convictions of a number of the Defendants, do Plaintiffs feel safe enough to come forward and assert their claims. So great was the fear generated by Defendants, that Plaintiffs believe there

    Case 1:20-cv-00485-EK-CLP Document 64 Filed 08/13/21 Page 13 of 217 PageID #: 400
    are still many victims and witnesses hiding in the shadows, frightened at the prospect of seeing their lives further destroyed if they come forward and assert their rightful claims in this or any other legal proceeding.”

  • Not only did the defense NOT call Camilla they also hired an attorney on Camilla’s “behalf” who directed Camilla to stay away from the trial.

    That’s right. The same defenndant who now cries foul because Camilla did not testify under osth, was part of a campaign to actively keep Camilla in Mexico and away from the witness stand.

    Frank. You know that’s true!

    • Yes. I think Camila’s Bronfman-paid attorney was hopelessly conflicted about representing Camila. I think Raniere and Co did not want her to testify. Which shows his guilt.

      But the DOJ could have called Camila if they wanted her and compelled her to appear. They did not want her as a witness either. That is suspicious to me. There may have been good reasons for it.

      • The DOJ knew Raniere had some sort of an influence over Cami. How much of an influence? They decided not to find out. They didn’t need her to testify and decided not to get greedy by pushing for it. One in the hand is better than two in the overgrown bush.

        The only reason this is suspicious to you is due to the alleged FBI cheating. If not for this, the decision not to have Cami testify would seem normal.

        • Maybe you’re right, but I believe in the confrontation clause of the Sixth Amendment. It may have been for show, but Agnifilo did complain the DOJ refused to produce her, but wanted to use hearsay evidence. I think the DOJ should have produced her and that would have settled Raniere and his claims or would have caused the DOJ not to use the photo evidence.

          • Frank.

            You keep putting it on the DOJ
            The defense could have called Camilla. And they did not.

            The DOJ is not responsible for anything other than presenting their own case.

            They did. They won.

            Raniere should have mounted a vigorous defense.

            He did not. They lost.

            Any person accused of committing a heinous crime has a right to call their Accuser.

            Keith did not exercise that right.

            That is his own fault. That is the fault of his lawyers who Keith was absolutely directing and micromanaging.

            Stop blaming people who were not hired to do the defense’s job. They were hired to do their own job and they did it.

            You even stated that you thought they did a remarkable job. You were full of compliments for Moira and the whole prosecution team.

            Keith and Clare and the defense stopped Camilla from testifying. Probably for precisely the reason they are making a fuss about it now. Keith is trying to get his dead end followers to raise some kind of doubt about the veracity of Camilla and. her story.

          • Cami testifying or not testifying was a key part of the trial. If the FBI cheated, they either couldn’t get her to testify or they were petrified she’d screw them over with her testimony. Did this cause a panicked 11th hour cheating scandal? I think we all know that the defense didn’t call Cami because they were (correctly) petrified of her.

      • Again Frank you are missing the point. It’s not the doj’s job to call Camilla because in retrospect Keith and his followers are pretending that they wish the doj had called her.

        The doj’s job is to present the case. They did that. They made multiple choices for multiple reasons. And the prosecution effectively proved the federal government case to the jury and the jury found Keith guilty on all charges. If you’re going to question choices that were made in the trial it makes more sense to question the choices the losing side made. It looks like the prosecution made absolutely every best decision to get a victory and an amazing outcome for the victims of Keith.

        It may be suspicious to you but the doj also prepped India and never called her to the stand.

        They clearly knew what they were doing on the prosecution side. Every decision was thoughtfully made. The loyalist and yourself want to see the worst in every Keith related situation. It may be that the prosecution weighed the value of Camilla in the trial against the trauma it would cause her and decided they didn’t need her to testify. And guess what? The prosecution was right about that. That may be the case with India as well. Or it can be as simple and black and white as the prosecution wants to to present a streamlined case and anyone who is unnecessary is not called to the stand.

        Putting all emotion aside it was just a strategic decision. And again. It was the correct decision for the doj. If it wasn’t the correct decision for Keith he can only blame himself and his defense team that he directed. Most people if they were accused of sexual exploitation of a child and that person who was accusing them was available would call them to the stand if they were innocent. Keith did not. That choice is 100% on Keith. It is not on the doj at all.

