Frank Parlato
OneTaste is seeking the return of its stolen documents, but the government refuses to turn them over.
And it may lead to trouble – for the prosecutors.
OneTaste Inc. attorney Paul Pelletier filed a “Motion for Return of Confidential Private Property and For Sanctions” against prosecutors at the US Attorney’s Office in Brooklyn.
Pelletier, a former prosecutor himself, was for more than 25 years, the senior-most financial fraud prosecutor at the Department of Justice. He believes the sanctions could include criminal charges against bad actors in the Brooklyn US Attorney’s Office and the FBI.
Pelletier wants US Magistrate Judge Robert M. Levy to order Brooklyn federal prosecutors to return documents stolen from OneTaste by its former IT contractor and seeks sanctions, including possibly criminal charges against the prosecution team.
EDNY Prosecutors Deny Review, Yet Hold Onto Stolen Documents
EDNY prosecutors admit they received the stolen documents but claim they don’t intend to use them and never looked at them during the three years they possessed them.
The EDNY charged OneTaste founder Nicole Daedone and former company executive Rachel Cherwitz with forced labor conspiracy in a one-count indictment in 2023. US District Judge Diane Gujarati has scheduled the trial for January.
The government says they won’t return the original documents stolen by former OneTaste IT contractor Mitch Aidelbaum but has shared scanned images of cell phone photos of the hacked documents, devoid of metadata, with the defendants Daedone and Cherwitz.
Complicating the issue is that the stolen documents have an “attorney-client privilege” marking on virtually every page.
Justice Department Ignored Filter Team Protocol, Says Pelletier
If documents are potentially protected as attorney-client privilege, the US Department of Justice internal policies and procedures require prosecutors to turn them over immediately to a “filter team” upon taking possession and before reviewing them.
A filter team, also known as a “taint team,” is typically composed of DOJ attorneys who are not involved in the investigation or prosecution of the case. Their role is to review seized materials and separate any privileged information before the investigative team can access the non-privileged materials to prevent the courts from disqualifying prosecutors or dismissing their cases on constitutional grounds.
This due process right of attorney-client privilege has been expressed in the 5th Circuit and quoted in this case: “Although the privilege may at times prevent the government from obtaining useful information, ‘this is the price we pay for a system that encourages individuals to seek legal advice and to make full disclosure to the attorney so that the attorney can render informed advice.'”
Prosecutors Claim Ignorance, OneTaste Suspects Deception
From a practical standpoint, a Justice Department filter team exists not to protect defendants’ due process rights but to prevent a judge from dismissing its case through prosecutors inadvertently (or deliberately) examining privileged evidence.
In their 2023 indictment, prosecutors in the EDNY allege Daedone and Cherwitz conspired from 2006-2018 to force OneTaste “members” to labor. Despite the alleged dozen-year conspiracy, prosecutors did not charge the women with forced labor, making it the first standalone conspiracy to commit forced labor in American legal history.
Defendants Rachel Cherwitz and Nicole Daedone stand charged with forced labor conspiracy, but not forced labor.
The Role of Witness #1 and Individual #13 in the Stolen Documents Saga
The evidence shows that prosecutors obtained the stolen documents in 2021. Still, it is unclear who gave them the documents first—the man who admittedly stole them or one of two individuals named in the government filings as Witness #1 and Individual #13.
Based on the filings, Witness #1 is a former OneTaste student, Andrew Cortado, who gave photographs of the stolen documents to another former student, Kara Cooper (Individual #13), who gave the pictures of the stolen documents to FBI Special Agent Elliot McGinnis.
The prosecution said in court filings that Cortado identified IT contractor Mitch Aidelbaum as a “possible source of the [privileged marked] document in [Cooper’s] possession.”
There may be more to the story.
Allegations of Misconduct:
Did the FBI Solicit Stolen Documents?
The prosecutors claim they “did not obtain any of the [privileged] materials through a search warrant'” and “did not knowingly seek privileged materials.”
Instead, they claim Cooper, a disgruntled former OneTaste student suing the company in a separate civil suit, “voluntarily” gave the photographs to the FBI.
Former prosecutor Pelletier suggests the prosecution’s story about Cooper might be a ruse to conceal the fact that an FBI agent solicited and obtained stolen, privileged documents from the man who stole them—Aidelbaum. When Cooper “voluntarily” offered the stolen documents, the FBI may have already possessed them, which suggests prosecutors may have deceived the court with their “wordsmithing.”
Pelletier: FBI Knew the Documents Were Stolen, Kept Them Anyway
Pelletier says, “Aidelbaum informed the Prosecution Team in late January of 2021 that he had unlawfully removed it from the laptop of a OneTaste executive and provided a copy to the Prosecution Team. The Prosecution Team’s efforts to distance themselves from knowing the criminal source of the privileged materials speaks volumes in this regard.”
