Frank Report reached out to Michele Hatchette, the DOSsier Project member who is threatening to reveal the names of the anonymous plaintiffs in the Neil Glazer lawsuit, to ask her if her motives in doing this are purely social justice-driven.
Hatchette agreed to the interview and gave her answers to our questions.
Let the reader decide for themselves whether it is believable that neither Clare nor Sara Bronfman are funding this initiative and whether behind it all is the master’s hand, the master being Keith Alan Raniere.
Keith Alan Raniere
Clare and Sara Bronfman
Nicki Clyne and Michele Hatchette
Frank: Are you really going to do this? What is your end-game here?
Michele: Yes. I meant what I said. My end-game is truth.
Frank: Why now? You didn’t say anything during the Raniere trial or the sentencing. Why have you suddenly done this?
Michele: Before and during the trial, I was threatened by the government and being harassed by the media. I also naively thought Keith would get a fair trial and he didn’t. I’m still being threatened and silenced, but the truth is more important. Now we’re talking about a civil case where the plaintiffs are seeking money. This is not about justice or healing. This is about financial greed. At least they should be “brave” enough to put their names to their claims.
Frank: Have you received – or do you intend to receive – any Bronfman money for this? Have you been in touch with Bronfman lawyers or anyone who has encouraged you to do this on behalf of the Bronfmans?
Michele: No, I have not received any Bronfman money, and I have not been in touch with any of their lawyers.
Frank: Is anyone paying you money to do this? To reveal these names? There is a lot of money at stake here and possibly some of the women will drop out rather than be named. Are you getting any kind of compensation for this?
Michele: No, no one is paying me any money to do this. I might not be a defendant, but the plaintiffs’ lies have severely affected my career, livelihood, and people I care about. These Jane and John Does have been able to make outrageous accusations, including lies I personally know to be false and could prove as much with evidence, and caused catastrophic damage to people’s lives, all without any risk. We have to ask ourselves, do we want to live in a country where someone can accuse you of something and destroy your life, all while hiding behind anonymity? Even if they decide to drop out now, I think they should have to answer for their claims and be held responsible for the damage they’ve caused.
Frank: If the Bronfmans aren’t behind this, is Keith Raniere behind this?
Michele: No. I haven’t spoken with Keith in months. This is my own idea and I stand behind it.
Frank: What about Nicki Clyne? Neil Glazer says in his filing that he believes that Nicki Clyne is pulling your strings, that is Nicki is indirectly prompting you.
Michele: I’ll tell you what I wrote on my Twitter: ‘Let me be very clear: I am a co-founder, along side my seven sisters, of the @thedossierproj. We have a platform and I, as an individual, am using our platform. I am also entitled to exercise my 1st amendment right wherever I want. Mommy Penza can’t help you, boo.”
Let me be very clear: I am a co founder, along side my 7 sisters, of the @thedossierproj. We have a platform and I, as an individual, am using our platform. I am also entitled to exercise my 1st amendment right wherever I want. Mommy Penza can't help you, boo. https://t.co/oxnhsR3dZR
— Michele Bari Hatchette (@thismixele) February 5, 2022
Not giving credit where credit is do does not honor the author of the work. Please use my full name when crediting my work. I'd greatly appreciate that. Deal?
— Michele Bari Hatchette (@thismixele) February 5, 2022
Michele Hatchette referred to former US Attorney Moira Kim Penza as “Mommy Penza” on Twitter.
Frank: What do you have to say about Cami, a 15-year-old, you’re going to reveal her name?
Michele: Contrary to everyone’s insistence on keeping Camila forever 15, she’s a grown-ass 31-year-old woman. What happened between two adult women in their own private lives has now become everyone’s stain. Camila suing the Bronfmans and others who had nothing to do with her girl-on-girl adventures is absolutely absurd. These accusations belong on Jerry Springer, not in a civil lawsuit or even serious media. The conversation I’m trying to have is for grown folks — this incessant infantilizing of women needs to stop.
Frank: What about Daniela, who was forced into solitary confinement for 2 years, you’re going to release her name? Do you think it’s right that she has to endure further abuse?
