Luthmann: Raniere’s Brutal Days in Court and Claims of FBI Tampering

MK10ART's painting of the Vanguard.

Richard Luthmann is a writer and contributor for the Frank Report. A former attorney and federal prisoner, Luthmann recently appeared with Scott Johnson and Peter Mingils on Building Fortunes Radio.

Radio Personality Peter Mingils

Radio Personality Peter Mingils

The following is not a verbatim transcript, but an edited for print version of the topics discussed.

Richard Luthmann is a writer, commentator, satirist, and investigative journalist with degrees from Columbia University and the University of Miami. Once a fixture in New York City and State politics, Luthmann is a recovering attorney who lives in Southwest Florida and a proud member of the National Writers Union. 

By Richard Luthmann

I met Keith Raniere in the Brooklyn MDC during his trial. He was one tough dude for having the stamina to go through a six week trial.

The physical toll alone is extraordinary.

I wrote an article for the Frank Report about this.

That article talks about the process a defendant undergoes if he chooses to exercise his constitutional right, go to court and challenge the prosecution’s case.

Your day begins at 4:14 am, when a guard awakens you with instructions to prepare for court.

By five o’clock, they take you downstairs at the MDC to a holding pen. They strip search you. Then put you in court jumpers.

After that, you wait in the Receiving and Delivery area in a holding pens, until the US Marshals Service comes.

The US Marshals transport prisoners between the prison and the courthouse throughout the United States.

On a typical day, the Marshals would take Raniere at about 7:30 am.

This meant he had already three and half hours of preparing and waiting, mainly in holding pens, before he even left the prison.

Keep in mind that Raniere, the defendant’s experience, was not unique. Every innocent until proven guilty defendant undergoes the same experience.

After the Marshals arrived, they would shackle him and other defendants headed to court that day. Then he and the other court-bound prisoners in handcuffs and shackles boarded a prisoner transport bus, with blacked out windows – and headed to court.

Agents of the U.S. Marshal Service outside a Federal Courthouse.

Agents of the U.S. Marshal Service outside a Federal Courthouse.

Raniere would board the Eastern District bus, shackled down, and the bus would depart. The drive was about a four-mile journey from the MDC in Sunset Park to Downtown Brooklyn where the Courthouse is.

The bus would drive under the Federal Courthouse into the parking garage.  The prisoners would then be escorted off the bus and into holding pens under the courthouse.

Keith would probably get to the courthouse at about 8:30 am.  He now had more than four hours logged in, either in shackles or in a holding pen.

He would then wait in the basement holding pen until it was time to go upstairs.

Court usually starts between nine and 10 am.  So when the time came, Raniere would be brought upstairs to the floor where his trial was held and be led to another pen next to Judge Garaufis’ courtroom.

If he was lucky, he might get a chance to talk to his lawyers before he goes into the courtroom.

The Ceremonial Courtroom in the Eastern District of New York Courthouse

Once Raniere entered the courtroom, he would have his handcuffs taken off. But he would have two marshals seated nearby, watching him to ensure he did not make any sudden movements.

Keith Raniere Trial Prosecution

Prosecutrix Moira Kim Penza presents an exhibit to the jury at the trial of Keith Alan Raniere.

By the time he was actually in the courtroom, and ready for the trial, he logged in between five and six hours of pure hell.

As for food, his only morning meal was a bologna sandwich and an apple.

Keith did this every day for six weeks during his trial.

During the lunch break, the Marshalls would escort Raniere back to the holding pen by the courtroom, and he would get a bologna sandwich and an apple for lunch.

Judge Garaufis denied Raniere bail thrice.

The return trip is almost as hard as the trip to the court. While court ends at 4 or 5 pm, it takes a couple hours to get back to your cell.

By that time, there is no more hot food. Your dinner is another jail sandwich.

For Raniere, it was sub-par nutrition every day during the six week trial.

Trying to press your right to trial in the Federal System is a hard thing to do. I give Raniere credit because he told me as much when I met him on numerous occasions when I was traveling to court and we got a chance to talk.

We commiserated about the harsh conditions, and because we had the same prosecutrix Moira Penza of The Vow fame.

