Skip to content
2019 Federal Trialtrial-daytrial-dayMark LeskoMoira Kim PenzaMarc AgnifiloCharles FontanelliStephen HerbitsMark VicentecrossredirectrecrossdirectDay 7 - May 16, 2019Mark Vicente completed testimony about FBI contacts, filmmaking, and DOS. Stephen Herbits testified about Bronfman requests and emails, while investigator Charles Fontanelli reviewed property records and evidence seized from Nancy Salzman's home.
← Day 62019 Federal TrialDay 8 →

Day 7 - May 16, 2019

Vicente Concludes Testimony; Herbits and Fontanelli Testify

Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis
12Proceedings
6Pages
3Witnesses
2,666Lines
4Sidebars
Day 7 of 29
Appearing:

Mark Vicente completed testimony about FBI contacts, filmmaking, and DOS. Stephen Herbits testified about Bronfman requests and emails, while investigator Charles Fontanelli reviewed property records and evidence seized from Nancy Salzman's home.

Full day summary

Mark Vicente completed his testimony after further questioning about his former beliefs, FBI contacts, filmmaking, and understanding of DOS. He acknowledged relying on others for information about DOS because he had not belonged to it, and qualified several recollections. The court limited others' statements to their effect on him and restricted further questioning about conversations with Kristin Keeffe. Outside the jury's presence, it excluded Tourette's cure claims from his cross-examination while allowing questions about filming tactics and leaving the defense free to pursue health claims in its own case. On redirect, Vicente said his contacts with Sarah concerned gathering clear details for the FBI. He described pressure surrounding obedience to Raniere and offered his present interpretation that NXIVM programs supplied recruitment opportunities and techniques for DOS. He also discussed removing material from intensive tapes in connection with litigation. On recross, he agreed that Exhibit 1397 itself referred to duplication, not editing or modification. Stephen Herbits testified about efforts to assist Sarah and Clare Bronfman with NXIVM's reputation and disputes. He said he refused requests to approach prosecutors and the Albany Times Union publisher, recommending public relations work instead. Six email exhibits were admitted, including Clare's discussions of possible criminal charges against Rick Ross and invoking political clout. Herbits denied conveying Edgar Bronfman's property instructions to Frank Parlato. Under defense questioning, he qualified his recollections, said he had never met Raniere, and acknowledged that he did not know Clare's motives for visiting her father. Investigator Charles Fontanelli reviewed maps, property records, email search-warrant returns, and photographs from the search of Nancy Salzman's home. He displayed a laptop marked for identification and linked seven admitted documents to it. He also identified an admitted box of labeled files, noting that his examination had been cursory. The court later established a sidebar procedure for potentially privileged questions during Lauren Salzman's anticipated testimony and deferred clarification of NXIVM's asserted privilege.

1. Mark Vicente — Cross (Part 9)

Mark Vicente’s continued cross-examination addressed his criticism of NXIVM, FBI contacts, and filming near India’s workplace. The court limited questioning about others’ statements.

→
Procedural
Resumption of Mark Vicente's Cross-Examination
9 lines
Cross
Mark Vicente — Cross Mark Vicente Marc Agnifilo
851 lines

The defense tested Vicente's prior beliefs, secondhand DOS information, FBI contacts, and filming motives. The court limited others' statements to their effect on him and restricted further hearsay questioning.

3 sidebars inside this proceeding
  1. Scope of Ramtha Cross-ExaminationThe defense sought to explore the witness’s Ramtha affiliation for context and credibility, while prosecutors warned against prolonged questioning and prejudicial focus on alien references.
  2. Limiting Use of Catherine Oxenberg's StatementsLesko requested that testimony about Catherine Oxenberg's statements be used only to establish Vicente's state of mind and their effect on him, not their truth.
  3. Hearsay Limits on Questions About Kristin KeeffeCounsel disputed whether questions about Keeffe’s FBI contacts explored Vicente’s motives or improperly introduced hearsay.

Highlights

3. Mark Vicente — Cross/Redirect/Recross (Part 10)

Mark Vicente finishes testifying, addressing his documentary involvement, reasons for contacting law enforcement, and concerns about NXIVM. Recross revisits tape duplication and his account of surveillance.

→
Cross
Mark Vicente — Cross Resumed Mark Vicente Marc Agnifilo
133 lines

The defense concluded Vicente's cross-examination by testing his documentary interests, finances, and changed beliefs. He denied editorial input in the HBO project and qualified counsel's income and travel premises.

Redirect
Mark Vicente — Redirect Mark Vicente Mark Lesko
295 lines

On redirect, Vicente explained his FBI contacts, described internal pressure, and clarified that he knew the tape-editing project involved litigation. He identified DOS members in a photograph and recalled Sarah's distress when discussing branding.

Recross
Mark Vicente — Recross Mark Vicente Marc Agnifilo
46 lines

Recross tested Vicente's tape-project document, recollection of a Fiji dispute, and surveillance account. After he was excused, the court admitted replacement Exhibit 1002A without objection.

Highlights

4. Stephen Herbits — Direct/Cross/Redirect/Recross

Stephen Herbits testified about the Bronfman sisters' requests for help with NXIVM's reputation and disputes, then faced questions about litigation and family relationships. He qualified several recollections. After his testimony, the court admitted additional government exhibits.

→
Direct
Stephen Herbits — Direct Stephen Herbits Mark Lesko
505 lines

Herbits described refusing requests to approach prosecutors and stop NXIVM press coverage. Six email exhibits documented requests for help against critics and his responses.

1 sidebar inside this proceeding
  1. Privilege Question Over Herbits’s MemoCounsel discussed whether attorney-client privilege covered Herbits’s memo, including whether its disclosure established that privilege had been lost.
Cross
Stephen Herbits — Cross Stephen Herbits Marc Agnifilo
89 lines

Herbits qualified his litigation knowledge and observations of Clare and Edgar, denied conveying instructions to Parlato, and confirmed he had never met Raniere.

Redirect
Stephen Herbits — Redirect Stephen Herbits Mark Lesko
14 lines

Herbits described withdrawing from dealings he considered improper, recounted family concerns, and declined to assess Clare Bronfman's mental state.

Recross
Stephen Herbits — Recross Stephen Herbits Marc Agnifilo
63 lines

Herbits rejected the defense's characterization of family visits but disclaimed knowledge of Clare's motives. The court then admitted listed exhibits by consent and over prior objections.

Highlights

← Day 62019 Federal TrialDay 8 →