Editor’s Note: The DOJ has a deep allergy to the truth. They break out in lies whenever they get caught. Lies and bluffs – playing the righteous avengers, which is a lie itself.
Prosecutors lie even when they lie about lying. They know not the difference between the truth and lying because they have so little practice in the former. At least that is what has happened in the OneTaste case. The backup lie has a backup plan. A prosecutor swears an affidavit that isn’t true, then when caught said the evidence is irrelevent. The thumb drive goes missing. The privilege wasn’t privilege. The agent is off to Ghana. The recording gets lost. The hard drive was not accessed illegally. Then they said the notes in pencil meant nothing. They lie even when the lie is falling apart. They lie as a reflex. Because truth has no utility. It’s not part of the process. What matters is the story. What matters is conviction. And when it can’t happen because the stench of their lies are so malodorous, the prosecutor leaves the case. The EDNY looks ridiculous and once it was said that federal prosecutors cannot afford to be made to look ridiculous. But they do – in this case. They really do.
By Juda Englemeyer
The last time The New York Times covered the OneTaste saga was June 2023 — the day its founder Nicole Daedone and a senior team member were indicted, spurred on by a sensationalized Netflix documentary that an FBI agent helped engineer. Since then, a very different story has been unfolding in the shadows.
The prosecution has made one misstep after another — from mishandled evidence to outright illegal behavior by the FBI. The government clung to a narrative built for headlines, not a courtroom. And a tone-deaf judge enabled it all under the illusion that the “upper hand” was theirs to keep.
The prosecution said that FBI Special Agent Elliot McGinnis – the man behind the fabricated evidence and obstruction of justice – won’t be available for trial. Is that because he will be behind bars by then? If so couldn’t they take his deposition from the Metropolitan Detention Center?
But that narrative is now collapsing. After relentless work by the defense — including developing a bespoke E-Discovery platform rivaling anything in the commercial market — key flaws and suppressed truths in the government’s case have finally come to light.
The tipping point? Two weeks after prosecutors assured the judge they still believed in their core evidence, they quietly abandoned it. Their star witness and her journals — the centerpiece of their claims — were deemed “unreliable.”
Today, for the first time since that indictment, The New York Times returned to the story. But not to double down. This time, they covered the DOJ’s failures. Even they couldn’t ignore what’s happening: a manufactured case unraveling in real time.
It is time to ask: will the government do the right thing and drop a case built on shaky ideology, silenced whistleblowers, and a desire for headlines over justice?
Will they pursue perjury charges against Ayries Blanck for wasting your time and money on their fantasy? Will Netflix be called into question for wantonly promoting a lie that led to the fall of a business and a long term legal ordeal for two innocent people?
If you are interested in a better story — the one that’s just now coming into focus — we can connect you with three insiders who tried to warn both the media and the DOJ early on. Whistleblowers who were silenced. People who saw firsthand how two sisters sold a fiction to Netflix, and the DOJ bought it wholesale.
AUSA Gillian Kassner: She’s gone and forgot nothing but to say goodbye to the women she falsely indicted.
One more detail for the record: the last veteran prosecutor on this case, AUSA Gillian Kassner, quietly left the U.S. Attorney’s Office just three weeks before trial. The AUSAs now holding the bag? Fresh out of training — five months of experience, tops.
What does that tell you? Let us know if you’re ready to hear what really happened.
