1.Mark Vicente — Direct (Part 4)

MARK VICENTE: My understanding is that they had concerns about the way Mr. Raniere's running things. About him sleeping with members of the executive board and other members.

There were some issues about monies that were owed to them.

That's my general understanding at the time.

MARK VICENTE: As far as I know, civil actions were filed against -- at the time, I believe it was against at least Barbara Bouchey.

I don't recall -- at the time I don't recall about the others.

MARK VICENTE: I was. I was asked to meet with law enforcement.

I'm just not certain if it was regarding this matter or another matter.

MARK VICENTE: Well, she was spoken of very badly, very negatively. She was spoken about as being suppressive. That she had all these issues.

I believe there was some legal action taken. I don't recall exactly what it was. That's my understanding at the time.

MARK VICENTE: Suppressive, if I were to translate it, is like an evil person; you know, somebody who is -- is -- the way it was defined in the system, suppressive is somebody who suppresses the goodness of the human spirit, which implies they're a bad person or they're doing bad actions.

But the way suppressive was used is basically against the company, negative towards goodness. That we were good and they were bad.

MARK VICENTE: I did have a perception. And I had a conversation with Raniere when he said to me, you know, in essence, the problem was they never got through their issues. They were -- he called them socialists. They believed in, you know, a socialist-type doctrine.

We had conversations that he would release a new curriculum now that they've left. We had those kind of conversations.

MARK VICENTE: My general understanding was that, you know, my loyalty was seen as some kind of maturity in the company or some sign of loyalty. I said that both ways.

Yeah, I think it was loyalty.

MARK VICENTE: Well, the defendant wasn't part of it, the defendant was at the head of it.

The way it worked was that it was -- the structure was Raniere, Nancy Salzman, and then the executive board was this sort of public facing structure.

MARK VICENTE: The authority at the very top was Raniere. Theoretically, Nancy Salzman was supposed to be in charge of the executive board. There were other things going on, so on paper that was true, but not entirely.

And then -- so below Raniere and below Nancy Salzman was the executive board.

MARK VICENTE: Yes. He did.

Generally when the -- when the executive board was in town in Albany and having meetings, he would -- quite often he would attend.

MARK VICENTE: Well, we were generally responsible for all the -- you know, all the activities in the company.

It's a bit more complicated than what I'm saying, but we were responsible for all the divisions -- I mentioned before the five colors -- for the health of the company, the physical health of the company, policies, making sure that policies were occurring, fielding requests for changes in policy.

In essence, the overall health of the -- of the entire company.

MARK VICENTE: We did.

Coach summits were generally run by us. We were considered the responsible parties who run them.

At V Week, members of the executive board and other greens were responsible for running certain activities at V Week. So certain, you know, areas of endeavor.

We were also seen as mentors that would help if there were any issues that came up. But we were seen as responsible for a great many of the activities of the company.

MARK VICENTE: Changes in the way the education might be done. Changes to the format of things in the education. Discussions about, you know, centers opening or where centers were.

And we had a lot of discussions about sales as well and, you know, commerce and things that needed to occur.

MARK VICENTE: Well, generally speaking, it was -- he was seen with awe, and enormous respect. You know, most people that ever got to see him had already gone through a lot of the education.

So I think people were generally awe struck. They saw him as the wisest person there, the person who had the most superior, you know, ethical morale understanding of humanity.

I mean, in some ways, you know, akin to, you know, a king or a spiritual leader.

MARK VICENTE: There were a lot of -- there was a circle of people that were individually related to him in different ways that was much closer to him, which didn't necessarily correlate with rank necessarily.

But, yes, there was a group of people that were very close to him, and some had been very close for a long, long time.

MARK VICENTE: They could be at Nancy Salzman's house. If there were Christmas dinners, they could be at a farm owned by Clare Bronfman. There would be socializing happening there, different events and parties.

A number of times the people very close to him were invited to the island of Fiji to spend time with each other with him as well.

MARK VICENTE: Yes, they -- they got to spend a lot more time with him. Often they would go and ask him questions. They would, in essence, be the go-between sometimes between the executive board and him. Sometimes people would be the go-between if they had the access to him. If they had, you know, his phone number, they could call him any time.

And then often they seemed to also get promoted in ways that were to me not consistent with the actual stripe path by virtue of their closeness to him.

MARK VICENTE: Well, I believe that -- I believe that my involvement with the tapes was one way. I believe that my going to bat for the company in 2000 -- '8 or '9. I believe that my defense of him in 2012 when there was a series of articles that came out.

And also I took the step to go to Mexico and begin working on a documentary, which was pretty risky for myself and others, and I think all those things -- and I think also just my -- my deference and my obedience.

