Kristin Keeffe: Why Clare Bronfman Lies

In a recent post, Bronfman Sisters’ Crucial Role: The Financial Backbone of Yellow NXIVM at the Heart of the Lawsuit, Frank Report discussed two sisters who caused so much harm to so many.

They are the real targets of the federal civil lawsuit, Edmondson v Raniere, and rightfully so,

These two ladies caused more harm than all the other NXIVM players, besides Keith Raniere, put together. While Clare stews in prison, her sister, Sara, escaped to Europe and lives the high life, oblivious to the people she harmed or how she and Raniere used her money to destroy lives.

Let us focus on Clare Bronfman for a moment and hear from Kristin Keeffe, who has written the following:

Why Clare Bronfman Lies

By Kristin Keeffe

Many people familiar with Clare Bronfman and the NXIVM saga have asked me over the years, “Why did Clare do the things she did?”

In 2011, after a year of trying to leave Clare and NXIVM, I accepted a position back, working for her part-time. My salary was so little I could barely keep the lights on, but it was enough to pay for food while I tried to figure out a better exit strategy from the group long term.

My primary responsibility was to prepare for the Yuri Plyam trial, which involved the theft of Clare and Sara Bronfman’s assets in Los Angeles in their company Precision Development LLC.

Frank Parlato had brilliantly uncovered the theft, and recovered much of the assets three years earlier. 

Clare had zero first-hand knowledge of the underlying facts supporting the launch of the suit, and I had handled all related litigation matters for her with her attorneys after Frank left her employment in 2008.

Although I had been out of her employ for a year, the case couldn’t go to trial without my help.

Years before, I had asked myself, “How is it possible Keith didn’t know about this – Yuri’s $10 million embezzlement from Precision Development?” I dismissed the question and moved on at the time.

In major litigations, it’s common for emails, phone records, bank records, meeting notes, etc., to become “discovery” in the case in search of relevant evidence to prove claims. Part of my job was to analyze and annotate all such documentation and present my findings to the attorneys.

Studying Precision v. Plyam was eye-opening. When I read the history of communications between Keith Raniere and Yuri and what was going on with the real estate business before Frank’s takeover, which halted the thefts, I found most of what Keith had told me prior did not match the evidence. He had known, at least in part, what Yuri was up to and didn’t care.

The case went to trial, and I was not asked to testify, which I didn’t give much thought to. I was told Clare was the star witness for Precision, and after several weeks, the jury rendered a $10 million judgment against the Plyams. Deservedly so. 

Long after, I read the transcript of Clare’s testimony. It shocked me. Under oath, she completely stepped into my shoes on all matters relating to Frank and the case’s inception. She boldly lied, even about things that took place while she was in a remote village in the Himalayas (unreachable by phone!) that were impossible for her to witness. Unsurprisingly, her testimony was all over the place.

When was Frank hired? For what, by whom, what was he paid, why he left her employ, and the existence of any underlying documentation to support her statements was highly inaccurate or flat-out wrong. This was because Clare didn’t know. She was pretending.

Had the Plyams’ attorneys done a better job investigating Clare’s early involvement in Precision, they could have impeached and thoroughly discredited her on the stand. Still, matters relating to Frank were not material to the case or their focus. What was material was proving the thefts, and the Plyams did steal.

So why did Clare lie? She did not need to lie. I could have testified to matters pre-dating her.

 Clare doesn’t lie out of necessity, she lies for sport. Keith does too.

In 2014, my son and I ran away from Clare and Keith with only the clothes on our backs. Leading up to that departure, though, I read the work of Dr. Robert Hare, which put my history with Clare in a whole new context. Dr. Hare, a Canadian forensic psychologist, is a pioneer and expert in studying psychopaths. He is a long-time advisor to the FBI’s Child Abduction and Serial Murder Investigative Resources Center.

Dr. Hare wrote two books, Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us (1993) and Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work (2006) with Paul Babiak.

Dr. Hare discusses the personality characteristics of psychopaths in his books and how to recognize them in the workplace. He developed the Psychopathic Checklist—Revised (PCL-R), a widely used diagnostic tool for assessing psychopathy. 

When I read his books, I realized Clare and Keith exhibited many psychopathic personality traits.

Yet with Clare, one trait, a hallmark of psychopathy, stands out based on my experience with her. It’s called “Duping Delight”. 

Duping Delight is the perverse pleasure a psychopath gets from lying and getting away with it, especially if it involves harming, stealing, or getting unfair control over another person. However, it is also lying for lying’s sake.

Unfortunately for her victims, once Clare got a taste for the thrill of Duping Delight – lying under oath at a big trial, not getting caught, and winning her case – it became her new M.O. Her criminal behavior escalated quickly after that, to a devastating result.

Guest View