My Day in Court... Kinda

I represented myself in federal court and here's how it went

Feb 03, 2023

Wednesday was my second time appearing in federal court, representing myself, in an outrageous and malicious civil case. It still doesn’t feel real. Maybe it’s my background as an actor, or maybe it’s a coping mechanism, but I feel like I’m playing a role in a hard-hitting, yet comical and human, dramatic series on Showtime. I have to do my own make-up and choose my own wardrobe. I’m expected to stand on my mark and speak on cue. No one has written my lines, so I have to improvise.

I was very nervous in court. My Fitbit tells me that my heart was racing. My voice was shaky and I ventured outside of the legal arguments accepted at this particular stage. This hearing was only to argue the grounds for dismissal, not the facts of the case. But I couldn’t help it. Facts and reason should matter when considering the plausibility and frivolousness of a complaint. Facts and reason should matter, period. Sadly, these days, this seems up for debate.

Much of the three-and-a-half hour hearing is a blur. The plaintiffs’ attorneys, of which there were five, spoke the most. There were pregnant pauses every time they were asked a question. Papers were shuffled. Glances were averted. Sighs were heard. They were totally unprepared. The judge held them to a standard of logic and case law to defend their 217-page fantasy novel of a complaint. I was thankful for this.

Although it should be a given because a judge’s only job is to apply the law and uphold due process in the proceedings, there are many instances where judges involve themselves emotionally and fall victim to prejudicial narratives. And prejudicial narratives were thick in the courtroom that day. For example, the plaintiffs’ lawyers, who are paid on contingency, orated for a good 15 minutes about the fact that Keith Raniere allegedly claimed to be the smartest man in the world, therefore exposing his fraudulent aims. The judge, quit astutely, pointed out that such a claim is subjective in nature and unverifiable, and therefore people who believed it might bear some responsibility. It was an excellent point. One of many that he raised, exposing the flimsiness of their legal work.

Me, Danielle and Brandon outside of the courthouse

If you’re not familiar with the NXIVM case, I’m not going to rehash it here, but it’s important to note that I’ve never been charged with a crime, or even accused of harm by a specific individual. I am being penalized in this civil case because I won’t join the mob of anti-NXIVM enthusiasts and perhaps they think they can bully me into silence, or to join their side. They can’t. The plaintiffs, or their lawyers rather, are abusing the RICO statutes, invented to prosecute the mafia, to fabricate some sort of “enterprise” and imply that anyone associated with the now-defunct organization can be held liable for horrific crimes. Crimes that 1) never happened, and 2) if they did, most of the plaintiffs would be culpable as leaders in NXIVM. Again, I have never been charged with a crime, even though the FBI did a months-long investigation and interviewed many people close to me. I did not cooperate either.

In the complaint, the 69 plaintiffs are alleging, though it is unclear directly how, that I participated in sex trafficking and forced labor. To write those words feels unreal. I have dedicated my life to being a person with honor, integrity, and compassion. I have always extended myself above and beyond to help people in need and everyone who knows me knows this. This includes the plaintiffs.

“Jane Doe 8,” who is the only plaintiff connecting me to the RICO conspiracy because I invited her into DOS. She is a woman I’ve known since I was 17 years old. When we were in our early twenties and she went to a summer acting camp in New York, I hooked her up with a place to stay. When I came back from backpacking around Central America when I was 19, we met for coffee and I showed her my whole photo album. The entire time she was involved with NXIVM after being recruited by her co-plaintiff Sarah Edmondson, she lived in Vancouver and I lived in New York. Her involvement in DOS consisted of phone calls where I coached her on quitting a job that she hated and pursuing her dream of being self-employed, which she is to this day. I could go on. I want to go on. I want to defend myself with an abundance of evidence against these false and frivolous claims, but again, yesterday’s court hearing was not the time for that.

Motions to dismiss can only be based on whether or not the plaintiffs have legal grounds to allege what they do. At this stage, the judge has to assume that everything they say is true. Just the act of having to travel and appear in court to be accused of such falsehoods feels like a violation, let alone have five lawyers berate and defame me, on the record, without recourse. I held my ground and said my piece. I am fortunate that, while I have no legal training, I love logic. The points I raised resulted in the judge allowing the plaintiffs to amend their complaint to specify exactly how they connect me to the alleged crimes. They were not able to do so on the spot. My fear is that they can write whatever they want, true or not, but I’ll cross that bridge when I come to it. In a perfect world, they will realize they can’t prove these claims and cut their losses.

I have no money to offer anyone, and this case is only about money for the attorneys. For the plaintiffs, it may be revenge, greed, or something else. Several of these plaintiffs have already been awarded hundreds of thousands of dollars in “restitution” from the criminal case. They submitted receipts from “yoga therapy” and “trauma release” for the “abuse” of voluntarily taking classes that taught personal responsibility and introspection. It’s deceitful and disrespectful to real victims of abuse, in my opinion, but that’s for them to live with, not me. No amount of money would be worth giving up my agency and lying on my friends.

When I dig past the anger and resentment towards these former friends and their greedy and/or misguided attorneys, I feel sad for them. Either they’ve convinced themselves that something bad happened retroactively, or they are willing to lie for material gain. Either way, that is a far worse reality than mine. I may have to live with the adversity and stress of defending myself in court, clearing my name in the media, starting again from zero, and fearing for my safety, but my inner world is a peaceful place. I know I’ve done nothing wrong and any mistakes I may have made can be easily fixed and apologized for. I can easily admit that I’m wrong if presented with new information, and it would have little to no difference in the decisions I currently make in my life. I would be fighting for justice due process no matter what my opinion of Keith. On the other hand, if I’m right, the damage these “victims” have caused, cannot be easily repaired in this lifetime. People have lost their freedom, their livelihoods, their reputations, their savings, and more, as a result of the lies and false narrative that continues to get twisted and contorted for personal gain.

Don't Call It a Comeback

Discussion about this post