This trial coverage project is brought to you by OneTaste. It’s about exposing the damage left behind by a DOJ that was politicized and weaponized during the Obama-Biden years. Americans across the country have been unfairly targeted for political and cultural reasons, victims of a system that was turned against the people it was meant to protect. OneTaste’s fight for freedom is bigger than one case. It is about defending every citizen’s right to fair treatment and real justice in this country. This is Nicole’s passion and OneTaste’s mission to stand up, speak out, and fight for the future of American justice.

UPDATE 85: Friday, June 6, 5:30 a.m. — FBI wanted a sex cult, so they tried to manufacture one…

When former OneTaste member Rachel Price told the FBI she wasn’t a victim, that didn’t stop them. She says the bureau leaned on her for over a year, pressuring her to testify and labeling her “traumatized”—even when she pushed back. Her take? The feds weren’t after truth. They were after a sexy, NXIVM-style scalp.

Yahoo News:

“When they came to my house, I was like, ‘You think this is like NXIVM, don’t you?’ And they were like, ‘Yeah, we do,'” Price told Reason in an interview.

At the time, she thought: “They wanted a high profile case that was salacious and had a sexual component and was something that they could, you know, take down a big organization for.” Price recalls them saying she was an important “victim witness.”

She would need to come to New York to testify in front of a grand jury—or perhaps chat now instead? Price says she felt “ambushed.”

So she chatted, stressing that she was not a victim. That did not bring the bureau’s interest in her to an end. She was repeatedly told, through her lawyer, that the FBI would need her to testify. The lawyer put her in touch with two FBI victim specialists, one of whom she says told her the anxiety she felt was just residual “trauma” from OneTaste.

This went on for over a year. Price felt like she “had no choice but to be a victim in the FBI’s eyes,” she says. She calls the victim-specialist system an “institutionalized victim mill” meant to “manufacture victims.”

She also thinks she knew what the FBI was after. “Based on the questions they asked me,” she says, she believes “they were hoping that I was going to say things on the record and they could turn into a charge of sex trafficking.”

Read the entire article here.

UPDATE 85: Friday, June 6, 5:30 a.m. — Prosecution rests: witchcraft, bad brain science, and infantilized women…

On Monday, the prosecution officially rested its very underwhelming case—a case that, so far, has leaned on witchcraft analogies, junk neuroscience, and a disturbingly infantilizing portrayal of grown women.

Read the article here.

UPDATE 84: Thursday, June 5, 8:30 a.m. — Feds rest their case in OneTaste trial — now the First Amendment takes center stage…

The government just wrapped its case against OneTaste founders Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz, charging them with “forced labor conspiracy” over a self-help community that once drew praise from biohackers and Buddhists alike. But as the prosecution leans on claims of psychological coercion, the defense is sounding alarms over First Amendment violations, arguing this is really about criminalizing free association, belief, and alternative lifestyles. With closing arguments looming, the courtroom battle is turning into a national referendum on personal freedom.

Revolver: 

The federal government rested its case against two founders of an intentional community and wellness education company Monday. Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz, founder and former head of sales for OneTaste, respectively, each face one count of Forced Labor Conspiracy – a charge with a maximum sentence of 20 years. Their defense argues the case raises worrisome First Amendment issues around freedom of religion, drawing unlikely allies in social conservatives. Federal prosecutors allege their unique beliefs and practices were used to coerce participants into underpaid or unpaid labor for their own benefit.

While seemingly always being described in the air of taboo, OneTaste and its leaders haven’t always been subject to such malignment. In the 2010s, OneTaste and its founder were recommended and recognized by everyone from gonzo masculinity writer Tucker Max to biohacker Tim Ferriss to writers in Buddhism, startups, alternative medicine, and personal finance.

But OneTaste’s unique blend of intentional community, self-help, startup culture, and sexuality has placed what might otherwise be benign into fodder for a seven-year saga of scandalizing exposés and federal investigation. Prosecutors allege OneTaste’s “combination of tactics” was “designed” to “compromise” the identity and psychological state of students, staff, and volunteers so that they’d work for their benefit.

Those tactics have included, according to the government, “sexual abuse,” financial coercion, and psychological abuse. The defense has countered that those same actions and beliefs are the business practices of a normal sales culture, combined with the social dynamics and expectations of groups like CrossFit gyms and yoga ashrams.

What is OneTaste?

According to testimony by its co-founder Robert Kandell, OneTaste was founded out of a world of sexually focused intentional communities and haphazardly found their way.

Kandell testified he and Daedone met at The Welcomed Consensus and, before founding OneTaste, expected to take over More University, both California intentional communities. It was also out of a practice of these communities that Daedone created OneTaste’s signature concept: “Orgasmic Meditation,” or OM. In Kandell’s telling, OM was borne out of Daedone’s transformation of “Deliberate Orgasm,” which was less structured and more male-focused.

The pair also iterated to find its footing. They focused on a practice to teach “personal responsibility in communications” but returned to sexuality after students found Daedone’s teachings too “intense,” “weighty,” and “complex.”

Kandell, a former software engineer, invested $350k of the $500k he received from selling his house, which the team used to live and work out of various properties, ultimately landing on Folsom Street in San Francisco. To make money, they offered courses, workshops, yoga classes, and massages. They’d also tried a bookstore and a café. The team offered a “work trade” program, allowing community members to live with and take courses for free in exchange for contributing various types of work.

OneTaste’s community and offerings were also openly sexual—with offerings like Naked Yoga being found on city tour guides and residents finding their Orgasmic Meditation classes via meetup.com.

Read the entire article here.

