FMN, a frequent and intelligent commenter, wrote about Dr. Danielle Roberts, as a comment in response to the article, Alanzo Defends Dr. Danielle Roberts in Her Quest to Get Medical License Back.

The civil case of Edmondson, et al. v Raniere, et al, is at its early stages.

According to the Albany Business Review, local businessman and chef, Mike Fortin , is selling Joe’s Tavern, an 86 year old institution in suburban Albany, in a place called Cohoes He plans to relocate his business with a new restaurant at 1475 Route 9 in Halfmoon, New York, in a 4,000 square foot, v

As Frank Report readers know, Marc Elliot is suing STARZ TV and Lions Gate, the owners of STARZ, for their allegedly defamatory portrayal of him in the four-part docuseries Seduced.

The Ambrose case is attracting attention.

Allen ‘Alanzo’ Stanfield has a lot to say on many topics. Here are some of his comments on Dr. Danielle Roberts’ right to fight to win back her medical license. These thoughts came from various comments he made with slight editing and arranging by topic.

Some readers think I should never allow my friend Roger Stone to be published on Frank Report. I disagree. He has a lot to say and the good thing is people either agree or disagree with him and that means a lot of clicks for me. Thank you in advance for understanding.

When they’re with you, they are with you.

This is a statement by Dr. Danielle Roberts. Those who would like to help her financially or otherwise can find contact information at the bottom of this article.

This is the Ambrose Papers #12.

Vacatur is a Latin word used in American law. It means “ it is vacated .” A rule or order that sets aside a judgment – such as a judgement of conviction – or annuls a proceeding – is vacatur.

Edward Kim has 30 years of experience in capital markets, corporate advisory, public policy and online media. He graduated from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology with a BS in Materials Science and Engineering. Mr. Kim is also shocked at what Connecticut Family Court has done to the children

Keith Alan Raniere’s new attorney, Joseph M. Tully, filed a Supplemental Appeal Brief on November 5th. The deadline was October 20th.

By Mark Question

By K.R. Claviger

The adorable Bronfman sisters, Clare and Sara, those enablers of the Raniere machine, are the only big money defendants in Sarah Edmondson, et al, Plaintiffs, v. Keith Raniere, et al. Defendants,

NXIVM news keeps coming in.Keith Alan Raniere has a new appellate attorney. He is Joseph Tully, the same attorney who is representing Marc Elliot in his defamation lawsuit against STARZ and Lions Gate.

By Heidi Hutchinson

It would be fair to say she’s doubling down on DOS.

An anonymous commenter, whom I call Mark Question, asked a series of questions in a previous post Suneel Won’t Answer Tough Questions, so Frank Has to Start Asking and Investigating . Now, M ark has additional questions for Suneel and myself.

If Suneel Chakravorty is wrong about everything else in his support of Raniere, in his belief in his goodness, in his contention that the US DOJ unfairly convicted him, that the judge was biased — he may not be wrong about his expert: James Richard Kiper Ph.D.

Halloween came and went this year, as it always does. It’s about the night, the darkness, and wild winds —rustling through the trees, and unseen cats and smoke coming out of chimneys, autumn leaves and candles lit and pumpkins plump to herald the harvest and trick or treat.

I wrote in a post that if Raniere “espied” Camila “as a child and groomed her… to take advantage of her innocence and purity, I would hang that asshole to the sour apple tree and laugh at him dangling.”

This is a blog interested in the truth, which is, as it has been observed, “always fair.” I like to hear both sides of the question and a commenter who titled his/her comment only by “ We want to know”, and who I am calling Mark Question has some piquant comments about Suneel and questions for me.

A commenter, Animus Liber, making use of the testimony of Lauren Salzman, opines that the photos of Camila, when she was 27, whether revealing a scar or not, were collateral. These were not taken with a free will – or, as the Latin meaning of “ animus liber ” is – with a “free mind.”