MARK VICENTE: Yes. In the case of Marianna, who was very close to Raniere. One example that seemed to really concern everybody is that as -- you know, in any rank, in any color, there were stripes and you had to -- you had to do certain things to achieve those stripes.

And in her case, when he decided to jump her two stripes, and she didn't actually meet the qualifications, and everybody was completely confused as to how that could happen.

I was told that he had ultimate authority over stripe paths, so he could do whatever he wanted.

MARK VICENTE: Other than what I said?

Well, myself. I don't know, I'm not -- I wasn't clear sometimes what are the requirement for the green. You know, I think it had a lot to do with loyalty.

MARK VICENTE: When I first came in, my recollection is -- sorry, a lot of names -- Pam, Marianna, Kristin, Dawn, Edgar.

I'm sorry, I'm just referencing a particular private event. That's all I can think of right this second.

MARK VICENTE: Well, as a senior proctor and green, I now had the authority to open centers and to grow centers and to own centers.

So that allowed me the opportunity, along with Sarah to open the Vancouver center. Well, to begin developing towards a full center then be able to officially open it.

So a person with a green connection could actually build areas, build countries and, you know, build centers.

MARK VICENTE: Potentially, yes. Because what happened is that once you were -- once you had a hundred paying Ethos members, you could call yourself a center at which point there was a certain commission that you would get.

Understand up to this point we were paying out of pocket for everything; for all the intensives, for the space, for rent, electricity, et cetera.

Once you reached a hundred, you could now get what was termed a "center bonus"; where you would get 10 percent of the gross, which you could then use to offset what you were spending on the center. And the idea was that if you kept on growing and growing into hundreds and hundreds of members, you could potentially earn a lot of money.

MARK VICENTE: I think so. He had a lot more sort of a personal relationship with him.

Raniere was mentoring him in matters that seemed more spiritual or referred him to a lot of different books to read.

So there was some kind of personal relationship, but it wasn't as -- it wasn't connected to the executive board any more.

MARK VICENTE: Well, I know at a certain point -- one second.

I know at a certain point that Esther Carlson was not trusted. And I was told as much in the executive board.

My sense is that there were people that were in and then were out. People that were out maybe they did something or they didn't do something, or there was some issue. And I would at first press for more information and then realize, you know, that based on not getting answers I realized it was above my pay grade.

MARK VICENTE: Well, there were people that were not high-ranking that had access.

My sense is anybody who had close access that generally speaking had gone through some kind of education, unless they were, you know, a PR person or -- or, you know, a political person, or perhaps a journalist.

MARK VICENTE: So my understanding is she was part of the accounting department, but slightly separate. You know, at times she was termed bookkeeper. She -- but, again, separate from the -- connected to the accounting department, but somehow separate.

She would answer to Emiliano on certain things, because if I spoke to her about certain things, she would check with him.

She also managed something called movie honor, which was, you know, once a week showing movies about great people, people with great philosophies.

And also she was the person that was also responsible for building his executive library and taking care of the library.

MARK VICENTE: She did.

She, you know, although the executive board, you know, was working with him, she tended to have a lot more access, so she would tend to report what we discussed directly to him. She also was -- she ran the -- what is the termed the "legal department". She was also overseeing finances. She was overseeing admin and accounting.

MARK VICENTE: Typically it would be a phone call or it would be in person. You know, they might meet somewhere, or might meet at Nancy Salzman's house.

I did a bunch of work where I got to see, you know, them interact, so they would talk a lot.

MARK VICENTE: Again, it was him. Because at one point I know a number of us were suggesting that people that were not EM7 should be paid as well. There was a general sense of agreement that this would be a good idea.

When it went to him for decision, he said "no, that was not going to happen." So in the end it was him.

MARK VICENTE: Well, that would be probably an example. It affected their potential earnings.

The standards kept on moving around, and a number of us, including myself, so you have people making no money when people, you know, in the outside world, so to speak, with less experience and less time in their craft, they're making hundreds of dollars an hour.

And there were many people that were struggling and if they could make some money at a lower EM level, it would have helped. But he vetoed that.

MARK VICENTE: I did. I don't recall his exact answer.

A lot of the way that I operated with him is when I asked questions and if he answered me in such a way that didn't necessarily make sense to me, I made the assumption, you know, given my lower rank, that there was something that he understood that I didn't.

He had a greater respect over the things than I did so, again, it was above my pay grade, or I just didn't have the intelligence to understand what he was saying.

MARK VICENTE: I do.

There was one instance where I remember speaking to Nicky Clyne and saying, "No, why don't you fly to so and so" -- I don't remember exactly where it was -- and she said to me, Well, I need to check with -- she said, "I need to check with Keith first." And I said, "Why? You're just flying there." And she said, "No, I need to see what he says and I need to see who needs me."

