This is Part 21 of the Lauren Salzman series. We are exploring whether she is more victim or perpetrator.
In this particular post, she leans heavily toward perpetrator.
In this post, we learn a few new things – like for instance that our good doctor Danielle Roberts was branded and had the audacity to show her brand to Lauren – which was a violation of protocol since she was Allison’s slave.
It’s nice to know that there are protocols about DOS slaves and that DOS slave masters did not try to snatch slaves from one another. That’s just how they did it back in the 19th century.
Some of the Q&As – this is part of the examination of Lauren in the trial of Keith Alan Raniere – have been published before – but are re-published to provide context to the new material.
This post relates, in large part, how Anthony Ames – whose nickname was ‘Nippy” – reacted to finding out about his wife being branded with Keith Raniere’s initials – and how Keith fashioned a splendid lie for Lauren to tell him in reply.
Let it be noted that Lauren did not object to lying for Raniere. She checked her conscience at the door long, long ago.
Assistant US Attorney Tanya Hajjar is examining Lauren.
Tanya Hajjar
Lauren Salzman
Q Ms. Salzman, you testified that you did get the brand?
A Yes.
Q — that the defendant told you about. When was that?
A It was on January 10th, 2017.
Q And at that time did you have an opportunity to meet the entire first line that you described earlier?
A I did, yes.
Q Who branded you?
A A woman named Danielle. [Dr. Danielle Roberts]
Q Was she a doctor?
A Yes.
The good Dr. Danielle Roberts
Q At the time, did you have an understanding as to whether Danielle was a member of DOS?
A Well, Danielle got excited that I was getting branded and she showed me her brand, so I learned she was a member of DOS.
Q Did you later learn something about the fact that she had shown you her brand?
A Yeah. She was disciplined for it because it was an indiscretion. She wasn’t — she was supposed to keep it secret.
Q Was Danielle, as you understood it, under you in rank in DOS?
A Yes.
Q Can you explain that?
A Danielle was enrolled by Allison, so she was second-line DOS and I was first-line DOS. So I was higher rank.
**********
Q After you were branded, did you have a conversation with Allison Mack about having joined DOS?
A Yes, I did. Yes.
Q What was that discussion?
A Allison was very excited that I joined, and she — she felt, like, excited to share everything that she had never been able to share that came with DOS. And her experience with DOS was a little bit different than mine, but what –what she shared with me is that she never had a [sexual] relationship with Keith until she joined DOS. So when Daniella [Padilla] enrolled her into DOS, she enrolled her also into a relationship with Keith or it happened contemporaneously, as I understood it. So Allison didn’t really understand and I have never discussed with her what my relationship with Keith was, so she was very excited and enthusiastically — like, “Isn’t this great? Like now not only do you have this master, but you have, you know, all these new sister wives” and she was like so excited about that. And I was like, Number 1, I’ve had sister wives for 20 years; Number 2, this is not — it’s something that’s — it’s been something that’s been incredibly difficult for me, and then I’m — I didn’t know about some of these relationships, including Allison’s, which I just learned about then.
So for me, it wasn’t as exciting as it was for her. But she was — I didn’t share that with her because I didn’t want her to not be enthusiastic or feel happy about her experience and I didn’t want her to feel like she couldn’t share things with me. But for me, it was really hard.
Q Did she mention children in this conversation?
A I’m not sure if it was this conversations or after, but she was like, yeah, we’re going to raise our babies together and we’re going to do all these things. And I came to learn that she believed she was having children with Keith, Daniella also now is believing she was having children with Keith and for me, this was just a lot to learn.
Q And when you say, Daniella, this is Daniella Padilla?
A Correct.
Sister wives – who both were going to have children with Keith – Allison Mack and Daniella Padilla.
Q Did you have a subsequent conversation with Daniella Padilla?
