Keith Raniere has written from prison his analyses of his codefendants, Nancy Salzman, Lauren Salzman, Clare Bronfman, Allison Mack and Kathy Russell. As readers know, all took plea deals, leaving him to stand trial alone.
He was convicted and sentenced to 120 years.
Other than Raniere, only Clare Bronfman has been sentenced – to 81 months. The other four await sentencing.
Raniere wrote this eight-part series from prison.
This is Part 1. It deals with his view of why those who attacked him and Nxivm will not be able to admit they are wrong despite what he says they destroyed and how he was blameless and his community was very good.
Since I opposed Raniere, and as some say, had a hand in bringing him down, some will find it odd that I am publishing his articles.
I think there is good reason to do so. If it is largely because of me that he is in prison now, then the least I can do is hear what he has to say, from prison.
Additionally, it is largely because of him that his five codefendants were convicted. He was the leader. He called the shots. Every one of them committed the crimes they were convicted of at his behest and probably every one of them would not be in prison or headed to prison if they had never met him.
Keith Raniere with Allison Mack.
It is, therefore, of interest to readers, I am sure, to hear what he now says about his codefendants. Two of them turned against them and cooperated with the prosecution [Allison Mack and Lauren Salzman].
Some say that Frank Report should never publish anything by Raniere [or his supporters] for it may corrupt minds and he does not deserve to be heard because he is a criminal. They argue it will hurt his victims and encourage his followers.
Others argue that everything he says is likely to be a lie, a manipulation of the people. That may be true. But discerning readers will be able to judge this.
To date, I have published more than 5,000 stories attacking Raniere and Nxivm, including numerous stories on each of his codefendants – and I have reported extensively on their plea deals and his trial.
Not to publish the central figure’s written views of his codefendants, who were his followers, would seem to be a colossal failure to present the entire story.
Of course, Raniere is saying he is innocent. What else would he say? He is also saying this after his conviction in a trial where he did not testify on his own behalf or put on any sort of defense. This is being published prior to the sentencing of four of his codefendants. It is of course relevant.
Since Raniere claims each of his co-defendants is innocent and why he thinks so, I think this is worth hearing even if everything he says is calculated to produce a result other than the obvious.
For those who are simple-minded, please heed the following:
People Who Are Easily Brainwashed Should Not Read Further!
Part 1
By Keith Raniere
In recent studies, scholars have estimated that up to 27% of defendants who plead guilty may be factually innocent. This means that pleas are taken not by virtue, but as the lesser of two evils: the choice between the pain of going through trial and the pain of agreeing to a plea. This choice has little to do with truth.
A person can be innocent of the charges against them, yet the fear of the imperfect nature of our justice system (and a much longer sentence), compels this person to plea, taking a lesser sentence to be done with it. Nearly one out of three pleas may be taken under this type of duress.
There is an important psychological theory called Cognitive Dissonance.
This model helps describe actions and motivations during the aftermath of plea and other decisions in criminal proceedings.
Take the following innocuous situation: I am presented with two items for the same purchase price — say a toaster and a blender, both $50 — and I rate their desirability identically at five on a scale from one to ten.
Once I make a choice, I create an internal dissonance: the uncertainty my choice was best. Cognitive Dissonance theory says as time passes, to resolve this dissonance, I gather data to support the correctness of my decision. I seek, select, and filter data tending to show the option I chose was the better, and the option I did not choose worse.
If I am asked to rate these same two items in the future, I will tend to rate my purchase higher — say a six — and the option I did not choose lower, more like a four. If we raise the purchase price to $1000, the effect becomes even stronger: we are no longer merely worried about a $50 mistake, the stakes are much higher. The greater the downside of a wrong decision, the more profound the effect (the motivation and strategies we use to “prove” to ourselves we chose well).
This also means the more we act based on a choice, the less likely we will ever choose the opposite — even if offered the option. This is especially true with destruction: although the receiver of destruction has plenty of motivation to question choices, the doer of destruction has the opposite.
An extreme illustration of this comes to us through the allegory of vampires:
One particular variation allows the vampire to switch on and off their humanity (conscience). Once switched off, the rekindling of their humanity requires facing all the conscienceless deeds done thenceforth in the moment it is switched back on.
In one instance, a vampire had killed loved ones and relatives in an especially cruel way. How would it be to wake up one day, as if from a dream, to “remember” you had cruelly destroyed those you love? Many people would rather not wake up. This is the sad reality of those who destroy much, yet are incorrect in their assumptions: they have a strong motivation not to see their mistakes.
Keith Raniere was the ethicist of the Nxivm community.
When people are moral, they must exercise self-doubt with check and balance type practices and thinking.