        • This requires a more elaborate answer than I can offer right now. The DJ presented Camila as both a victim and a criminal when it suited them and the judge let them introduce hearsay evidence based on her being a criminal. The hearsay should not have been admitted without her verifying it. An example was the texts. Because she was labeled a coconspirator [a criminal], it was allowed in evidence.

          Due process should have required her to authenticate the texts in person. I am not saying the texts were not legit – but I like Due process and do not like patterns of conduct that skirt around it — not so much for this case but for another case – maybe where the defendant is innocent. I know, I know Raniere is not innocent. But that is not the point. It’s the process that is the point.

          • Again

            That’s on the defense. Why didn’t they make those arguments then?

            Legally that is also a separate issue

            You’re conflating different evidence now with the fact that the defense could have called Camilla.

            Now you’re talking about texts being authenticated. That’s not the original issue that was being debated

            The issue is a man was accused of a crime and he had the right to confront his accuser.

            That man was Keith. The accuser was Camilla.

            Keith did not exercise his right to confront her in court.

            That is on Keith it always will be on Keith . Ultimately, it’s his responsibility and his choice and a decision that Keith made.

            It is very manipulative to pretend that it was up to the prosecution.

            The defense made the choice not to call Camilla.

            If it was of utmost importance to Keith and the defense that Camilla testify under oath then they could have made that happen.

            Again the defense chose not to exercise that option.

            It is not the prosecution’s job to do the work of the defense team.

      • Perhaps they simply saw no need to retraumatize her — particularly given the predatory, misogynist tactics of Raniere’s sleazebag attorney? I’m far less concerned about the DOJ not calling every single witness who had first hand experience of Raniere’s abuse than I am by the manipulative intimidation tactics of the Bronfman-bankrolled attorneys.

  • “the defense knew those photos were of Camilla”

    Exactly. That, in 8 words, settles it.

    Or put it this way: There was someone in the courtroom who DID identify those pictures of Camila. That person was Keith Raniere.

    He knew Camila intimately, for years. He saw the pictures. He was in agreement with the prosecution that they were pictures of Daniela.

    If he hadn’t been in agreement he would have spoken up. That would have caught the prosecution in a lie. They would have been caught in perjury. Caught falsifying evidence. All he had to do was speak up and and he would have walked out of that court a free man.

    So why didn’t Raniere speak up if those pictures weren’t Camila?

    Those were pictures of Camila. Claiming otherwise is plain nonsense. Pretending there’s any doubt is ridiculous.

    I’ve stopped taking the Frank Report the least bit seriously. Like tea leaf readings and horoscopes, it’s for entertainment purposes only. I more than half suspect Frank is just shitposting here, pulling our collective leg with this silliness.

    • I was told that Raniere never saw the photos. Marc Agnifilo did not want him looking at them in front of the jury and in court was the only place where they could be viewed, since they were child porn. That said, Agnifilo certainly thought they were photos of Camila.

      I think the question is not who but rather when were the photos taken and was there metadata alteration?

    • Seriously, and so many scumbags just throwing other scumbags under the bus for book deals, fame and to bury their own turds. Few involved give a crap about the victims, just continue to exploit them for their own ends or perversions.

  • If I remember correctly, didn’t Daniela testify during the trial that Camilla was still in NXIVM? Camila was offered a nanny job paying a large amount of money. The job materialized, but apparently not the large salary she was promised. I think Camila did not leave NXIVM until around the time of Keith’s sentencing. At which time she did assert, but not under oath, that Keith had molested her when she was underage.

  • No matter what happened… the fbi brought down a criminal cult. It’s like taking down Hitler and Goebbels. Raniere and Salzman/Loshin respectively. Who cares how it was done.

    • Maury, I’m not sure you know how right you are in your statement.

      You see according to keith, Nancy Salzman was actually Adolf Hitler in her former life. And keith says she has quite a bit of atonement to do. Another NXIVM member was Goebbels assistant. Reinhard Heydrich became Barbara Bouchey. Toni Natalie was Herman Goering, and she was basically responsible for the Holocaust. And for good measure, Alexander Betancourt was Mussolini. Nearly the entire Nazi leadership somehow ended up reincarnated in Albany, New York. Who knew? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

      “The law of Karma weighs heavy on you,” Raniere reportedly told her. Salzman teary eyed thanked him for saving her and removing her karma and vowed to obey him for life.

      I don’t know if Nancy ever did reverse the law of Karma. 42 months in prison and $150,000 fine I suppose is a good start. It couldn’t have been easy for a Jewish woman to tell her daughters that she used to be Adolf Hitler.