And I remember saying to her like, "There's lot of people to take care of him, I don't think he needs you, what's the big deal?" And she couldn't give me a straight answer.

But I remember being confused as to why a simple decision had to be run by him.

MARK VICENTE: Well, I think generally, again, loyalty was one way.

I think that, you know, he received a lot of gifts from people. Maybe that was another way. People would drive him around. I certainly did the same. Deference. Deference and respect.

MARK VICENTE: Yes, that was.

You know, if anybody's willing to speak out and speak on his behalf. You know, there was a number of, you know, speeches that I gave during my time there where, you know, I was -- I specifically named him, you know, in my speeches. And I did a TED talk once where I specifically named him.

Those are the kinds of things that people would do to, A, to make sure that, you know, he knew that, you know, yes, I respected him; B, because if I didn't, there would be the issue of, you know, I lack tribute, and I'm prideful, and I have all these problems and it would go on and on and on.

MARK VICENTE: Yeah, people were -- you know, if you could recruit, you know heavy hitters, so to speak, people of influence, that was seen as, you know, very important.

And very early on I enrolled somebody from the De Beers family. That was seen to be a big deal. And then I enrolled a lot of movie stars; you know, film makers. That was seen as a big deal.

High net-worth individuals or people who had a large platform in the world, that was -- that was seen as something really good and, you know, I was often congratulated, and I think other people were as well when you enrolled certain people.

MARK VICENTE: Yes. You know, Sara Bronfman, Clare Bronfman, Emiliano Salinas, Alex Betancourt, Alejandro Gonzalez.

Those are some of the people that would enroll high net-worth individuals, and also people with a lot of political clout.

MARK VICENTE: Yes. Actually, it wasn't -- I don't know if it was his neighbor, it may have been Nancy Salzman's neighbor.

But there was a time when there was one particular neighbor who really had a problem with us, with the company, and was very aggressive with Raniere and somebody stood in between Raniere and this person. It was a large -- large fellow, and basically, you know, put his body in between them.

And Raniere couldn't stop talking about it. Just talking about how, you know, amazing it was that this guy did this, you know, what amazing principles, what loyalty that kind of thing. But he spoke about it a lot.

MARK VICENTE: Well, yes, because the higher rank you were, the more were you able to do within the system.

You know, if you were at a certain rank and had the training, you could be a head trainer. As I said before, head trainers could make up to 30 percent of the gross intensive or, you know, EMPs; you know, the EMs, they could make a few hundred dollars an hour.

But, yes, the higher rank you were, it was tied to more money. And basically we were told this path is an entrepreneur path. You know, we want you to get to the point that you could make enormous amount of money, you know, put some effort in, create something, build something, and then, in essence, make money off that thing, almost in a passive kind of way.

MARK VICENTE: Oh, there were different ways.

There was an online system with a -- that could take credit cards. So it was either a credit card. Some people would sometimes bring checks to intensives. And then there was also cash.

MARK VICENTE: They did.

So as I said before, all over the U.S., from Canada from Mexico, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Europe, Australia. I'm sure there's continents I missed.

MARK VICENTE: Generally, yes, it was much closer. I was flying from -- I was flying often from LA. I could fly direct to Albany, but often I would need to stop in New York for some reason, so JFK was easier for me.

When I was spending a lot in Mexico, I would fly to JFK and then go to Albany by train.

And also from Canada, there was no direct flight, so I would often fly that way.

MARK VICENTE: That is a little bit of a mystery. I can tell you in the discussions with Nancy Salzman, she would say to me sometimes, "Well, haven't you healed yet?"

I would talk to Raniere sometimes about certain people and he would say there's still outstanding issues, you know, with the breach. I never knew what they were.

And, again, I would ask questions, but at a certain point I got the impression that I shouldn't be asking these questions, so I would train myself to stop.

MARK VICENTE: I think I started to, and there was -- again, there was -- it wasn't going anywhere, so I got the message, you know, don't go there.

Ben Myers wanted to start a company and I was all for it. And I was -- let's let him go for it. This is what we do. We build entrepreneurs. Why not?

And his -- the way he was with me, in terms of saying there was a breach and everything, this is something I clearly don't know about, so I stopped.

MARK VICENTE: I was told by Nancy Salzman that Siobhan had committed an ethical breach.

I was unclear as to exactly what it was. It had something to do, I was told with -- not completing an editing project; you know, she had been, you know, put in a room and she had to keep going until she finished, and something about her not doing that was a big problem and, you know.

MARK VICENTE: Yes, I was there when -- basically Evie went from actually being the go-between for a while between myself and Raniere, and then at a certain point suddenly she wasn't any more.

