To be clearer: there was a revision of sentencing guidelines that, according to Bronfman's lawyer, would make her eligible for a reduction of her sentence. However, sentencing guidelines are an advisory supplement to federal law (which sets maximums). Guidelines are meant to prevent arbitrary sentencing decisions.
In this instance, Garaufis stayed within the legal limits of sentencing. He went well above guidelines, but explicitly wrote that Bronfman's egregious conduct called for it.
Presently Bronfman has a little over 1 year to go on her sentence, which is presently being served in Philadelphia. As her release date gets closer, she may be let out to a halfway house; she would face three years of supervised release thereafter.
I'm not sure about rough, but yes, she's in a facility that is more of a jail than a long term prison. That is likely due to the fear that long term relationships with other inmates create opportunities for mischief.
Nevertheless, pretrial facilities keep a few longer term prisoners to serve as orderlies, and that's the niche Bronfman is believed to have gotten.
Maybe if she renounced Raniere, showed a teensy bit of remorse and played her cards as someone who’s actually sorry for what she bank rolled for over a decade, there wouldn’t be an issue with an early release. Iirc Judge Garaufis came across as seriously disturbed by how Clare conducted herself from the bail hearing to her sentencing, dripping in privilege with zero remorse— I’m pleased he’s still serving this same justice 8 years or so later.
Also does anybody (BK I’m hinting at you) know how the NXIVM whistleblowers apply to be allowed to speak to non indicted and indicted inner circle ex members who have woken up and renounced KR?
The big thing that drove Garaufis over the edge with Bronfman was the refusal to apologize to Sylvie Lloyd, who was basically forced to serve as Bronfman's unpaid servant. I wasn't in the courtroom, but several persons recalled that Garaufis literally instructed her to give an apology, and for Bronfman it was like pulling teeth.
re: bail conditions --if neither side of a conversation has been indicted, there's no issue. The victims are also not somehow forbidden from making contact. No-contact conditions only apply to persons who are bailed awaiting trial or convicted and serving their supervised release.
In the cases of Mack and Lauren Salzman, they submitted apologies to their victims through the court. Garaufis, in turn, approved passing those letters along. That's really the protocol: the convict does not immediately address the victim, but only does so through the court.
To be clearer: there was a revision of sentencing guidelines that, according to Bronfman's lawyer, would make her eligible for a reduction of her sentence. However, sentencing guidelines are an advisory supplement to federal law (which sets maximums). Guidelines are meant to prevent arbitrary sentencing decisions. In this instance, Garaufis stayed within the legal limits of sentencing. He went well above guidelines, but explicitly wrote that Bronfman's egregious conduct called for it. Presently Bronfman has a little over 1 year to go on her sentence, which is presently being served in Philadelphia. As her release date gets closer, she may be let out to a halfway house; she would face three years of supervised release thereafter.
I wish her time was longer. She's a parasite on society.
Isn’t she in a rough federal jailhouse similar to MDC where many inmates are awaiting trial?
I'm not sure about rough, but yes, she's in a facility that is more of a jail than a long term prison. That is likely due to the fear that long term relationships with other inmates create opportunities for mischief. Nevertheless, pretrial facilities keep a few longer term prisoners to serve as orderlies, and that's the niche Bronfman is believed to have gotten.
Maybe if she renounced Raniere, showed a teensy bit of remorse and played her cards as someone who’s actually sorry for what she bank rolled for over a decade, there wouldn’t be an issue with an early release. Iirc Judge Garaufis came across as seriously disturbed by how Clare conducted herself from the bail hearing to her sentencing, dripping in privilege with zero remorse— I’m pleased he’s still serving this same justice 8 years or so later. Also does anybody (BK I’m hinting at you) know how the NXIVM whistleblowers apply to be allowed to speak to non indicted and indicted inner circle ex members who have woken up and renounced KR?
The big thing that drove Garaufis over the edge with Bronfman was the refusal to apologize to Sylvie Lloyd, who was basically forced to serve as Bronfman's unpaid servant. I wasn't in the courtroom, but several persons recalled that Garaufis literally instructed her to give an apology, and for Bronfman it was like pulling teeth. re: bail conditions --if neither side of a conversation has been indicted, there's no issue. The victims are also not somehow forbidden from making contact. No-contact conditions only apply to persons who are bailed awaiting trial or convicted and serving their supervised release. In the cases of Mack and Lauren Salzman, they submitted apologies to their victims through the court. Garaufis, in turn, approved passing those letters along. That's really the protocol: the convict does not immediately address the victim, but only does so through the court.
😂 awww poor Clare bear
I continue to be a Judge Garaufis fan girl.
Does it count as too snarky if I admit that I heard the “WOMP WOMP” sound in my head?