Raniere and Luthmann's shared prosecutrix, Moira Penza.

Raniere and Luthmann’s shared AUSA Moira Penza.

As for Moira Penza, Keith and I talked a lot about how we both believed she was engaged in some very sharp practice.

Keith has filed a Rule 33 motion alleging the FBI tampered with evidence. He alleges, and the facts seem to support him, that the FBI planted child pornography and other adult photos to make it appear they were all in a file together on a hard drive. They may have deleted other items, changed metadata, and manipulated evidence on the hard drive and a camera card.

In the Federal System, and in most systems, the buck stops with the lead prosecutor. A prosecutor exercises great control over FBI agents, so there is a strong relationship between a federal agent and a prosecutor.

If a federal agent does anything untoward, it is a constitutional error.

If they engage in misconduct, the prosecutor cannot just throw that agent under the bus. The buck stops with the head prosecutor.

Head prosecutors are imputed with the actions of their agents. In the NXIVM case, Penza was the head prosecutor. She was also the head prosecutor in my case and many other cases.

If there was misconduct in the Raniere case, what kind of misconduct was it?

Experts reviewed the digital evidence.

Dr. J. Richard Kiper: “In my 20 years experience with the FBI, I have never seen data manipulation, evidence tampering anything like this on this scale.

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

Steve Abrams Esq, cyber lawyer: “This is the most serious tampering of evidence that I’ve ever seen.”

Wayne B. Norris expert witness for digital forensics: “It’s inescapable that the FBI proactively created fake evidence.”

Stephen Bunting; Computer Forensics expert. “It was changed while in FBI custody, it was changed, it was modified and was altered.”

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.”

Let’s assume for a second that these experts are right. Suppose FBI agents went rogue and planted evidence to ensure Raniere, a bad guy went away.

They probably did not need to plant evidence to convict him, given how the deck is stacked against criminal defendants in Federal Court.

But maybe they would only have sentenced Keith to 20 years instead of 120 years.

Is evidence seized by the FBI secure from tampering and destruction by Federal Special Agents?

Is evidence seized by the FBI secure from tampering and destruction by Federal Special Agents?

If Raniere’s claims of evidence manipulation are substantiated, many hard questions are raised for the Federal Government.

What is the problem with Federal Agents putting their thumbs on the scale of justice for a guy you “know” is guilty and you are going to convict anyway? Isn’t law enforcement supposed to put away “bad dudes”?

If this activity is condoned, do we even have a constitutional republic anymore?

If there was tampering, did Moira Penza or anyone else in the Eastern District of New York US Attorney’s Office or somebody of authority in the FBI involved know?

Moria and others may have had a motivation to look the other way. Winning this case led to big things for Penza and others.

And if it happened in the NXIVM case, did it happen in other cases?

Are these practices still happening?


In the next segment, Richard Luthmann discusses Keith Raniere’s pending Writ of Mandamus with the Second Circuit US Appeals Court seeking to disqualify Judge Nicholas Garaufis. Additionally, Luthmann discusses the troubling conditions at the MDC-Brooklyn and New York Attorney General Letitia James’ fight for social justice.

About the author

Richard Luthmann

Richard Luthmann is a writer, commentator, satirist, and investigative journalist with degrees from Columbia University and the University of Miami. Once a fixture in New York City and State politics, Luthmann is a recovering attorney who lives in Southwest Florida and a proud member of the National Writers Union. 

For Article Ideas, Tips, or Help: or call 239-287-6352.


Click here to post a comment

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

  • Some food for thought.

    When reading “Rock Around The Block’s” 2 responses to Richard below —- I’m getting a sense of deja vu.

    Rock’s tone kinda reminds me of the same childish poster who visits FR from time to time, who goes out of his way to refer to Frank as “Frankie” —- while always making snide remarks about Frank’s federal legal case, while always seeming to revel in Frank’s legal misfortunes.

    Could be a coincidence.

    Could be that Rock is just an imitator.

    Calling Richard “Dicky” in one post, while reveling in his past legal misfortunes (deriving pleasure from calling him a convicted felon) in another post —- is a rather childish attitude which mimics the ‘Frankie’ idiot.