I was told by Nancy Salzman that she committed a breach of some kind. Raniere said she had as well.

So our communications stopped for many years because, loosely speaking, I used to use the term "you're in a dog box". You know, they've done something bad, a breach, but I was never clear, while I was in there, exactly what the nature of this terrible thing was.

MARK VICENTE: I don't think so.

The thing is there wasn't really a formal thing in place. It was when you were told by -- I assumed it was if you were told by Raniere or Salzman --

MARK VICENTE: Usually if they were not -- if they weren't giving tribute, if they weren't giving appropriate tributes, they would be told, you know, you're prideful. This is your issue.

That happened to me a number of times. It happened to other people as well where -- and it was never said you're being accused of pride, but it was like that.

Understand, many of us became very, very careful with the words we used because we knew -- it was sort of like walking into a land mine. If you said something that triggered the land mine, then you would be told it's your pride again. You know, this tribute problem you're having. I myself went through that a lot.

MARK VICENTE: Well, it may be related, but it may not. In other words, I was told I was very prideful. I was told, you know, that I lacked the understanding of tribute.

I wasn't told that I committed an ethical breach.

MARK VICENTE: Well, I think the most significant time is when I was working on this Mexican documentary, Encender EL Cocorazon, in which I was in Mexico from around 2009 telling the story of some event that happened in Albany; and then also when I was documenting in Mexico, I was doing various iterations of the cuts, of the edits.

And at one point people were very upset, including Clare Bronfman saying, "You know, you are minimizing Raniere." And I said, "No, I'm not, this is the story I'm following that started."

And she would, at one point, really exploded at me saying, "It's unbelievable that given everything you've been given by this man, you can't -- you know, you can't give him tribute."

And so that went on for years. And eventually the entire executive board was getting involved where I would basically sit in a room with all of them as they began to pick apart my personality issues and my inability to recognize, you know, the greatness of Raniere. And that I was somehow minimizing him. So I was pushed constantly to make a bigger and bigger deal of him in the film to, in essence, lionize him in the film.

So, yeah, I was accused of that for years.

MARK VICENTE: He was accused of pride and of having a major tribute issue.

He was writing a number of poetry books, and I was told -- and also that I read the book and we had discussions and basically what was told to me by Ron Salzman is the issue that Edgar is writing things in the book that come from Raniere.

And then I would say, "Well, actually these things predate the birth of Raniere. Some of these things are thousands of years old." We'd have these debates about this.

But basically Edgar was seen as somebody who was just prideful. He was very -- I was told he was very disconnected. There were entire intensives that were created specifically to help him wake up or to break his pride.

MARK VICENTE: Well, they could have their position held back. I know in the case of Siobhan Hotaling she was not allowed to train any more for a while. I think that possibly her pay was docked. I have clear recall of that.

But there could be consequences to one's growth of the stripe path and one's earning capacity.

MARK VICENTE: Well, by agreeing to get on a special program. In essence, a program was suggested, you know, if you were a person that was very, you know, prideful do the things that, in essence, would humiliate you.

Humiliation and humility was seen as a potential, you know, antidote to this pride problem. If you could really just break down your insistence on, you know, your position, what you believe, then maybe you could, you know, deal with your pride as well.

MARK VICENTE: So penances were -- I believe they were introduced with the human pain curriculum, and then very strongly in Ethoses, and then Society of Protection as well.

Basically a penance was a consequence of pain that you would take upon yourself. So if you had done, you know, let's say, you know, you might not be angry and you say something angry to somebody, you know, you'd say I'm going to go to do that consequence now. Take that cold shower for two minutes to allow myself to feel the pain because I wasn't willing to feel it when I was yelling at the person.

So penance was that originally, and then it turned into as well -- so it was creating a consequence for behavior that was in some way aberrant from the way you were supposed to behave.

And then penances were also part of conscious groups, you know, where few of us together, and if anyone failed, we all did a consequence or a penance.

And then Raniere would explain that, you know, if somebody else is doing something that's a problem, and then you take on the penance for them, you don't necessarily tell them, but you take it on.

So if somebody's doing some behavior that's a problem, you know, maybe I'll walk out the room and I'll go do 30 pushups to, you know, experience the pain that they're not experiencing.

That one confused me. I wasn't clear how that would work. But I went along with it for a while.

MARK VICENTE: Well, feedback was basically being told something that was believed you didn't -- didn't know or didn't want to know.

So either you were unaware of this thing that's a problem, or you're aware of it but you're being defiant or you're being resistant.

So the idea was give the person feedback, keep putting this thing in their face until one day they realize that they're being this kind of person, or that kind of person and they're doing this behavior that's a problem.

