Over the last few months, I have been reporting on the Eastern District of NY US Attorney’s case against Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz.
Daedone co-founded OneTaste, a sexual wellness education company that teaches a meditation practice called Orgasmic Meditation, also known as OM. Cherwitz was head sales manager.
Defendants Rachel Cherwitz and Nicole Daedone stand charged with forced labor conspiracy.
OneTaste opened in 2004, and 35,000 people have participated in its events. Some 16,000 have taken classes and workshops in Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, Boulder, Las Vegas, London, and other locations. Over 1,400 people have gone through OneTaste’s coaching program, taught three days per month in LA, New York, or London.
A Unique Legal Charge
After a five-year FBI investigation, the US Attorney for the Eastern District of NY brought the charge of forced labor conspiracy against the two women in April 2023. It appears to be the only case of forced labor conspiracy as a standalone charge in the history of the forced labor law.
In general practice, conspiracy, a non-substantive charge, accompanies the substantive charge. The government did not charge the two women with forced labor. Instead, the government accused Daedone and Cherwitz of a conspiracy to commit forced labor over 12 years, but the women failed.
The government alleges they agreed to commit forced labor, but prosecutors did not have actual evidence of forced labor. Conspiracy was the only crime the prosecutors charged.
US Attorney Breon Peace
As the US Attorney wrote in a recent court filing, explaining why there are no victims to identify for the defense:
“The instant case charges a conspiracy and not a substantive offense. The defendants could be proven guilty if they never forced any victim to do anything—so long as the evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they agreed to do so.”
Possible Motive for Prosecution
It appears from court filings that the government considers the OM meditation practice dangerous, and for a time, the FBI investigation chilled the public demonstration of OM into virtual cessation.
Although OM may be dangerous, it is not illegal.
In her bail memorandum prepared by the government, US Attorney Breon Peace wrote, while arguing for a million-dollar bail for Daedone:
“Daedone poses a continuing danger to the community. Based on information obtained during the investigation, as recently as this year, Daedone has returned to performing public OM demonstrations…”
Daedone’s return to teaching OM in adults-only classes may have prompted the indictment in April 2023.
OneTaste’s founder, Nicole Daedone and public demonstration of OM
Public Perception and Support
While the government considers OM dangerous, some think it is a “deeply beneficial practice.”
A Facebook group of about 2700 members called OM Wiki describes OM practice as follows:
Orgasmic Meditation™ (OM) is a partnered consciousness practice focused on clitoral stroking, explained by Nicole Daedone in her book ‘Slow Sex’ and taught by the business OneTaste.
The basic rules and structure of the practice can be found here: http://onetaste.us/container.
Perhaps because the government considers OM dangerous, the group is private, and admission depends on the application of a would-be member being over the age of 18, and the administrators’ acceptance.
OM Wiki describes itself:
We hold a safe space to connect and support the many thousands of people around the world who practice Orgasmic Meditation™ (OM) – and the many more who are curious to learn this deeply beneficial practice.
We want this group to be a place to meet other OMers, and share your questions, experiences and gathered wisdom about the practice….
We also sometimes discuss other genital stroking practices, and sexuality in general…
The group is not necessarily a supporter of Daedone or OneTaste, although it seems members may have learned the mediation practice from her books or education company.
OM Wiki writes:
The OMWiki is NOT affiliated with OneTaste in any way, except our shared love of Orgasmic Meditation.
While most of us love the practice of OM, many of us have serious criticism for the business.
Some Frank Report stories have attracted modest attention at OM Wiki:
In response to Eastern District Prosecutors Go Medieval on OneTaste’s ‘Dangerous’ Practice of OM, a member of OM Wiki, had this to say:
The article spends 95% of its time on things from the 19th century so seems a bit all over the place.
But it touches on something I was PMing with someone here about just the other day….
Right now… I am a LOT more afraid to OM because I worry the Feds will knock down the door and arrest me for assault on the women I am stroking….. than I am about someone trying to sell me a class at the end of the OM circle. I can handle the latter but the former would be devastating.