  • The FBI did a good job removing this menace from society. I salute them for it. There is not the tiniest bit of evidence the FBI did anything nefarious. I read all your posts about the so called “evidence” that Suneel provided to you. There’s nothing there other then FBI not fully following protocol in some instances.

    Perhaps Frank has a “the government cheats all the time” derangement disorder. It makes him blind too……

    But I salute Frank for his tireless, undaunted and successful crusade to bring down Raniere. Against all odds I might add.

  • The defense could have compelled Camilla to testify.

    That is the point.

    Most men accused of creating child pornography would do anything to clear their name if they were innocent. Anything.

    The fact that Keith did nothing is indicative of his guilt.

  • Clyne just did a youtube interview with colonel kurtz, and she tried so hard to put their narrative out there. No mention of Cami that i can remember.

  • Bravo, Frank.

    This is one of the clearest things I’ve ever read by you on a very complex and convoluted subject.

    Your incredibly talented clarity here is a public service.

    Bravissimo, Don Parlato.


  • Times Union

    Records scattered on road latest tiff in Saratoga County DA’s race
    Challenger Michael Phillips calls incumbent Karen Heggen’s office ‘center of chaos;’ she says files are not hers
    Photo of Wendy Liberatore
    Wendy Liberatore
    Oct. 26, 2022
    Updated: Oct. 26, 2022 5:50 p.m.

    BALLSTON SPA — The contentious Saratoga County District Attorney’s race took a turn to the bizarre when incumbent Karen Heggen’s opponent showed up to her office on Wednesday morning with a bag of court files that he said were found strewn across the road outside Ballston Town Court.

    Democrat Michael Phillips said the files, found on Charlton Road by Army veteran David Ketterer on Oct. 18, belong to Heggen and show that the prosecutor’s office is poorly run.

    “This is indicative of an absolute incompetent administration of Karen Heggen,” Phillips said right before he carried a bag of what he says were 150 files into Heggen’s office. “It’s a center of chaos.”

    Heggen, who was home recovering from a bout of COVID-19, said that those files are the court’s, not her office’s.

    “They are not my ADA’s files,” Heggen said. “This is how inept he is. Those are the court files, not the ADA’s files. … He’s the one causing chaos.”

    Phillips says Heggen is making excuses and that he is certain the files are her office’s documents.

    Ketterer, who was present when Phillips brought them into Heggen’s office, said it was after dark when he found the papers on the road. However, minutes before his discovery, he said he saw a box that was left on a car that drove away. He didn’t see whose car it was nor did he see the files fly off the car, but assumed that was how they ended up in the street.

    Ketterer then contacted Phillips, who is a fellow veteran, asking him what he should do with the files that he took home and locked up in his gun case.

    Phillips said he determined they should be brought to Heggen’s office.

    This incident is just another one in the fight between Heggen and Phillips, a state Health Department attorney, who accuse each other of being unqualified to hold the office.

    Also with Phillips was Maureen Jackson, who said her son survived a car crash with a repeat DWI felon. She said she is happy her son was not severely injured in the April crash but said Heggen’s office “has given her son the runaround for six months.”

    “We want this changed,” Jackson said. “We want victims to be heard. We want consequences for these drunk drivers and habitual felons before more innocent people are affected by the actions of these criminals.”

    Heggen said she can’t provide any information on the case as she deals with the victim, not the victim’s mother. Furthermore, she said if a crash victim does not suffer serious physical injury, the driver cannot be charged with vehicular assault.

    Phillips said that driving while intoxicated is a big problem in Saratoga County, noting that AutoinsuranceEZ, a website that finds competitive insurance rates, lists the county as 13th in DWIs for small counties throughout the U.S. (It lists Oneida County as No. 5.)

    “This flies in the face of Karen Heggen’s story of Saratoga County being the safest in the state,” he said.

    Written By
    Wendy Liberatore

    Wendy Liberatore covers communities in Saratoga County. Prior to joining the Times Union, she wrote features on the arts and dance for the Daily Gazette, Saratoga Living and the Saratogian. She also worked for magazines in Westchester County and was an education reporter with the Bronxville Review-Press and Reporter. She can be reached at, or 518-491-0454 or 518-454-5445.

  • District Attorney Karen Heggen denies files found belong to prosecutor’s office. The public has a right to know the truth.