So feedback was basically telling a person what you saw, or it may be you were sent feedback. You know, we would be tasked, especially with high ranks; you know, please give this person feedback about something. Which maybe we weren't even privy to the things they had done, but the idea was go and tell this person that that thing they did was a real big problem, and it's not -- it doesn't match their rank what they just did.

That was generally how feedback was used.

MARK VICENTE: It was. Because as you moved up the stripe path, you were required to be more and more open to feedback.

So, for instance, one of the things I learned when I became a green is that you had to be, you know, 100 percent open to feedback from anybody.

It didn't matter who it was, didn't matter what they were saying, in essence, you took it in and if you argued, that was a huge problem.

We were told, you know, all feedback is true. If you argue, it's a sign of -- it's a sign of your -- your resistance and a sign of your pride. Like you're trying to hold on to this image of yourself, and that's why you're doing this, which is if you eradicate pride completely, you would be open to people saying anything about you.

MARK VICENTE: Yes. So in the yellow rank, which is coach, there were a bunch of different requirements; you know, enrollment, you know, taking education. But then there was also identifying your life issue.

And the life issue was simply what is this formula that you keep doing in your life that's kind of screwing stuff up? You know, what's that thing you just keep doing again and again and again, and how does it relate to fears and your insecurities and, you know, your inefficiency; what are the things you try to do to feel better. It's sort of a formula that defines your problematic behavior.

And then as you move further up the yellow, you have to then come up with a plan to overcome it. So this thing that you keep doing, what will do to overcome it.

So, for instance, in my case, you know, I would tend to -- you know, when I was shooting a movie, I was interacting with people, but the minute I was done, I wouldn't want to be with people at all. And I was told one of the issues I had is I isolated from people.

So the thing I did for my life issue, you know, plan, was I moved into a house with a whole bunch of people so I would have, you know, constant people around me all the time. And then I would have to deal with my struggles I had with never being alone.

MARK VICENTE: Shunning was, in essence, there was shunning and there was boycott. Shunning was basically you don't talk to the person anymore, you don't do business with them. You don't do business with people that do business with them. Shunning and boycott were used together sometimes. But, in essence, you don't acknowledge them and you do not support them in any fashion.

The idea being, you know, this person said something bad, you know, whoever, so if you even talked to them, you know, in any kind of way you're supporting this terrible thing that they have done.

MARK VICENTE: Well, in the case of, for instance, Barbara Bouchey. Barbara Bouchey was shunned, we were told not engage with her, not to talk with her.

I remember at one point, Ed Kinnam was shunned. He was a Proctor. He apparently had done something that wasn't supportive. I am currently still being shunned.

MARK VICENTE: Well, there were two conversations I had with Raniere. One was about the Kristin Schneider situation where Kristin Schneider had disappeared, the police had never found her body, and he had told me that they'd actually -- private investigators had actually found her at a motel quite alive with a girlfriend and that so she had lied about the entire thing. The PIs had found her.

Then also he told me that Kristin Keeffe had left, I think, it was around 2014. He told me that they had tracked her down, the PIs had found her, I think he said in Florida. They'd found her, they were watching her, and then later, when I asked him about it, he said that they had lost her. So maybe surveillance didn't be work or something.

MARK VICENTE: Society of Protectors was, in essence, a men's movement. The idea was similarly to the way that women had the Jness moment movement. This was a men's movement to help build character, honor, ability, nobility, that kind of thing, and it, in essence, was to help toughen the little boys into men.

And it began, I think, in 2011. I think, I'm not entirely certain, and it was founded by Raniere with the four of us as we would eventually term "The High Council," and that ran for, well, I don't know, probably still running, I'm not sure.

MARK VICENTE: Yes, there was different curriculum. There was an initial weekend that all men went through. The first time a weekend occurred, Raniere would teach it himself. The first one, I believe, was called the Commitment Weekend. It was generally two and a half days. Thereafter, men would watch the -- do the same weekend, but they would watch him on video. So that was one kind of curriculum.

There was also monthly curriculum that was put out which was a series of questions. The men would get together, you know, once a week or different activities include discussing the questions and at the end of the month. They would then receive a recording of Raniere much like debrief/disposition of him discussing the concepts.

And then there was eventually a curriculum created called SOP Complete which was a curriculum that involved some of the women as well and that was --

MARK VICENTE: Yes, there were things called readiness drills. There were two kinds. A readiness drill was basically a drill to see, are you ready. At an appointed time every day, I believe it was 12:00 noon, sorry, 3:00 p.m., Eastern, a message would be sent. So all the men were on different teams with a head of teams and this was all on telegram, and basically, what would happen is I ran the standard drill. I would send a message at precisely 3:00 p.m. saying, in essence, "Ready?" And that would go to a number of the leaders, that would go to their people, and their people and their people and all over, in essence, the world. And the idea was that everybody had to report back to say that they were ready and then that was sort of tabulated to see how long did that take. How long did it take to see if the network was ready for whatever it could be. So it was basically drill to see how responsive you could be.