A Yes. Well, I went to Keith and was like, “You’re having babies with Allison and Daniella” and he said “No, not necessarily,” you know, that’s not — and actually he acted like he didn’t know really quite where they got that idea. And then I had a subsequent conversation with Daniella where Daniella was describing that she and Keith had discussed how they were going go about doing this because they were going to — Daniella was going go to Marianna [Fernandez] and ask Marianna for permission for Keith to be the [sperm] donor. So to make it like to Marianna that it wasn’t a relationship, that he was just going to be the donor. So then I went back to Keith and was like, we have to ask Marianna for her permission to have kids, to have you be the donor? And so then he acknowledged that he had had that conversation with Daniella which negated the first conversation where he said he wasn’t discussing having children with them, and then didn’t seem to understand why it would be a problem for me to ask Marianna this, why, you know, if he could be the donor.
****
[Lauren met Allison in San Diego. She believed that “Keith was having sex with all her slaves.”]
Q What happened after that?
A I came home and said to Keith: “Are you having sex with Allison’s slaves?” And he said: No. And I said: “Why does she think you are?” And he said: “Because I didn’t correct her.”
Q What did you understand that to mean?
A I understood it to mean that he was trying to be truth –like be right on the technicality. Because in my mind the next question was: “Well, how did she get that impression in the first place?” So I didn’t ask it, because I believe he knew what I was asking and specifically chose not to tell me truth about it. And so I believed that either he was lying to me in that moment or he was lying to Allison, but in either case, he was lying to somebody about this.
Q So what did you after you spoke to the defendant?
A I went back to Allison.
Q And what did you say?
A “Is he fucking your slaves,” is what I said.
Q What did she say?
A She said: “Just Nicole and Suzy. But we’re going to start working with India and Jay.” And I said to her: “When you say working, do you mean fucking?” And she said: Yes.
Q Did you later come to learn that Allison’s slaves were not the only ones to get the seduction assignment?
A Yes. I can’t remember the time frame, but at one first-line DOS meeting, I said something but — along the lines that Allison had been the only one who had assigned people this [seduction] assignment, and Nicki [Clyne] said “No, she’s not.” And then I learned that other people have been tasking their slaves to do the assignment.
Q At some point did you learn that Nicki’s slaves had been tasked to that assignment?
A Yes, I just don’t recall when. But yes, I did.
Q Did you subsequently raise Nicole’s name with the defendant again?
A Yes, I did.
Q What was your conversation with him?
A What he had said when I — also when I had asked him about the seduction assignment, was that it wasn’t always going to be him doing the seduction assignment; that at some point, somebody else was going to be doing the seduction assignment. And Cami and I had a conversation about it at one point in time and I went to him and said Camila and I were talking about who was going to be run the seduction assignment, and he said Nicole was going to be heading that testing.
Q Now, at some point after these conversations was the existence of DOS publicly exposed?
A Yes, in June 2017.
Q How did that happen?
A Sarah’s husband, Nippy, came and confronted myself and Jim Del Negro at coach summit in a very public way. And then a series of rumors about — or allegations surrounding DOS started circulating through the West Coast community and so we were hearing back about that. And within a few days, a blogger [Frank Parlato -Frank Report] started blogging about everything very publicly, obviously, the blog is public.
Q When you say rumors and allegations, were they true?
A Yes.
Anthony Ames AKA Nippy
Sarah Edmondson
Q And when you say Sarah’s husband approached you, was he angry?
A Yes, he appeared angry. He was yelling at me and Jim [Del Negro].
Q Did the aspects of DOS after that become publicly — publicly discussed —
A Yes.
Q — within the NXIVM community?
A Yes.
Q Did members of the community raise concerns to you?
A Yes, they did.
Q Did you try to reach the defendant [Raniere] after Sarah’s husband confronted you?
A I did. I was sending him 911 text messages and trying to call him and call anybody I thought he might be with to try to find him.
Q What were the 911 text messages?