    Karen Heggen says “returned” court documents weren’t from DA Office
    by Tom Eschen Wednesday, October 26th 2022

    About 150 court documents were found near Ballston Town Court last week (WRGB)
    Facebook Share IconTwitter Share Icon Email Share Icon

    Saratoga County — Saratoga County District Attorney candidate Michael Phillips stood in front of incumbent Karen Heggen’s DA office on Wednesday with a bag full of court documents, saying he was returning the misplaced files. Heggen on the other hand, says they have nothing to do with her office.

    Phillips claims the documents were found by a member of the public scattered across Charlton Road last Tuesday night, just a few feet away from Ballston Town Court.

    “I got contacted on Thursday of last week, they contacted my campaign,” Phillips says. “We got together Sunday. I identified the files, we secured the files. We looked at a convenient scheduling date so we can return them. Last Tuesday to today is 8 days, so it’s not a long period of time.”

    The man who found the files, David Ketterer, says he’s an acquaintance of Phillips, and he didn’t know what to do with the roughly 150 documents when he found them. So, he called the attorney (Phillips) for guidance.

    Heggen says once her office reviewed the documents, they determined none of the files had any connection to her office.

    Michael Phillips brings misplaced documents to DA office, current DA Karen Heggen says they weren’t from there

    “They have confirmed that the files that Mr. Phillips delivered to our office today are files from the [Ballston] Town Court, and we have returned them to the Judge,” Heggen says. “Anybody who practices regularly in local town justice court would recognize the difference.”

    CBS6 reached out to Ballston Town Court to learn more about the sensitivity of the documents in question, and if they plan on investigating the issue further, but they were not available.

  • Suzanne wrote – “The defense absolutely had the opportunity to subpoena Camilla and force her to testify or make a statement and they chose not to. And there’s only one reason they would have done that. Because the defense knew those photos were of Camilla. They knew Keith took them. And they knew Camilla was 15 in the porn photos.”

    I completely agree with this. EVERYONE completely agrees. The dead-enders stay silent when it comes to these facts and shift the narrative to the FBI. But the dead-enders sure as hell know that Keith statutorily raped and took hairy vag pix of an underaged Cami. The only thing they care about is trying to find a sliver of an opportunity to free Keith.

    I understand everything Frank is saying and the points he is making. IMO, he is the only one playing fair. BUT, he is also being used as a pawn to give a voice to the FREE VANGUARD crowd. Frank gets it and doesn’t care. He should also get it when observers rip him for the optics of the outcomes that are the result of his stance and his platform.

    • Vanguard must know his nefarious methods will not free him. They will however, perpetuate and deepen his abuse of Camilla, having her ordeal graphically described publicly over and over, denying it so obtusely by claiming to be a victim of the FBI. I think this is typical narc level DARVO. A vicious and protracted attack on an already badly harmed target.

      Maybe the dead-enders fancy that they have Frank’s pure intentions, in harness. Maybe he’s just being super generous with the rope. Judging by the full extent of the legal counter- offensive, all I see the deadenders documenting here is gargantuan hubris.

      • Yeah. Let’s not forget that Vanguard loves ruining people. Anything he can do to hurt Cami is nice to him. But even better, is the damage he’s doing (time, reputation etc.) to the dead-enders. Once everyone forgets about him and he is dying in prison, he’ll still be using this strategy against guards and other inmates. He is who we thought he is.

  • Frank I think this is your clearest summary of your position. While I don’t necessarily agree with the amount of time you are devoting to the loyalists because I think it feeds their delusion I understand your position. Sadly even if there was a full evidentiary hearing and 10 other experts proved there was no tampering or other improper conduct the loyalists will never accept it just as they don’t accept the basic principle that Camilla was raped by Raniere.

    • Yes, they cannot see the truth about Vanguard, but many won’t even consider that some suspicious happenings occurred with the evidence and answers are required. It won’t free Raniere. But it will provide the answer to one, unanswered question that concerns me: Did the FBI cheat?

      I already know the answer to did Raniere abuse Camila? He did.

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.” Parlato was also credited in the Starz docuseries "Seduced" for saving 'slave' women from being branded and escaping the sex-slave cult known as DOS.

Additionally, Parlato’s coverage of the group OneTaste, starting in 2018, helped spark an FBI investigation, which led to indictments of two of its leaders in 2023.

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 premiered on May 22, 2022. Most recently, he consulted and appeared on Tubi's "Branded and Brainwashed: Inside NXIVM," which aired January, 2023.

IMDb — Frank Parlato

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