Will the Department of Justice indict Ayries Blanck, the central accuser in the federal case against OneTaste? After revelations that she fabricated key evidence used to indict company founder Nicole Daedone and executive Rachel Cherwitz, the odds have gone up.
Federal prosecutors at the Eastern District of NY have admitted that Blanck’s journals—presented in court filings as authentic accounts of alleged abuse—were fabricated.
The DOJ admitted last month that Blanck lied to federal agents, deceived prosecutors, and misled investigators with the fake journal she claimed she wrote in 2015 but actually wrote in 2022 for Netflix.
And now, making it far worse for Blanck, Devlin Barrett for The New York Times has covered the story:
“Two women accused in Brooklyn of mistreating employees of their ‘orgasmic meditation’ group argued that key evidence against them had been concocted for a true-crime documentary and had it thrown out of court.
“The women, Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz, won a major pretrial decision in March when prosecutors said in court papers that they no longer considered a key witness credible for their criminal case.
“That witness, Ayries Blanck, had been expected to testify this year in Brooklyn federal court and offer her journals about her experience at the company in question, OneTaste.
“‘The government no longer believes that the disputed portions of the handwritten journals are authentic,”prosecutors wrote to the judge overseeing the case. The diaries, they said, were actually transcribed by hand years later, and they will no longer call Ms. Blanck as a witness nor ‘seek to admit any of Blanck’s journals at trial.’…
“In the journals, Ms. Blanck describes being coerced into sex, beaten by a boyfriend and manipulated by her bosses….
“Defense lawyers spent months arguing that there were many reasons that the journals could not have been writtenin 2015 as Ms. Blanck claimed. The journals cite a book that came out in 2019. The written entries match word-for-word an electronic version of the journals that had been edited over time and by people other than Ms. Blanck…..
“After interviews with the FBI, Ms. Blanck admitted that her account of creating the handwritten journals was not true, according to the prosecutors’ filing…
“For months, prosecutors had told the judge that the journals indicated ‘a high degree of trustworthiness’ and represented the best evidence of Ms. Blanck’s psychological and emotional state at the time.
“The prosecutors now say that Ms. Blanck’s journals are unnecessary and irrelevant. Without her as a witness, they plan to call several other former OneTaste members and employees to testify….”
Blanck May Face Serious Prison Time
Under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, lying to the FBI carries a penalty of up to five years per false statement. Fabricating evidence and selling it for profit to a media company—Netflix reportedly paid $25,000—could also qualify as wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1343 and 1349.
In addition, obstruction of justice, conspiracy to defraud the United States, and destruction of evidence carry penalties of up to 20 years per count.
Durham, DC on the Case
Acting U.S. Attorney John Durham, known for his oversight of politically sensitive cases, is reportedly aware of the situation. According to sources close to the matter, officials at Main Justice are reviewing the case. A grand jury investigation into Blanck’s conduct is said to be under discussion.
FBI Director Kashyap Patel has vowed to not cover up FBI misconduct, unlike what his predecessors have done. A report filed with the DOJ Inspector General lays out the misdonduct of the lead agent on the case, FBI Special Agent Elliot McGinnis. Ample evidence exists in this document to suggest Agent McGinnis knew all about the fake journal and conspired with Blanck to deceive the courts.
That evidence includes the fact that
- Agent McGinnis told Blanck to delete her email account,
- He told her sister Autymn Blanck to hide evidence with him and keep no copy
- Most damning, he had Blanck send the fake journal on his private email account and she sent him emails in confidential mode with settings to make the email disapper after 24 hours. McGinnis kept no copy of the email Blanck sent him.
It comes as no surprise that the prosecution said it will not call FBI Agent Mcginnis at the trial.
Ayries Blanck triggered a federal indictment based on fiction. If there are no charges, what stops the next ‘Jane Doe’ from doing the same? Deterrence is a word. If Ayries Blanck walks free, what does that say? Does lying work? Is forging evidence a career move if Netflix likes your angle? That you can nearly destroy two lives, and walk away untouched?
She said she was beaten. She said she was brainwashed. She said her smile was all gone. She copied a Word doc by hand in 2023, using a pencil. And told the FBI it was her 2015 diary.
The FBI said, “That sounds good!”
The prosecutors said, “Excellent. Our Jane Doe 1.”
Netflix said, “$25,000 for that? A bargain.”
Ayries smiled.
Will the Department of Justice admit it was fooled? Or worse, admit it wasn’t?
The fact remains: Ayries Blanck lied to the FBI.
In America, when you lie for the government, it’s called cooperation. When you lie against the government, it’s called perjury. That was the paridigm in the Eastern District of NY for years – until Trump came in, until Bondi, Patel and Durham came in. And now also in – the New York Times.