    Methinks that Rock may not be right in the head, from an emotional viewpoint.

    Have a good day. 🙂

    • As ever, Bangkok, I’m sorry to have to tell you you’re barking up the wrong tree. Not me. I have far more respect for Frank. I’m not even familiar with that poster you mention.

      Like tricky Nicki, Tricky Dicky loves his conspiracy theories and attempts to cast doubt on a Rock solid conviction by summarizing the reports of a bunch of “experts” paid handsomely to give credence to dubious evidence.

      Let’s just see what the court decides.

  • The govt plants evidence all the time. They probably get away with 99.99% of the time. FBI is rotten from the inside.p

    • Seems like ‘Reds under the bed’ has been replaced by ‘Feds under the bed’. I’m shaking in my shoes.

  • You can find Antifa at pedophile-pushing drag queen events. Antifa are the one’s in the black masks with guns protecting the criminals. (of course other criminals like to protect their pedophile antifa friends saying “oh antifa doesn’t exist” Elon Musk removed the Antifa accounts on Twitter when he banned child porn. All the antifa disappeared at the same time!

      • The real question is: why does Antifa attack people over drag queen events? Not only in US but Canda
        It’s happening in multiple countries at the same time… looks like a coordinated globalist agenda. There are multiple videos showing the drag queens acting like pedophiles, encouraging children to put their hands near their groins, etc. Grooming them. Why is it so important to Antifa to violently defend grooming of children? Who is supporting Antifa financially? Why is grooming children so important to Antifa? Why are you trying to gaslight people into thinking “Antifa doesn’t exist” when there are hundreds of videos and your activities all over social media. Why does the trusted news media support Antifa gaslighting? Again, all looks like a globalist agenda supported by wealthy billionaires who also support WEF and WHO agendas.

  • Hi Richard,

    Thanks again for another fantastic and informative article. From a convicted person’s standpoint, what is the legal procedure for proving prosecutorial misconduct after the trial has ended? Can there be legal consequences for a prosecutor if prosecutorial misconduct (e.g. FBI evidence tampering) is proven? Can prosecutors go to prison due to misconduct and how frequently does it happen? I asked the questions generally, but I have the Raniere case in mind as the context.

    My next question will be a personal one. You don’t have to answer this. You mentioned in another article that you were wrongfully accused and convicted in a politically motivated hit-job. Do you think that Moira Penza engaged in prosecutorial misconduct in your trial? I got curious because you mentioned that it might have happened to others, too, in this article.

    • Second part first: Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus is a Latin maxim meaning “false in one thing, false in everything.” At common law, it is the legal principle that a witness who testifies falsely about one matter is not credible to testify about any matter.

      If Moira & Co. cheated in the Raniere case, I believe it creates a presumption of irregularity in every case she touched. Suppose the Raniere tampering is proved, and there is even a scintilla of evidence that there were shenanigans going on in another one of Moira’s cases. In that case, the Government should bear the burden of showing why the questionable conviction should stand.

      A prosecutor who has nothing to hide invites inspection of “how the sausages were made.” Moria hasn’t done this with any of her convictions. She instead tries to remind everyone what a “bad dude” her prosecutrial targets were. But the procedure is separate from substance. The worst dude ever has to walk to protect the constitutional structure if the Government cheated procedurally. Nothing less than a total vacatur of the indictment in question is an adequate remedy.

      Do I think Moria cheated? You bet. Do I think she did so in my case? Probably. And based on the shocking Raniere claims, if he is successful in the EDNY, I may very bring my own motion. I have to wait and see if Raniere’s claims are proven because that effects the evidentiary presumption that I, or anyone potentially aggrieved by Moira’s prosecutorial misconduct, will have or must argue for.

      To answer your first question, Prosecutors lie all the time, and generally with impunity. There are plenty of articles about this topic. One from the Huffington Post a few years ago is on point:

      Of course, the vast majority of prosecutors behave ethically. But even one bad actor in a prosecutor’s office can have a significant impact on countless defendants and cases. And based on the data that is available, it’s clear that there are more than just a few bad apples.