And then, sorry, then it evolved into another kind of readiness drill as well which was termed, "Random Readiness." I think the term was "C Level Readiness." Random Ready was, in essence, you were on stand-by seven days a week, 24 hours a day. We went through a lot of trouble to make sure our equivalent of an air raid siren going off, and then you would get a random message from -- it was from Marianna who would send a ready to the High Council. And then we would -- and this could happen any time of the day or night and then it was the scramble to reach everybody and, of course, find people who weren't responsive.

MARK VICENTE: So that was Jim Del Negro. I recall clearly because I had a concern about him doing the books because this wasn't his field of expertise. I spoke to Raniere and I said, you know, it seems to be a better idea to actually have somebody to do this that knows exactly how all this works and Raniere preferred that he do it.

Jim Del Negro, I think, at times was confused and uncertain. I just couldn't get any clear answers and I looked at the Excel sheet sometimes and I was just baffled.

MARK VICENTE: Yes. I don't recall the exact date, but we were holding a training in 455 New Carner. I don't recall the exact name of the weekend, but, in essence, the requirement was there should be a hundred paying men in the room and I believe we were slightly short. And I think it was the high 90s, and a few men were enrolled that were close by and I think the number went up to maybe it was 102 or 103 perhaps.

We began, the training the first questions had occurred, Raniere came out, did the disposition, we went into the back room which was the ESP Proctor room which we used. He said, I have disturbing information. I heard that some men were put into this training in a way that wasn't ethical and so, you know, I have to make a decision and I'm not going to continue running this training. So I'm leaving and you guys can do whatever you want.

MARK VICENTE: It was regarding the nature of the SOP weekend activities. There was a format that I forgot to mention which was something that was called "BS sessions." BS standing for bullshit. And BS sessions were basically held with other SOP members at first with only men and then eventually both sexes.

And a BS session was basically that you were to come to this group, the group with some problem you had some issues you had somebody you were upset with. And basically, the other three were to call you out on your BS. In other words, how you understand or how do you try to understand that you're actually responsible for this thing that you're complaining about.

So the whole idea was, you know, for you to get your authorship over every single event in your life that you felt upset about and basically own them and that it was actually you that caused the problem and only you. That was the nature of what we call BS sessions.

MARK VICENTE: Basically, what he told us was that woman lacked discipline and that the issue is that most men had never really grown up into men, they were boys themselves. This would be helpful for the men, but what the woman really wanted was the experience of what it's like it be a little boy in a man's world.

So the metaphor being when you're a young boy, you get teased by all the other older boys and you get basically teased and tease and teased and pushed and pushed and pushed until you finally man up and stop crying. And it's like man up, stop being a child. He said that's in essence what we're going to do. We are going to help them find themselves by pushing them the same way that many of you were pushed which turned you into who you are today. So that was the idea that we were going in with.

MARK VICENTE: So, basically, as opposed to, you know, the normal type of SOP training where, you know, you're sitting in a circle with questions and that kind of thing. The whole idea was sit up straight, and if you're not sitting up straight, there would be, you know, various consequences, you know, which anything from you get singled out in front of everybody to your entire group of people here has to go and do planks which is the top of a pushup for a minute, two minutes whatever. So much like the army, you know, when one guy screws up, everybody else has to go do the thing. There's that and with him men and women. There was one thing also eventually people would get names which you wear nicknames, be teased about some aspect of yourself. There were various props that were used that people would wear. There were, you know, mantras given. In other words, something you had to say all the time. You know before you spoke, you had to sit up straight and you had to repeat this thing that you've been told.

And basically, the idea was that the first training Raniere and us the High Council would walk around observing are people sitting up straight? Are they being too deferential? Is somebody, excuse me my language, is somebody kissing ass too much, well, they have to be singled out for that. Are they defiant and prideful and they have to be singled out for that.

And the whole idea was that the woman had to learn, and the men, the women had to learn no matter what you do you're going to be wrong, so keep taking the hits until you grow up and stop being a baby. That was very general.

MARK VICENTE: Yes. It was spoken about a great deal in the SOP training in general even before this that the issue with women is that they're entitled. And he would say to us, you know, he told us a story once that he went to college with a woman because he opened the doors all the time, she was so blind to the fact that he did it that, in essence, she thought the door was opening automatically. That he said that woman had been coddled their whole life, and because they've been coddled their whole life they had no understanding of reality whatsoever and that men are arbitrators of reality. We understand reality et cetera, et cetera.