The argument that this is all harmless error is open to debate.
Prosecutors Insist No Harm, Pelletier Says ‘Malfeasance’
The prosecution said they “have not reviewed, and do not intend to review those materials for use in [the trial of] Cherwitz.”
The defendants claim that “the vast majority of the indictment” came from the stolen privileged documents.
Pelletier said the prosecution not only refuses to turn over the original stolen documents but will not even turn over the JPEG images of the photos of the stolen documents, provided by Cooper “because the meta-data may expose further evidence of their ‘malfeasance.'”
Pelletier cites potential criminal conduct by prosecutors.
A Federal Crime? Failure to Report Stolen Documents to the Court
“Title 18 USC §4 makes it a federal crime to, with knowledge of the commission of a federal felony, fail to report it to a court,” Pelletier wrote.
“Certainly, if the Prosecution Team knew that the Privileged Marked Document was retrieved in violation of US computer crimes laws and… that there is no legal or evidentiary basis for the government to solicit or receive attorney client/work product privileged material, maybe the Prosecution Team can explain why such conduct would not amount to a separate criminal act sanctionable herein?”
Prosecutors’ Failure to Use Filter Team: A Strategic Move?
In their court filings, the prosecution has not addressed why they did not use a Filter Team or seek the Court’s permission to review the material.
“Perhaps it’s because a truthful answer to that question would have dramatic consequences beyond the relief sought in this petition,” Pelletier said in his filing.
OneTaste seeks a hearing on the matter. Magistrate Judge Levy has yet to issue a ruling.
In addition to OneTaste’s legal representative Pelletier, the defendant Daedone is represented by Jennifer Bonjean and Cherwitz is represented by Arthur Aidala, both prominent defense attorneys in the greater NYC area, who have handled high profile, nationally reported cases, almost guaranteeing the matter of will be fully reported.
This is a breaking story and more news is expected soon.
Read the documents at the heart of this issue:
Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist, media strategist, publisher, and legal consultant.
Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
Powerful turn of events. Thank you for such a thorough reporting. I look forward to more.
If the opposing counsel is inadvertently provided any document that clearly was not intended to be released, they’re to contact the opposing counsel, notify them and return the privileged document.
If only laws and Rules of professional conduct were followed.
It’s over. One Taste prevailed!
I love that you can be charged with conspiracy only. Basically you are sharing potentially criminal thoughts with another but void of an actual plan- ie no date, no targeted person, and no act of labor identified, these women are being charged with the alleged kernel of a shared thought… a seed with no roots nor reach.
Shameful.
1984.
Are prosecutors ever held accountable? The ENRON case was an outrage but the lies and deceit continue with impunity.
If these ladies weren’t wealthy they’d have pled out and would be in jail for decades.
If the jury is properly educated as to their role and rights, there will be no conviction.
Conspiracy to force labor without any known to be victims, no dates, no labor identified – what exactly were they conspiring to have anyone do????
Conspiracy to do… ? What?
This case is an embarrassment.
Shameful conduct by the prosecutors.
The prosecution jumped on Huets scandalous reporting without doing their own investigation. It was easier to accept the Bloomberg article and it’s been a disaster for everyone and only getting worse.
Are any of the “victims” without major credibility issues?
Looks like the prosecution is scraping the bottom of the barrel – thousands of people took classes and no complaints. There’s a handful that were dissatisfied and instead of moving along they chose to be recklessly vindictive.
But for the relationship between Huet and her housemate, there would be no case.
Sounds like a desperate prosecution
Onetaste: the Silicon Valley company where Nicole Daedone taught classes about a partnered clit stroking method she called Orgasmic Meditation.
Why no mention of the multiple defense attorneys connected to Keith Raniere.
because fuck Keith Raniere
Well well well… what an interesting turn of events!
Thanks for your dedication in reporting what mainstream media never will-
The credibility of their alleged victims continues to plummet based on FR investigations. Now two of the victims were part of stealing confidential documents? Screenshot or otherwise- the victims are desperate for a case.
They must have made a lot of money to get powerhouse attorneys.
Smoking Gun. The case should be over based on malfeasance.
Eyes on Judge Robert Levy…If he’s wise he’ll use this as an out to end the malicious prosecution. It’ll only get worse.
Sounds like a floundering prosecution team. Desperate to grasp onto anything to justify the time invested in a non-case. Driven into the ground by Huet and too arrogant to admit it.
Alec Baldwin just had a manslaughter case thrown out because the prosecution failed to turn over one single bullet. So based on that, I would be quite surprised if the docs in question here do NOT get thrown out. And afterwards, the remainder of the case sounds to me like a plain vanilla “fruit of the poisoned tree.” I would be floored if this goes to trial. In addition, NY prosecutors are now making Diddy their “du jour” celeb to take down, so perhaps they are ready to move on.