A It was like, “I need to talk to you now” and I was sending literally 911, which in 20 years I never sent a 911 text message, but like that this is important, this isn’t just if you’re busy don’t get back to me now, it’s serious.
Q I you eventually reach him?
A I did.
Q And what was the conversation you had with him?
A I told him that Nippy was really upset and that he had said, “My wife had Keith’s initials branded next to her vagina,” you know, like “This is not okay” and [he] basically resigned from all his positions within our community and didn’t want to speak to me ever again, didn’t want to speak to Keith ever again, so I relayed that.
Q And how did the defendant respond?
A He responded saying, “Well, Nippy found out that my initials were branded next to his wife’s vagina, how do you think I feel learning that this wife branded my initials next to her vagina?”
Q How did you — what did that mean to you?
A Well, it was Keith’s initials and Keith knew it was his initials and I knew it was his initials and I knew he knew that it was his initials, so I interpreted it as him acting out how I should respond to Nippy, like “Keith didn’t know this, how do you think he’s feels learning this.” That was the party line on it, like “Keith just learned this, you know, how do you think he feels knowing that a bunch of women went around and did this?”
Q Were there subsequently meetings with the defendant and the first line of DOS?
A Yes.
Q And can you describe those meetings?
A That we went to the DOS house and were trying to figure out how to deal with everything that was happening. And everybody’s questions and upsets surrounding it and basically, you know, Keith directed that we were not going to tell anybody about his involvement, it was going to be secret, that he didn’t know anything about it, that he wasn’t associated with it, that the brand was not his initials and he gave several options for how we could address the concerns that were being raised to make it look like they were all things that were not the truth. Which is that the brand instead of being his initials could be explained that it had seven lines so it was the seven chakras or it was the four elements or it was bar alpha mu.
It wasn’t Keith and Allison’s initials – because there were assertions that it was Allison’s initials, too, which it wasn’t – but those were going around as well. And then things about the seduction assignment which he said could be described as a dare or a test of Abraham, that it was a test to see if the slave was committed enough that they would carry out the act but that they didn’t — it was never intended that they actually would follow through on the act, that it was just a test to see — a trust test.
Q What did the test of Abraham, that phrase, what did that mean to you?
A My understanding of the test of Abraham is in the Bible, God tasked Abraham to sacrifice his son on the alter. It’s a test of faith and loyalty and Abraham was willing do it and then at the end God said you didn’t have to do it, I just wanted to see if you were willing to do it.
And so that’s how we went out and described it, that the women had been tasked to seduce Keith but the intent was that it was never carried out and that Keith don’t know anything about it.
Q The — how did the defendant — what did the defendant instruct you to say regarding the brand?
A That it was the seven chakras and the four elements or it was bar alpha mu but that it was not his — but it was not intended to be his initials but that when the design was being created somebody noticed that it looked like his initials and so it was refashioned to include – incorporate them as tribute.
*****
MK10ART– Keith Alan Raniere.
***
Ah, Keith, you are such a consistent liar. You are inventive though.
Here are a few of the conversations I reconstructed based on this testimony.
Lauren: You’re having babies with Allison and Daniella?
Keith: No, not necessarily – how did they get that idea?
Lauren: Daniella said you told her that she had to go to Marianna and ask for permission for you to be the sperm donor. She said this was in order to hide the fact that you are fucking Daniella. So I and Dani and Allison have to ask Marianna for permission to have kids, to have you be the donor?
Keith: Well, yes, I do recall now that I did have a conversation with Daniella but why should it be a problem for you to ask Marianna if I can be the sperm donor for your baby?
***
Lauren: Are you having sex with Allison’s slaves?
Keith: No.
Lauren: Why does she think you are?
Keith: Because I didn’t correct her.
***
Lauren: Is he fucking your slaves?
Allison: Just Nicole and Suzy. But we’re going to start working with India and Jay.
Lauren: When you say working, do you mean fucking?