      “There are disturbing indications that a non-trivial number of prosecutors — and sometimes entire prosecutorial offices — engage in misconduct that seriously undermines the fairness of criminal trials,” Kozinski wrote last year in a landmark paper critiquing the criminal justice system. “The misconduct ranges from misleading the jury, to outright lying in court and tacitly acquiescing or actively participating in the presentation of false evidence by police.”

      The trouble is identifying the misconduct. Because so much of what prosecutors do is behind the scenes — gathering evidence and working with police and investigators as they build their case — malfeasance is often not discovered until years, sometimes decades, after a person has been convicted. In many cases, it’s never discovered at all.

      But the data that is available on prosecutorial misconduct clearly points to a problem that is steady and widespread. Misconduct by police and prosecutors occurs with such frequency that it has become one of the primary causes of wrongful convictions, according to the Innocence Project.

      Frank Parlato is covering the prosecutorial misconduct in my New York State case. There, Special Prosecutor Eric Nelson suborned the perjury of a sitting New York State Supreme Court Justice, Ronald Castoria, Jr., in order to procure a bogus indictment:

      On-Point Evidence of Judge Castorina’s Perjury in Grand Jury Proceeding

      The procedure to combat prosecutorial misconduct starts with a motion to the Court laying out the misconduct. But as the HuffPost article says, these motions come years after the fact because the prosecutors’ and governmental agents’ activities are shrouded in secrecy. Often, these motions are not brought unless it’s a capital case (Innocence Project), or the person has financial backing (Raniere). Most of the time, the bad apples get away with it.

      Will there be consequences? Especially here, where apparently felonies have been committed? I hope so.

      Stay tuned.

      • I’m so shocked that a convicted guilty person who lost their criminal case thinks the other side cheated. Gee I wonder why Raniere and the deadenders think the same way too? Was the jury fooled to? Was Raniere’s million dollar lawyers incompetent? We don’t care about your superficial interaction with Raniere for some months in jail or whatever. That gives you no special depth to your viewpoint concerning him nor the actions he committed against his victims. This entire article is in line with the idiotic deadenders prosecutorial misconduct BS and the alleged “woe is me” mistreatment of the justice system against the charlatan.

      • “Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus”. Love the Latin, Dick. What about convicted felons writing about stuff which is pure speculation?

  • Why were you in MDC, Richard?

    Were you found guilty of your crimes?

    The article says the former attorney.

    This leads me to believe that you lost your ability to practice law due to being a convicted criminal.

    I’m sure prison isnt a nice place to be. It houses people found guilty of crimes.

    Some are not guilty
    Some minor crimes
    Some are in for life for horrible crimes

    Its a place of might rules
    Not a place people want to go

    But people gamble, they won’t get caught.

    When they do
    Prison shouldn’t be a nice place to hang out
    They shouldn’t wish to go back back.

    Some people haven’t broken the law, trying to “just get by, a day at a time.” They work 2-3 jobs to care for their kids, and their housing isn’t great. They have to deal with the slum lord.

    Did you or do you fight for these families for better housing, Richard?

    Most people don’t feel sorry because Raniere spent long days going to trial, eating a cold sandwich and an apple for his meals.

    Hell there are kids oit there who dont get breakfast or school lunch.

    It’s more food than Raniere’a DOS women got in a day.

    Can you honestly tell us his attorney team wasn’t allowed to bring him food in while they met with him?

    No one knows where Raniere’s FBI tampering experts got their information.

    Did they got it from the DOJ directly?

    Did they get it through a carrier of one of Raniere’s attorneys, i.e., Suneel?

    We don’t know what they are basing their opinions on.

    • And it’s a worse place when the Feds lie, cheat, and flush the Constitution down the toilet bowl to keep you there, Moira.

      I know first hand that lawyers don’t and can’t bring their clients food in the Feds. The US Marshals and US Courts Security Service will not allow it. How fucked up is that? So if you’re the person in the cage, you are hungry, and some asshole denies you food, how do you ever exist as a functioning member of society ever again? Can you? Or do you dream about the children of the US Marshals and US Courts Security Service writhing in pain before they die from hunger? Is that your sustenance?