Michele: Throwing a tantrum and staying in a room for two years because you don’t want to do homework is not solitary confinement. Like her sister Camila, she is a grown woman and made her own choices. Out of respect for them, I am treating them as adults instead of children. During the trial, Daniela admitted to the most crimes out of anyone, and yet she was protected by the government because she was willing to go against Raniere.
This is akin to a child thinking there’s a boogeyman in the closet and allowing that child to believe that the boogeyman is real by saying you’re protecting them from the boogeyman. These women are making very serious accusations anonymously. Protecting the lie that they’re too weak to say their own names further strips them of their agency and the empowerment they claim to want.
We shouldn’t lie to children and we shouldn’t lie to these women.
Frank: The restitution, after you take out the attorney’s fees and costs, doesn’t really amount to all that much money. It just covered therapy and actual damages and doesn’t make them whole. Are you really saying these women don’t deserve restitution?
Michele: Yes. I do not believe we should be rewarding tantrums and claims that can’t even be investigated properly because they are made anonymously.
Frank: What about Nicole, she was your own slave-pod sister? Are you really going to out her, knowing she doesn’t want to be named? Why are you going to do that?
Michele: Nicole had no problem naming me without my consent and sharing my private life with the world. Her doing so severely compromised my livelihood and the lives of very dear friends of mine, all from behind a protected wall of anonymity. The cost? She has to be a child for the rest of her life. I do consider her a sister and I don’t think that’s right. As a sister would, I’m looking out for her best interests. If your sister was in a bad situation and you knew you could help her, even if she’d be mad at you, I am the type of person who is willing to do that. Truth and sisterhood are more important than pettiness and whatever comfort these women get from thinking they need to be protected from their own choices.
When Nicole left, she said she was doing so because the Frank Report said 100 women were sex slaves and she didn’t want to be named, knowing it was a lie. No one wanted to be called something so atrocious and untrue. Nicole told us explicitly she wouldn’t join the hate campaign that was already forming at the time. We didn’t hear from her for six months, and then all of a sudden, she claimed to be a victim of sex trafficking.
I have studied Nicole’s testimony. Her position and recollection changed dramatically from when I last spoke to her — when she left DOS on her own volition with no repercussions. I was there with her for many of the events she talked about at the trial.
Michele Hatchette submitted this picture of her and Nicole, and asked that it be published. Frank Report agreed provided we could disguise Nicole so she could not be identified.
A woman who lived out her own kinky fantasy is not a victim of sex trafficking
.
Frank: Are you saying that the event that the jury found to be the sex trafficking of Nicole, where she was blindfolded and tied to a bed while another woman, 26 year old Camila, was assaulting her sexually, while Raniere looked on, is someone’s idea of, as you say, ‘a kinky fantasy?’ I find that hard to believe.
Michele: I said what I said. That’s my understanding. She told one my sisters that she had done stuff similar to that before and that it was a really “alive experience” for her. She had done it in the past and my guess she probably has done it after. And a man gets 40 years in prison for that?
Not only has she been rewarded financially for her testimony that put people in prison, she is now seeking additional money in the civil lawsuit. Sex trafficking is a serious crime and perpetrators should be punished and imprisoned. Similarly, making false accusations anonymously and changing your story in ways that absolve you of all responsibility is also very serious. Rewriting history and putting others in prison should not be a new career path, ladies.
My video was a genuine invitation to Nicole and every other Jane and John Doe to do the right thing. I hope this will help them consider the consequences of what they’ve done and how they are infantilizing themselves and all women, and castrating men, who deserve due process. This is not a matter of if this is going to happen, it’s a matter of who will say it. This is not a threat; it is a promise.
Frank: After all you’ve seen and heard of Raniere doing these many things that must have surprised you, that came out at the trial, do you really think he is a good man, or are you fighting for him, or for some other principle?
Michele: My personal opinions of Keith Raniere are irrelevant here. This is about due process and about women (and some wannabe men) who want the rewards that come from being a victim without substantiating or putting their name to their claims. I am doing this for all the men in my life: my brothers, my nephews, my business partners, and future children. I cannot sleep at night knowing we’re going down this path and I can do something to stop it. Therefore, I must.
