News NXIVM

Guest View: Keith will never, ever authorize an insanity or diminished capacity defense!

Guest View by Please Don’t Poop on my Dinner 

Keith’s legal team will NEVER, EVER be authorized to use an insanity or diminished capacity defense. It’s not even a possibility that Keith would ever entertain that idea.

K. R. Claviger is correct that Keith’s ego would never allow that possibility. This is one of the few times that I actually agree with that legal-minded turd.

Guess what?

For the rest of you spectators who may disagree, here’s the straight skinny:

1) Keith’s only achievement in life is that he is Vanguard, wise leader of NXIVM and worshiped as a demigod by all Nxians.

2) Keith has nothing else in life except the power and wealth he derives from being Vanguard.

3) Vanguard is all-knowing among his supporters. He’s never wrong. He has no ‘disintegrations’. He’s a perfect human being.

4) If Keith uses an ‘insanity’ defense — either at trial or at his sentencing — his legal team would have to say that he’s a fucking nutball who really doesn’t know reality from Fantasyland. Keith’s legal team would have to call expert witnesses who testify that Keith is a fucking nutter. His own attorneys would have to argue, in open court, that he’s a crazy fucker who’s not playing with a full deck of cards. Most importantly, Keith would have to approve this defense and agree with it.

5) Once his legal team makes this argument in open court (that he’s a crazy nutball) Keith would cease being Vanguard to every follower he ever had. He could never go back to being Vanguard after that. His money from Clare Bear would be cut off forever, since how can Clare and Sara Bronfman continue supporting a guy who openly admits to being a fucking nutball?

6) His harem (i.e. his endless supply of pussy) would be gone forever if he pleads insanity. Even if he was released early from prison his pussy supply would dry up, since no girl wants to fuck a crazy nutball who no longer has money from Clare Bronfman. Girls only want him because they think he’s a demigod who might give them an avatar baby. …But who would want an avatar baby fathered by a guy who told the world he’s not right in the head?

7) MOST IMPORTANTLY: Even if convicted at trial and facing 20 years in prison, Keith will delude himself into thinking that his appeal will be successful and thus he won’t see any benefit to pleading insanity. His attorneys will likely fuel his belief that the appeal will be a successful one, since they’ll likely tell Keith that the jury was full of emotional people who ignored the law but the appellate judges will be fairer when reviewing his case.

That’s the straight skinny.


About the author

Frank Parlato

Frank Parlato

5 Comments

Click here to post a comment

Leave a Reply

  • Perhaps he would not lose his loyal followers though. They would justify the insanity defense as a last resort, pushed into it by the evil DOJ and stay just as loyal than admit they devoted their life and money to a nutjob. The Bronfmans haven’t dared admit any of their own mistakes. These people have devoted their lives and harmed their relationships to follow this guy and it’s highly possible whatever defense he takes, they will remain right behind him.

  • The world has become a pretty sad place. Since when is a bad childhood an excuse for comitting a crime? Quite on the contrary. If he is a psyco or insane the society needs to be protected from him even more. Imagine letting people out because they cannot distinguish between doing good or bad. This is just stupid.

  • “Even if convicted at trial and facing 20 years in prison, Keith will delude himself into thinking that his appeal will be successful and thus he won’t see any benefit to pleading insanity.” completely agree with this astute observation. True narcissists such as Vanguard and Clare’s lawyer, Dennis K. Burke, have to live their daily lives with the shortest path to a “quick rationalization” allowing them to function while their proverbial world is crashing down. They simply have to believe whatever self-justifying theory they are working with at the moment will prevail. It’s what keeps them going. It’s what makes life livable or them. Rationalizing their own bullshit. They cannot face reality; it is too bleak.

  • This insanity defense conversation is fanciful. I’ve been practicing criminal defense exclusively since 1984, both as a prosecutor and defense attorney in state and federal courts, and I’ve never been part of a case in which it was used successfully. Under federal law, a defendant must prove insanity by clear and convincing evidence to prevail. US v. Freeman 804 F.2d 1574 (11th Cir. 1986). Often used examples of how difficult it is to prove insanity: there is a mass shooting with the shooter running through a building firing away, but the shooter spares small children or a personal friend who happens to be inside; or a con artist is careful to shield friends or family from losses. Acts like these demonstrate the defendant appreciated the consequences of their conduct, and even if they were in the midst of a psychotic break an insanity defense will fail because they made choices that showed they knew what they were doing was wrong. Raniere demonstrated time and again, from hiding his direct involvement in multiple business enterprises to fleeing to Mexico to avoid civil or criminal liability, that he knew the consequences of his conduct. His attorneys won’t pursue insanity because (1) they can’t show it in the first place, and (2) if they try it would open the door to the prosecution putting on a massive amount of evidence showing how hard he and/or his minions worked to hide his direct involvement in multiple criminal enterprises, something they might not be able to get into without an insanity defense. In other words, insanity would play into the prosecution’s hands by making him appear even less endearing than he otherwise would.

  • I believe there is a substantial possibility, given K.A.R.’s opportunistic slant on things, he will be gladly giving up any perceived sanity of his image in exchange for more years in liberty. He must be very aware that the game is over and any privileges of old are permanently lost to him. Being a pragmatic chap I am betting he will seek more years of complete freedom gladly giving up on a mob of what he perceives as dispensable scum, that he won’t control anyway. Or, even better, his contempt for them could be so sizeable that he may feel confident of continuing to screw them around post factum, in complete defiance of this alleged mud slinging exercise at his persona. The scenario put forth in this article I find highly improbable.

%d bloggers like this: