+
More
Clare Bronfman was sentenced to six years and nine months in prison, after pleading guilty in 2019 to charge of “conspiring to conceal and harbor an undocumented immigrant for financial gain and fraudulent use of identification.” The judge stated that Ms. Bronfman “used her incredible wealth as a means of intimidation, threat, and exacting revenge on individuals who challenged [NXIVM’s] dogmas.” This would seem like a fair sentencing at first glance Yet.  Ms. Bronfman has nothing to do with the subgroup of NXIVM accused of the most heinous crimes. Dominus Obsequious Sororium, or DOS, is the faction that has been involved in the most disturbing sexual allegations. But as Judge Nicholas Garaufis, Senior United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, himself put it, there was no direct evidence that Ms. Bronfman was aware that DOS even existed. So, why was Ms.  Bronfman sentenced to nearly seven years in prison after the prosecution recommended a maximum of fewer years than that? Some back history: Ms. Bronfman discovered NXIVM in its early stages and found meaning alongside many other individuals who found it to be a positive and support group. Ms. Bronfman quickly rose among the ranks of the group to gain a seat on its executive board, a position that some claim was granted due to her considerable dedication to the group as well as her ample donations which financed day-to-day expenses. Ms. Bronfman admitted that she allocated funds to NXIVM because she was a proponent of its self-help appeal and because she was fond of the group’s core teaching, in addition to its breakthrough program helping people afflicted with certain neurodevelopmental disorders, such as Tourette’s Disease. For her financial involvement (her wealth) in the group, Ms. Bronfman was sentenced more harshly by the judge. In the same court order, Keith Raniere, the group’s leader and founder was found guilty of seven felonies, including sex trafficking, was sentenced to 120 years in prison — essentially a life sentence. However, other active members of NXIVM who stood charged alongside Ms. Bronfman received much more lenient penalization, with the Hollywood actor Allison Mack being sentenced to just three years in prison. Mack was a group leader in DOS and was found guilty of recruiting individuals for sexual services on behalf of the group, in addition to helping brutally burn and brand them. Lauren Salzman, another active member of NXIVM, and DOS in particular, was sentenced to time served and five years of probation and assigned 300 hours of community service for her involvement in racketeering and conspiracies to commit criminal acts on behalf of NXIVM. Those with lighter sentences, such as Mack and Salzman, were quick to turn against Raniere. Though it became her downfall, Ms. Bronfman’s reluctance to speak out against anyone only reinforces that she believed, even naively, she was funding a good cause. Allocating or donating funds to support legitimate organizations is an individual liberty. The ability for those funds to be misappropriated or misallocated does not directly indicate culpability to those who gave those funds. As such, giving financial support to a legitimate cause, even if it was discovered to be a fraudulent one, is undeserving of the more disproportionate and more severe punishment. Is everyone who supports Catholic charities guilty of supporting the alleged crimes of priests? If justice is blind, a judge should be held accountable too – to the law they serve.  Unfortunately, that accountability is woefully absent in the rulings and behavior of Judge Garaufis.  Garaufis, who has presided over recent high-profile trials including that of Ms. Bronfman and others involved in NXIVM, has repeatedly demonstrated bias, lack of emotional empathy, and disregard for sentence guidelines. Looking closer into Judge Garaufis’ long career over criminal proceedings, there are various incidents in which he has lost his temper in the courtroom. Judge Garaufis has raised his voice to attorneys, defendants, reporters, and other individuals assigned to his courtroom. This alone has subsequently affected his reputation as a temperamental man with manic outbreaks. He was said to have, “abandoned his neutral role, was influenced by press accounts of the proceedings and ignored key evidence,” in a case where New York City’s lawyers asked for him to be removed. Unfortunately for Judge Garaufis, this track record shows the degree to which his decisions can be fueled by emotion and simultaneously demonstrates a potential vendetta or outside motive to inhibit justice in some cases, such as that with Ms.  Bronfman. The core of the freedoms that exist within the United States is its unwavering belief that these freedoms only exist if the law is honored and exercised without prejudice. The separation of powers leading to an independent judiciary is meant to assure the populace that all presiding court officers, including the jurists who manage the rule of law within the courtroom use facts and law, not personal politics or instincts to rule. America has always prided itself on the ability of the populace to criticize their leaders, be they legislators, executives or even judges without fear of reprisal. The fact that a judge can take upon himself to dole out decisions based on personal animus and render sentencing that are vastly contrary to the recommendations of the prosecution, that heavily reviewed and studied the case before it came into the courtroom, is alarming and deserves scrutiny. The American legal system relies on the integrity of the officers that serve it. Without insight into their thoughts and rulings, the entire system can and will be called into question. When an officer as vital to the system, such as a Judge, is open to cries for social justice instead of fair impartiality, the entire system is questioned and this is dangerous for a democracy that was created as a reaction to arbitrary and often corrupt legal and legislative decisions.  Judge Garaufis must be held to account for his deviation if justice is to truly be served.Famous law professor and trial lawyer Alan Dershowitz said of the Strine-Bouchard duo, “Any attorney who advises his client to incorporate in the State of Delaware is tantamount to legal malpractice!” Delaware has now dropped from 2nd place to 27th place nationally for being business friendly according to the “Thumbtact Small Business Survey.” Folks this is extremely detrimental for the future of Delaware’s economy. One third of all of Delaware’s revenue comes from corporate franchise fees. This comes after Delaware dropped from a significant #1 to a pathetic #11 for Judicial fairness from the National Chamber of Commerce survey. Delaware’s formerly esteemed Chancery Court has lost its great reputation which is why Delaware was the incorporation capital of the world in the first place. It is obvious that Bouchard’s actions in the TransPerfect case were part of the reason. These are two, separate, gigantic drops, folks and Delaware will definitely feel the pain.    It’s no coincidence that the large drops for Delaware have come as the TransPerfect Global case was making headlines over the past couple of years! The Chancery Court and its assigned players operating the TransPerfect Global case under the auspices of Delaware’s Chancellor has seemingly turned out to be terribly detrimental for the state of Delaware.    The TransPerfect adjudication by Chancellor Andre Bouchard was completely outrageous and unprecedented. The way it was handled should be totally unacceptable to any reasonable litigator. Millions of dollars were wrongfully forced to be spent by a Chancellor who legislated from the bench while making unprecedented and inequitable rulings. Equity is what is supposed to happen in the Delaware Court of Chancery, not the incessant and apparent feathering of nests for the benefit of the Chancellor’s good buddies and his former law partners?   Consider that in a 4-year TrasnPerfect litigation, Co-CEO Elizabeth Elting called zero fact witnesses, and had zero affidavits, which is the least evidence in a Delaware civil trial that I am aware of ever being offered by the Plaintiff? Co-CEO Philip Shawe called all 10 witnesses in the case, all testifying on his behalf. He had 43 more waiting to testify and had over 120 affidavits. Then, in front of a hundred employees per day that traveled down to Wilmington to support Shawe, Bouchard found for Elting in 2015 and ordered the company dissolved and sold. This crazy ruling shocked the TransPerfect employees beyond belief, and that’s when the wave of Delaware corruption rumors began circulating like wildfire.   In my opinion, Elting got the auction result she asked for in 2015; not because it was the right solution, indeed it was certainly without precedent, but because this allowed a vehicle, for what now appears, the moving of large sums of capital from TransPerfect’s coffers to that of a Court appointed Custodian who was a former business partner and friend of Delaware’s Chancellor. Folks, I am talking about over $25 million billed dollars that were not itemized and were approved for payment anyway by Chancellor Andre Bouchard. If there ever was the appearance of an impropriety, in my opinion this was it !   Elting’s lawyer, Kevin Shannon, is a life-long friend of Chancellor Bouchard’s. Bouchard has admitted he was friends with his appointed Custodian Robert Pincus and folks– Pincus comes from Bouchard’s old law firm. Bouchard traveled to New Orleans, and made a public appearance with Shannon, during the decision-making phase of the trial. Beyond any doubt, this is an appearance of an impropriety. Every other lawyer was made to itemize their fees, making them subject to challenge. Which lawyers didn’t have to? You guessed it.    Shawe won in the end. His winning “auction bid” was $385 million, but he’d offered $300 million publicly half-way through the litigation, 2 years ago. $250 million has been the widely reported estimated legal cost (I estimate higher), this means that roughly, the Chancery Court spent an extra $125 million of shareholder money (and took an extra two years of employees lives), only to get an $85 million dollar increase in value. This was not really “value maximizing” to the shareholders was it Chancellor Andre Bouchard? Whose value did you maximize, I wonder? Another Appearance of an Impropriety ?   There is no doubt in my mind, that Delaware has recently dropped from #1 to #11 in Judicial fairness, and a devastating drop from #2 to #27 for Delaware being friendly to small businesses, has happened in my view, because of the shady way the TransPerfect case was handled. At least when Delaware economics sinks further and further into the red, we’ll know who to point our fingers at. I guess that’s something, but it’s not enough, there should be an investigation.    Most importantly, I feel it is time for the General Assembly to act by responding to these significant drops in national recognition with necessary changes in the law — changes that will restore faith in Delaware’s judiciary so that businesses will continue to incorporate in Delaware and prosper accordingly. Please read the article below.        

Delaware slips from second to 27th in Thumbtack small business survey

By Delaware Business Now

August 16, 2018

Delaware saw its No. 2 ranking head south in the Thumbtack 2018 small business survey.Small business owners surveyed by Thumbtack, gave Delaware a B- this year, ranking 27th in a survey of business friendliness in all 50 states.Thumbtack is a website and app that finds local professionals.

That’s 25 spots lower than last year when the state ranked second and received an A+. Delaware scored higher than New Jersey (D+), but lower than Maryland (B+).

State leaders had been taking note of the positive 2017 findings from Thumbtack as surveys from CNBC and others gave Delaware low business rankings.“The biggest slip this year for Delaware was in its training and networking programs. In 2017, it received an A grade, with 27 pecent of our respondents saying that they or their business had benefited from a training or networking program,” Thumbtack economist Lucas Puente, stated in an Email message. “However, this year, only 10 percent of the small business owners we heard from had used such a program. This drop in usage led the state to get an F for its training and networking programs this year.”

Another noticeable decline came in tax regulations Puente noted Last year, 45 percent said that tax-based regulations were friendly towards small businesses; this year, only 34 percent did.

Its 2018 Small Business Friendliness Survey, ranked all 50 states and 57 cities based on factors that included licensing requirements, tax regulations, and labor and hiring regulations. With over 7,500 small business owners surveyed, it’s the largest continuous study of small business perceptions of local government policy in the U.S, according to a release.

Based on the evaluations in surveys, Thumbtack also assigned eight policy-specific grades to evaluate how easy local governments make it to start, operate, and grow a small business. For more details about the report and the full set of results for Delaware, please visit Thumbtack.com/DE.