One very essential practice for each important decision is answering, on an ongoing basis, the questions, “Am I wrong?” and “If I am wrong, how will I fix what I have done?”
If you do not believe you can fix what you do then you likely should not do it. Once done, if you cannot fix the results, there will be a very strong motivation to not see the possibility you made a wrong decision. As a guideline we teach, you should always care about whom you might be hurting with your decisions and actions — including people you might consider your opponents. You should always seek to redeem, not destroy.
The opposition to our community has destroyed:
NXIVM, a 20-year old company with over 17,000 past students from 33 countries. It has a full community, 2000+ hours of curriculum, coaches world leaders, and positive studies in ethics, IQ, and self-esteem. NXIVM seeks to inspire more joy in people’s lives independent of religion and political beliefs. Our goal is to provide our unique tool-set for people to be more compassionate ethical humanitarians.
Jness, an international woman’s group in 8 countries with 8+ years of monthly curriculum and twelve 80+ hour intensives. Although it comprises women from all walks of life, it also has female international leaders, CEO’s, and nationally recognized thinkers. It is time for women to inherit their powerful birthright and contribute to even more to humanity’s evolution with their unique world-changing abilities and experience. Jness facilitates this empowerment through a one-in-a-lifetime journey of wisdom.
Inlak’ech, a Mexican peace movement organizing community alert practices, a weekly national peace pledge, the Santiago transformational community project, the Pan American games peace segment (with associated production awards and nominations: 3 day-time Emmys, 10 Tele), and many other individual events. It’s a well-developed experiential model of non-violence transforming societal violence and antagonism into appreciation respect, and an interdependent culture.
The Tourette’s project, which has 12 out of 12 successful outcomes, and an award-winning documentary (first place in the Milan and Harlem film festivals). This is a documented initial study and is the first step to studying the application of the proprietary EM method to a range of syndromes including Autism, OCD, and Crohn’s disease.
Rainbow Cultural Garden has hundreds of multi-cultural children (with many speaking 8 or more languages) creating a world without boundaries through a generation of multi-cultural, compassionate, world-citizen leaders.
The Knife of Aristotle media site and diagnostic methodology. A new addition to media applying science to journalism providing objective measures and data.
Additionally, the community itself with the SOP (men’s group), exo|eso, Reverence, Platform 0, The Source acting program, World Audience Productions, Simply Human, Children’s books, The Ethicist and related studies, and many sub-divisions and sub-groups of these.
What if this opposition is wrong? How could the destruction of these things be undone?
Any person participating in this wrongdoing would tend to make excuses and blame rather than face these consequences. The conscience of one person in particular, the organizer and chief active proponent of this opposition, would bear much of this as weight and responsibility.
Mark Vicente opposed Keith Raniere and teamed up with Catherine Oxenberg, Sarah Edmondson, Frank Parlato, and others to bring a halt to Nxivm.
The destruction is vast: the value of these entities, lost future contributions, and the loss and pain of thousands of people. Can you imagine “waking up” to this?
Most people would not want to “wake up” and therefore would not want to evaluate their decisions. The words, “What if I am wrong?” will never be heard in their minds. As with our opponents, if destruction is the method of dealing with conflict (there are other methods), the more damage caused, the stronger the motivation to not re-assess the decisions to destroy. Thereby the damage will continue.
Some of the people in opposition to our community say they “woke up” one day to find they had done horrible things in the name of our community, and must now destroy it — although believing you’ve done something bad by supporting a community does not mean you must now destroy it.
Sarah Edmondson decided, after she was branded, that Keith Raniere was not who she thought he was.
On the most basic level, there has been no stated act of “wrongdoing” or actual things destroyed by our community. The only bad thing allegedly done is wasting time, and contributing to something now not liked. It is one thing to say something is “bad,” it is another to be able to pin-point what is “bad” about it beyond an opinion or dislike.
The opposition aggresses upon us to destroy, and to destroy as globally as possible. This is their guiding principle. Most civilized groups accept instead, in the least, the basic tenets of “retaliatory force in equal measure” and “minimizing damage.”
Chief among the people who destroyed the community and Raniere [r] is Frank Parlato [l].
Although I have been incarcerated for 18 months (as of this writing), people within the community are still aggressively pursued and shamed, in their neighborhoods, media, and on the Internet.
This is certainly microcosmal of some of the worst activities of humankind from the past.
The prosecution, controlled by our opposition, has even stated, “First, we are going to cut the head of the snake off, and then we’re coming for the body.”
Lead prosecutor AUSA Moira Kim Penza after the verdict in the trial of Keith Raniere. Was she controlled by Raniere’s opposition?
Stay Tuned for Part 2 From Prison: Keith Raniere: ‘My Co-Defendants Are Very Innocent!’