Allison: Yes.
***
Lauren: About the seduction assignment, is it always going to be you doing the seduction assignment?
Keith: At some point, somebody else will be doing the seduction assignment.
Lauren: Cami and I had a conversation about it and Cami and I were wondering who was going to be run the seduction assignment.
Keith: Nicole is going to be heading that testing.
***
Nippy [angrily]: My wife had Keith’s initials branded next to her vagina…This is not okay.
Lauren: I don’t know anything about it.
***
Lauren texting Keith: 911. I need to talk to you now.
***
Lauren speaking to Keith: Nippy is really upset and he said, “My wife had Keith’s initials branded next to her vagina,” He resigned from all his positions within our community and doesn’t want to speak to me or you ever again.
Keith: Well, OK. Nippy found out that my initials were branded next to his wife’s vagina – How do you think I feel learning that this wife branded my initials next to her vagina?
Lauren: I’ve got my orders, master. We know, of course, that it’s your initials, and you knew it was your initials because you designed it that way, and you know I know it is your initials.
***
Lauren [to Nippy]: Keith didn’t know about this. How do you think he’s feels learning this – that your wife branded herself with his initials? Keith just learned this, you know, how do you think he feels knowing that a bunch of women went around and did this? He feels terrible about it.
***
Lauren to Nxivm members who were asking questions about the brand: Keith had nothing to do with this. He didn’t know anything about it. He isn’t associated with it. The brand is not his initials. The brand is the seven chakras or the four elements or the bar alpha mu. It isn’t Keith and Allison’s initials.
Lauren to the DOS slaves who were leaned about the seduction assignments – where they had to go and seduce Keith: The seduction assignment is just a dare or a test of Abraham, a test to see if you slaves were committed enough that you would carry out the act – but it was never intended that you would actually have to follow through on the act of having sex with Keith. It was just a test to see –a trust test like with Abraham in the Bible. God tasked Abraham to sacrifice his son on the altar. It’s a test of faith and loyalty and Abraham was willing to do it and then, in the end, God said: “You don’t have to do it, I just wanted to see if you were willing to do it.”
And that’s how we were going to do it with you – you who were being tasked to seduce Keith were being tested – but it would never be carried out. Keith didn’t know anything about it.
***
Slave to Lauren: But the brand is Keith’s initials?
Lauren: It was intended to be the seven chakras or the four elements or the bar alpha mu and it was not intended to be his initials but when the design was being created, somebody noticed that it looked like his initials and so it was refashioned to include – incorporate – his initials as a tribute.
***
Comparisons are odious – but Lauren Salzman does have at least one feature in common with Pinocchio.
The members of Nxivm’s inner circle – just like their master, Raniere – are creatively stupid liars. Lauren was such a consistent enabler of his lies.
I find it hard to understand how she could have continued to believe he was a great and noble leader and, at the same time such a total and terrible liar.
Could it be that Lauren did not really believe Keith was good?
But instead, she loved the lifestyle she was living. She was making a nice six-figure salary; she had hundreds of people looking up to her as a high-level executive in Nxivm.
Her total act during the trial was to make her look like a victim. It was right out of Raniere’s playbook.
She was his willing co-conspirator for 20 years and she blubbered like a baby during her testimony to save her own rotten hide. She cared nothing about anyone else during her testimony and over the 20 years when she lied for the monster. And now she is facing prison, so she wept and cried and admitted she was just a poor, little, weak, abused tiny woman –,a prisoner of love and false faith in a man she believed was so good and only just learned was not so good.
The problem with Lauren is she is such a damn execrable liar that it is hard to know when she is telling the truth.
Was she ever a victim? Or was that $200,000 per year salary, the two houses, the BMWs, the trips to Mexico, Fiji, and wherever, the glory of being seen as wise and a guru [a mini Keith] enough to allow her to set aside all her morals – and be part of the monster’s team?
If so, she should be punished for it.