      I went to the MDC because of political fuckery. I was kept there because of Moria & Co’s legal fuckery, enshrined in the American laws, the Bail Reform Act of 1984 being the chief among them.

      Prison isn’t a nice place to be. And the Government and each and every one of the DOJ and BOP employees go out of their way to turn something unpleasant into something inhumane. When prisoners are released, the vast majority are Government-hating sociopaths – because prisons made them that way. Even the innocent ones.

      “If you prick us, do we not bleed? if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?”. – (Act III, scene I).” ― William Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice

      • “ When prisoners are released, the vast majority are Government-hating sociopaths …”

        It seems you are outing yourself here.

        • “Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster… for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you.” ― Friedrich W. Nietzsche

          There are monsters everywhere.

      • Raniere is an example of inhumane treatment and abuse of the legal system for decades from the other side.
        That’s why so many don’t feel sorry for him.
        Why do you think Raniere was so hell-bent on getting people arrested on criminal charges by lying about what they did to him?
        Now prison is such a horrible place. He didn’t seem to care when the shoes were on the other foot.
        It was to torture these people if he could only make charges stick.
        It was Raniere’s idea for Clare to press charges against Frank because he exposed Raniere for the theft he was being. Clare was too brainwashed to understand.
        How about all the litigation Raniere has put people through, and he lost those cases? Because he had the Bronfman money to do so? These cases were made up of lies.
        Raniere, along with his top leaders, convinced the parents of a young woman she had done horrible things, and she had to be kept in her room until she figured out her breach. There was nothing to figure out. This came out at Raniere’s trial. This woman spent two years in this room with no papers to return to Mexico. Becuse she was attracted to another man.
        He loved to torture people, so who gives a fuck if he’s not in club med?
        Had he not run to Mexico, maybe he’d been able to get bail.
        He always thinks he is more intelligent and has a better plan.
        His luck finally ran out.
        His behavior has caught up with him.
        Let’s hope he spent the rest of his life behind bars.

    • “No one knows where Raniere’s FBI tampering experts got their information.”, someone knows or we wouldn’t be talking about it.

  • Boo-hoo, Raniere had to get up at 4:15 am every day M-F, for six weeks.

    Many of us have to get up that early every day of our lives. It’s called working for a living.

    And what did Raniere do on those days, after having his beauty sleep curtailed? Sat on his ass all day. That ain’t workin’, to quote the Dire Straits song.

    Cry me a fuckin’ river.

    Raniere could have saved himself all this bother and inconvenience had he not, y’know, committed a bunch of felonies. Oh but I forget, he’s innocent. He was framed. By the big bad government. The same tale every convicted criminal tells.


    • We all know that you’re a fascist. But the US Constitution doesn’t allow punishment prior to the adjudication of guilt.

      The US Supreme Court said so in Bell v. Wolfish.

      But that case only addressed “short term detention.” There is a legal fiction that pre-trial detention is “short-term.” But it’s not. It lasts years. Public Pretenders waive speedy trial. Defendants rot in detention, with poor nutrition, no fresh air, no exercise, and the constant fear of violence and anal rape.

      As for you Aristotle, if you dealt with one week of what Raniere (or anyone) had to endure in the Brooklyn MDC, you would be curled up in a ball, sucking your thumb, and crying for mommy. But then, you might enjoy it!

      Those in power have to remember their history. Mistreatment of the peasants and plebeians led to the guillotine in France. January 6 was but a burp compared to what is coming if we don’t course correct. And the treatment of pre-trial detainees is just one example of the degeneration of our constitutional republic.

      • Not a “fascist” here (at least, I don’t believe I am). Your post was mostly about what Keith Raniere has endured. It’s a given that there are gross inequities within our legal system, pre-detention being among them.