Behind the crux of their case, I have a vague sense that they think women being stroked is a crime and women are victims, even if they don’t know it. Which means the strokers are perpetrators. They don’t say this directly but I just feel it sitting there, behind the charges.
Didn’t an OM Circle in LA get busted just like this once?
Imagine being arrested for OMing. They don’t even need to charge you, the arrest record will be public information. Anything can be found on the net. Frank’s articles prove this.
First Amendment Concerns
The government has chilled the practice of OM. There will be some who will argue this is a First Amendment prosecution. OM is not illegal. Dangerous, perhaps, but not illegal. Though to the best of my knowledge, no one has died from the practice, nor have any injuries been reported. No one has ever been arrested for practicing OM and no one has ever been accused of a sex crime because they practiced OM. In fact, no one ever practiced OM, under the auspices of OneTaste, at least, that did not explicitly consent.
For those who want to study the legal documents, the commenter explains how:
OT has published a boat load of legal docs on their Medium page. … It has all their legal responses and also the prosecutions responses to the responses and even the NY original indictment. … Some stuff Frank is posting about apparently has been publicly available for 2 years…
My guess is Frank subscribes to portals that put this material on the net. He likely just goes to the source and gets his material from there…. Here is the link to the massive document….
https://onetaste.us/…/June-2024-Joint-Statement-for-OT…
…The actual diary (of Ayries Blanck) he wrote about can be found as Exhibit H, about 1/3 of the way though. All the texts Frank cut and pasted (and more) can be found immediately afterwards in I, J and K….
There is some stuff Frank has not written about that are probably pretty important to both cases, halfway through, as exhibits D3 and D4. Ouch.
It appears Frank is simply waiting until documents become available, reads them, then writes his articles. All he has to do is wait until they are released and “voila.”
I always suspected it was something like this, as “feeding” him the materials seems a bit unlikely. This is, after all, the guy who helped bring down NXIVM, so I would think OT’s lawyers would never allow them to get too close to him….
If you have some time to read through this stuff, it has some interesting material. All I know after looking at all this is…. I don’t ever want to be in a lawsuit.
Lawsuits Are Burdensome, Painful and Expensive
I agree with the commenter. I don’t want to be in a lawsuit, if I can avoid it. I am pretty certain Ayries Blanck wishes she wasn’t in a lawsuit.
I suppose Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz, who did not volunteer for this trouble, feel that way too. It would not surprise me if FBI Special Agent Elliot McGinnis wishes he had not believed a word of the liar Blanck and told his superiors years ago, “there is nothing criminal in the targets’ conduct.”
Added to the list of those who now or soon may regret they took on “The Case of the Dangerous Meditation” is likely to be the US Attorney and his numerous assistants.
AUSA Gillian Kassner is the lead prosecutor.
After 12 years of trying and 35,000 people coming through their doors, Daedone and Cherwitz could not force anyone to labor? The jury may resent having their time wasted and blame it on the prosecutors.
There is a reason no other US Attorney ever brought a standalone forced labor conspiracy charge without the underlying forced labor crime. Get a dictionary. Look up the definition of “evidence.”
It’s not just a trial and error process, and the punchline is not an acquittal.
This is a case of reckless prosecutors who apparently believe in the malleability of truth, who don’t care that with the swipe of their pen, they make decisions about someone’s freedom. This case was never a question of discovering the commission of a crime and then looking for the person who has committed it. This was a case of picking the woman, and her dangerous meditation, then searching the law books, to pin some crime on her.
I heard it said of prosecutors by a defense attorney:
We, as criminal defense lawyers, are forced to deal with some of the lowest people on earth, people who have no sense of right and wrong, people who will lie in court to get what they want, people who do not care who gets hurt in the process. It is our job – our sworn duty – as criminal defense lawyers, to protect our clients from those people.”
Yes, there is nothing scarier than a reckless prosecutor. But this time they may get a comeuppance.
Stay tuned for our next post, where we explain why.