So he spoke a great deal about their entitlement. He spoke a great deal about their misusing their sexuality to gain advantage in the world which he said men couldn't do in the same way. He spoke about them being chronic complainers. He would say, for instance, you know, if you ever use see -- do you ever see a woman accused of something and a group men are blaming her? No, it's the other way around. One man being blamed by all these women. Women are complainers and they're whining and basically entitled. And they think they should have a bunch of things they really shouldn't have and that this training will address their entitlement.

MARK VICENTE: Yes, there were a number of videos. I recall in the first trainings where Raniere would suggest, you know, take photographs of the women that are addressing a certain way and let's make, you know, make a video which I mostly did of, you know, them to, in essence, reveal what they're doing; or if somebody was very, very prideful that a video be made of them to show them their pride and show it to everybody, in essence, embarrass the person and hopefully the theory was, you know, they'll have a sense of oh, God that's how I've been behaving.

I recall making a video for the very first one and then I wasn't at every training, but when I was the idea you had to replicate what happened at the first training. So you would go through the notes and say, okay, now it says if you can make a video so we just replicate what happened the first time.

MARK VICENTE: Well, in one particular case, when the Society of Protectors was first formed, there was the high council, which was the four of us, and our, you know, wives/girlfriends were spending time together because they were struggling with how to deal with is, how to deal with us who were in this, no some ways, you know, militarized system. And my wife at some point said to me, you know, we've been talking and we -- we have concerned about what's going on. We're not sure this is a good thing. And I remember calling Raniere and saying, you know, There are some women who have concerns about this, and he immediately said, I need to know who they are. And the way he said it made me realize, Shut up. Do not say another thing.

So, you know, Well, I know -- I made some excuse, because I certainly didn't want to call out my wife, and the other women. But they got the impression they should probably just shut up.

MARK VICENTE: I believed with some reservation, but I believe that the reason it was being created because the women wanted to feel stronger and that maybe this would help in some ways. My experience of the women over time is that they became shells of themselves. They were -- they almost looked like they were beaten in submission, and in essence, I believe that's what SOP Complete was doing. It was trying to make these women submit to men to be obedient to the point of potentially being dangerous, following orders no matter what. And my experience of the women is that it kind of broke them and they would just do whatever they were told. So I now have grave concerns about what it was actually doing.

And, you know, I find there's layers to these things. There's a layer of what you're told of what this is doing. And then there's what it's actually doing, and I don't think it was good for them at all.

MARK VICENTE: I feel very ashamed. I just feel, you know, it's -- it's been a -- it's been a thing in my life that I -- that I try to protect and take care of people. And to see that I was basically enforcing this kind of really dark, hateful misogyny was deeply upsetting to me. And also it goes opposite to every single thing that I actually believe.

But I don't think I was told the truth about what this really was. I know I wasn't, because these women were broken. And I saw later that they were shells of themselves, that -- that something inside them was gone. And I do believe that that SOP Complete had a lot to do with it.

MARK VICENTE: Yes. That was -- yes. That was actually also an Apropos. I think it was in the -- what's called the proctor room. She was struggling with something that he had asked her to do, and she was feeling -- she -- she feeling unwilling to do it. She didn't tell me what it was. And then she said to me, But it -- it kills me because then he says to me, don't you love me? And I go, of course, I love him. So of course.

And I was -- again, I couldn't understand how a friend and somebody, you know, who runs a division was having those kinds of discussions with Raniere. It didn't make sense to me.

MARK VICENTE: Yes. That concerned -- sort of came to a head for me in and around December of 2015, when I became very concerned for two reasons. The one was there was so many of the examples in the education about not giving into comfort and choosing principal instead. You know, in other words, don't go for, like, the ice cream -- you know, don't do the ice cream. Like focus on your calories. And I -- and I thought to myself, why is there this obsession with weight and calories? What is going on? Is there no other metaphor that can be used? Why it always the cake or the pizza or the -- why is that the grand example of like you have a weakness and, you know, you're going through this thing.

And then I began to see a lot of the -- a lot of the women just becoming rail thin, I mean, to the point that it just looked unhealthy to me. They looked pale, and I -- I was -- it was just -- it was beginning to look almost like their skin was translucent. And I saw the kind of food they were eating where they were eating the same kind of food again and again where their fingers were turning the color of food. They were eating cucumbers all the time or squash or -- I don't know.

