According to the latest motion filed by his attorney, Joseph Tully, the Department of Justice (DOJ) refuses to hand over four pieces of evidence to Keith Raniere’s defense team.

Raniere claims the evidence will prove his original trial was flawed due to the admission of falsified evidence.

The evidence includes camera card reports, hard drive file listings, and the examiner’s notes related to two critical pieces of digital evidence, a hard drive, and a camera card.

Raniere’s defense team alleges the government intentionally withheld this critical evidence during and before the trial and continues suppressing them despite requests.

Raniere retained experts, including four former FBI employees, who analyzed the available evidence and attested that they found definitive evidence of manipulation and falsification, with the most logical explanation being government involvement, the defense argues.

Specifically, Raniere claims the FBI manipulated and planted digital images on the camera card and hard drive to make it appear that he photographed 22 nude pictures of Camila when she was 15 years old and then retained them on a Western Digital hard drive.

Tully wants the additional evidence for an anticipated evidentiary hearing on the alleged FBI tampering in Raniere’s case and the possibility of a new trial – under his Rule 33 Motion.

All seven retained experts agree that each instance of alteration and manipulation supported the government’s trial narrative.  

By reviewing the critical evidence, Raniere’s experts can determine whether the hard drive and camera card manipulation occurred before or after the government imaged it.

The four items sought relate to the racketeering conspiracy charges. According to the government, the predicate acts of possession of child pornography and sexual exploitation were “at the heart” of their racketeering conspiracy.

Tully wrote in his motion, “the government’s refusal to disclose these items forces Mr. Raniere to bring this supplemental motion now, requesting an order for the disclosure of these four pieces of exculpatory evidence forthwith.”

The list:  

1 Camera Card Report of April 11, 2019

A forensic copy of the camera card [CF] dated April 11, 2019, and the corresponding FTK log file.

2 Camera Card reports of June 11, 2019

A forensic copy of the CF card dated June 11, 2019, and the corresponding FTK log file.

With the camera card and the two FTK reports, Raniere’s experts can examine the content and metadata of the 37 new files that appeared on the June 11, 2019, FTK report, which were not on the April 11, 2019, FTK report of the same camera card.

This could possibly determine how and when some manipulation was done, including what tools were used. 

According to Tully, if the government had disclosed the evidence before the trial, the defense could have shown the camera card as incompetent evidence and excluded it from the trial.

The government’s failure to provide the forensic copies of the camera card, which were analyzed by two FBI forensic examiners on separate occasions, once during the trial, prevented them from discovering evidence manipulation and presenting proof during the trial.

3 Hard Drive File Listing

The CSV file listing for the image of the Western Digital hard drive taken on September 19, 2018.

By reviewing the hard drive’s file index list, Raniere’s experts may determine whether the manipulation on the hard drive occurred before or after the government imaged it.

4 CART Examination Notes and FTK Log Files

CART [Comuter Analysis Response Team] Examiner SFE Stephen Flatley presumably took examination notes when he inspected the camera card for the Canon camera.

These notes, and the corresponding FTK log files, are needed to determine whether the 37 new files were added after SFE Flatley analyzed the camera card or existed beforehand. 

Most Heinous Racketeering Acts

The jury in Raniere’s trial found that the government proved all 11 racketeering acts, including acts two, three, and four – possession of child pornography and sexual exploitation of a child.

These three acts were the most severe against Raniere and the only ones that involved a minor.

Raniere’s defense further argues that adding acts two, three, and four, in a second superseding indictment just before the trial impacted every aspect of the trial. After the child porn and sexual abuse racketeering acts were added, all of Raniere’s co-defendants requested severances and accepted plea bargains.

Tully thinks the FBI should want to turn the evidence over to the defense.

He writes in his motion, “The FBI… should have a clear interest in understanding how, when, and why evidence in its custody was tampered with and by which agents – not only to vindicate Mr. Raniere’s civil rights but to protect itself from future incidences of illegal misconduct and attendant appeals…

“There is no reason at all for the government here to continue to withhold from Mr. Raniere these four evidentiary items which were used to convict him of the most heinous allegations against him, where, not only does he persists in his absolute innocence, but such innocence is bolstered by reputable forensic experts who have affirmed that further testing of the four requested evidentiary items could, given the circumstances of the crimes and the evidence marshaled against Mr. Raniere at trial, establish to a certainty that he actually is factually innocent of the crimes for which he was convicted… 

“Further, Mr. Raniere was deprived of the ability to adequately confront his accusers – the government’s FBI witnesses – about their relation to the evidence manipulation. He was also deprived of the ability to present experts to show that the only two pieces of digital evidence used to prove the most heinous of the allegations against him, the camera card and the hard drive, were not only incompetent but also manufactured through government malfeasance… 

“Such heinous violations of fundamental Constitutional rights would upend the entirety of Mr. Raniere’s case and necessitate a new trial, if not an outright dismissal of all charges.

“Further, the government’s case at a retrial would be severely hampered by the disqualification of the twenty-two alleged contraband photos, the camera card where the twenty-two photos were alleged to have originated, and the Western Digital hard disc drive where they were alleged to have been stored. This is not to mention the difficulty of proffering testimony from FBI agents who either refuse to testify by invoking their Fifth Amendment rights or who bear convictions for involvement in a criminal conspiracy to tamper with the specific evidence at issue in this case.”

Frank Parlato