        Unlike many of the people harmed by this travesty, KR had/has access to almost unlimited funds to ameliorate some of these, thanks to Bronfman $millions ie.he is no “peasant” nor “plebeian”. Thus, he did not have to endure what as you put it a “Public Pretender”. In fact, he had the best defense money could buy. Due to the fact that he was an expat fugitive when arrested, as well as the severity of his alleged crimes he was among the very few within his wealth class not afforded any level of freedom before trial e.g. bail, home detention etc. That was completely on him.

        As far as your caveat “Keep in mind that Raniere, the defendant’s experience, was not unique.” – so why even mention it?

          • I did not “make your point” – only in your mind. Your entire article does not concern itself one bit with the inequities POC experience within our legal system. In fact, you never even mention it once. In your phony outrage, you point your finger at others’ lack of empathy regarding this issue. You do opine KR’s utterly non-unique endurance travails during the trial. Talk about bait and switch. KR standing in for the poorest within our society is rich indeed. He’s a multi millionaire white man (however adept he was at hiding such), afforded all the luxuries they could never afford.

          • The fact that you believe a white man with property is somehow immune to the cruelty incident to the Federal Bureau of Prisons’s prisoner treatment regime shows that your virtue signaling deflects the electrical impulses from the two or three brain cells that you have remaining. I made my point, and you made it thrice.

          • ‘… you point your finger at others’ lack of empathy regarding this issue. You do opine KR’s utterly non-unique endurance travails during the trial. Talk about bait and switch. KR standing in for the poorest within our society is rich indeed. He’s a multi millionaire white man (however adept he was at hiding such), afforded all the luxuries they could never afford.’

            Couldn’t agree more.

  • How did these alleged to be “experts” come into possession of illegal child porn?

    Did they get a copy of it from Suneel Chakrovarty, aka, Isaac Edwards? Who authorized the COC for the data this disk contained?

    • It’s practically impossible.

      Lawyers and judges like to say the most important right is the right to counsel. But detained defendants have little meaningful access to counsel.

      Moreover, anyone who relies wholly on their lawyer is a fool. The charged defendant knows the most about their case, what actually happened, and where to find exculpatory and exonerating evidence.

      The fact is, most lawyers are overworked. Public Pretenders have overfull caseloads. Private attorneys do not spend ample time on the case because of the economics of the practice of law unless you have untold millions to spend.

      The sad fact is, defendants must rely upon themselves first and foremost in the bastardized U.S. justice system of 2023. And pre-trial detainees don’t even have access to Google, have to pay for limited email service, and have to get their buttholes searched every time they meet with a lawyer. This is the only way to actually “talk” with your lawyers because the BOP records phone calls and reads emails, all of which get handed over to the prosecutors. (Unless, of course, the DOJ has listening devices in the attorney meeting rooms, which I wouldn’t put past them.)

      If George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson were around today, a slew of DOJ Officials, FBI Special Agents and Administrators, and Assistant US Attorneys would be strung up for the only crime defined in the US Constitution: treason.

      Step 1 would be to fix the Bail Reform Act of 1984, which basically rewards prosecutors for lying to Federal Court Judges, and allows them to do so with impunity. I talk about this in part of the radio appearance, and a write up on that segment in forthcoming.

    • Not sure Raniere would have bothered preparing for trial whether he was in the MDC or under house arrest in some luxury pad, so arrogantly convinced was he of his transcendent purity

  • Penza is guilty as hell. She ran the charade. Withheld the evidence until just prior to trial. The experts have valid and precise claims.

    No one will look at Penza but they should. She’s a sick bitch.

    • She had every motivation. As long as she could “Get Raniere,” she had a multi-million dollar partnership at a Democrat Party Factory of a law firm, where the first case she took in private practice was to sue Donald Trump. But soon enough, everyone will see what’s under the fish net stockings.

    • “No one will look at Penza but they should. She’s a sick bitch.”
      In that photo she’s more of a slick dish. Can’t stop looking at it!

  • What’s shocking is the hell people are out through BEFORE they are even convicted of a crime.

    Innocent until proven guilty is a lie.

    We need to own this lie, and cease pretending to be an ethical and lawful process.

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.” He also appeared in "Branded and Brainwashed: Inside NXIVM, and was 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 premieres on May 22, 2022.

IMDb — Frank Parlato

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