When I asked, Why that? Well, because it's low calories and it fills me up, kind of thing. And I just got concerned because everybody just looked -- just really unhealthy -- not everybody. Some of the women just looked really unhealthy. They were looking skeletal. I could start to see their bones under their flesh, and I thought to myself, something's not right here.

MARK VICENTE: Well, I went to see him. I think he was at that point living at 21 Oregon Trail. I went to see him, and I said, I'm concerned that all these people have this idea that skinniness is the ultimate objective. And I said to him, It also worries me deeply given that in this society right now, with -- with the -- the obsession, with the bodies and models and everything, like I don't think it's healthy to tell a woman that their -- her weight is tied to her enlightenment or her growth or whatever. It's just unhealthy. It's going to -- it' -- it's bad. Women, and especially young women have enough issues already with their appearance given the culture we live in, why -- why do that? And he said to me, Well, you know, I work with different people in different ways, and there's different reasons for different things. And I -- you know, it wasn't making any sense whatsoever.

And I said, But Allison -- you know, what about Allison? She's -- you know, she looks terrible. This is -- if this -- if this is her having some kind of breakthrough, I don't what's going on. Then I don't understand breakthroughs because she looks horrible. And he said -- I said to you, You know, she looks broken. And he said, Well, I'm trying to break her. And I was like uh-huh. Okay.

Well, she's not looking healthy. And he said, Well, she's still getting her period. And I was like, Okay. I wasn't sure where else to go because I -- I don't know -- I was thinking to myself, Well, you know, you can take a pill and still do a whole bunch of things, so...

But in the end I just backed away, because I couldn't get any clear answers, and -- and I felt like -- I just think something's wrong and I can't quite put my finger on what it is.

MARK VICENTE: Many -- many of the people that were -- had some kind of a close relationship with him. Some of them that might be in the inner circle were extremely skinny. You know -- I'm sorry. I'm referring to a list to make sure I get this right: Daniela Padilla, you know, Monica Duran, a number of the -- a number of the women that were spending time with -- with Allison Mack would eventually -- I was concerned about, you know, India's weight.

There seemed to be a kind of a club of I young women gathering around Allison Mack and they just didn't look healthy. I mean, you know, maybe they were healthy by Fashion Week's standards, you know, which is not healthy in my opinion, but they just did not at all look good. They were just obsessed with eating as little as possible, and they would literally measure their calories on a scale. There was all this measuring going on. And there was also this obsessive penitence that they would do if they messed something up. You know, so if somebody was on a certain number of calories and they messed something up, then they would cut their calories. You know, and when I was hearing that people were cutting it down to 500 calories or 300 calories, something's not -- I mean, okay. So I'm fat. But, like, something's not right.

MARK VICENTE: I was disturbed because a part of me thought okay, well, so we're trying to break pride. Okay? I mean, I -- I get that. But I couldn't understand why somebody withering away was somehow going to fix that. That was the part I didn't get. And -- and the thing is, I -- I -- I was at this point beginning to ask Raniere a lot of questions, but there was still the issue of my rank and his rank. So I had to be very careful that only in private would I ask him certain questions, not in public. And then also even in private, this was somebody who was, like -- it's like questioning the king, you know? Like at a certain point just slow down and be careful.

So I would office just nod my head and think, okay. Well, he's got some understanding that I don't have and maybe there's some wisdom I just can't get because of something he knows. I don't share that anymore, but that's what I thought at the time.

MARK VICENTE: Well, one of the ways was when Barbara Jeske died, after she died he spoke to me and said this was like losing a wife for him. And I'd never heard him say that before. And suddenly it occurred to me, Oh, I didn't realize that that was the relationship. That was quite -- it was a surprise to me. And it sort of made sense because, you know, he said to me once, like when it comes to having sex he really needs to know somebody, and -- and it takes at least a year to really, really know somebody before that happened. So I thought okay. Well, you know, he's known her a long time. I guess that kind of makes sense.

And then later, there was an actress that I had introduced him to, and he told me that they'd begun a thing together, and that it had got very inflammatory and she hit him. And I thought, Okay. So they're a thing. I -- I -- I took that to mean a sexual thing given the way they were with each other. And then in 2017, he told me that he had conceived with Marianna, and I was surprised that I didn't -- I didn't really -- even though they were together all the time, I didn't know that that was their relationship, and I -- it was a disturbing conversation in general to me. But I decided to just, you know, in essence, not show that I had deep concerns about it. And I said to him, You know, okay, well, I guess congratulations are in order, and I just left it alone. But I began to develop a picture in my mind. Okay. So there's lot more going on than I realize.

MARK VICENTE: That's a committee, yes, yes.

And then she also was the head of the company called The Source, which would be the acting program. And then she also for a time was involved in a company called The Knife. The Knife of Aristotle was a media analysis company.