UPDATE 83: Thursday, June 5, 5:00 a.m. — Roger Stone torches FBI over ‘cult case’ circus…

Roger Stone isn’t holding back, blasting the FBI for wasting time fabricating evidence in a fringe “orgasm cult” case. His response to the Daily Mail headline says it all: this is what our top law enforcement is focused on? A congressman is even accusing the lead FBI agent of faking evidence. Total clown show.

UPDATE 82: Thursday, June 5, 5:00 a.m. — First Amendment on trial…

As the OneTaste case heads to closing arguments, even the defense is sounding the alarm: this isn’t just about sex and sales, it’s about your right to assemble freely. The First Amendment is now in the crosshairs.

UPDATE 81: Thursday, June 5, 5:00 a.m. — Defense demands mistrial after 1A bombshell…

Prosecutors just crossed a major line, violating the defendants’ First Amendment rights during closing arguments. Now the defense is pushing for a mistrial. Will Judge Gujarati sweep it under the rug… again?

UPDATE 80: Thursday, June 5, 5:00 a.m. — From witch hunt to witch trial…

You can’t make this up, what started as a figure of speech turned literal when a witness dragged actual witchcraft into the courtroom. The OneTaste trial is officially off the rails.

UPDATE 79: Thursday, June 5, 5:00 a.m. — Celia Cohen brings the heat…

In a much-needed dose of sanity, defense attorney Celia Cohen shredded the prosecution’s fairytale narrative and slammed the government’s case as pure revisionist history. The jury seemed to nod along as she knocked down witness credibility like bowling pins.

UPDATE 78: Thursday, June 5, 5:00 a.m. — Witchcraft, junk science, and “poor little women”…

The feds finally rested their weak case against OneTaste and it was a circus. From invoking witchcraft to pushing laughable brain science and portraying adult women as helpless victims, the government’s argument is as desperate as it is disturbing.

Read the entire article here.

UPDATE 77: Thursday, June 5, 5:00 a.m. — DOJ now says 25-year-old women are basically children…

Biden’s DOJ holdovers are now claiming grown women in their mid-20s aren’t capable of making their own choices. Why? To prop up their crumbling case against OneTaste. Turns out treating adults like clueless kids is the government’s latest legal move and they’re not even shy about it.

UPDATE 76: Thursday, June 5, 5:00 a.m. — Mackey sounds the alarm: DOJ’s new definition of “slavery” could destroy free association…

Douglass Mackey, convicted for sharing a meme, warns the DOJ is now redefining “slavery” to mean feeling bad about leaving a group. Under this warped logic, startups, religious communities, and even friend circles could become crime scenes. A dangerous new chapter in Biden-era lawfare, where feelings now equal federal charges.

Douglass Mackey:

In my case, the DOJ tried to criminalize free speech by saying that sharing a meme was part of a criminal Conspiracy Against Rights, even with no evidence of conspiracy or an intent to steal votes.

Now, the DOJ is trying to criminalize free speech and association by saying that people are victims of slavery if they “felt psychologically entrapped” in a group. In other words, they feared if they left a group, they would be shunned or ostracized, and this makes them modern-day SLAVES.

This obviously implicates the right to practice one’s religion in this country, among a host of other things like participate in a company or startup.

Very dangerous precedent and pathetic #MeToo infantilization of both men and women.

UPDATE 75: Wednesday, June 4, 1:30 p.m. — Regret ≠ abuse: Bonjean hits back…

Defense attorney Jennifer Bonjean reminds the court that claiming regret after the fact doesn’t equal abuse. The DOJ’s case hinges on emotional hindsight, not actual harm at the time.

Reason:

“What the government has alleged [and] the evidence has demonstrated is that there were people who participated in OneTaste and then later determined that they were psychologically harmed,” Bonjean suggested to Gujarati on Monday. “Not that in the moment psychological harm was the reason they stayed.”

Read the entire article here.

UPDATE 74: Wednesday, June 4, 5:00 a.m. — Remorse isn’t a crime — but the DOJ thinks it is…

The feds claim Nicole Daedone ran a “forced labor conspiracy.” But the real story? They’re turning adult regrets into government indictments, with an assist from Netflix, the media, and a few bitter exes who can’t keep their stories straight.

Read the full article here.

UPDATE 73: Wednesday, June 4, 5:00 a.m. — Judge to defense: if you weren’t there 24/7, sit down…

The defense rested, but not before Judge Gujarati raised eyebrows by dismissing key testimony unless witnesses were glued to accusers “24/7.” A legal standard pulled from where, exactly? Certainly not the law books.

Watch:

UPDATE 72: Wednesday, June 4, 5:00 a.m. — Free to leave, but still a crime?

Four weeks, zero chains. Every so-called “victim” admitted they could walk out the door, yet the feds still call it forced labor. You can’t make this stuff up.

UPDATE 71: Wednesday, June 4, 5:00 a.m. — Prosecution rests—without a real case…

After a month of courtroom theater, the government’s case fizzled into nothing more than smear tactics and emotional bait. No substance, just a strategy to slander and the jury doesn’t seem to be buying it.

Watch:

UPDATE 70: Tuesday, June 3, 5:00 a.m. — The star witness who self-destructed…

Prosecutors called him a victim. The defense exposed him as a bitter ex with a phone full of flirty texts. Coercion? Try teenage drama with lawyers.

OneTasteCase:

Read the full article here.

UPDATE 69: Tuesday, June 3, 5:00 a.m. — From consent to coercion: the feds’ most ridiculous leap yet…

She walked in by choice, now the feds call it coercion. The real stretch here isn’t the story. It’s the prosecution’s logic.

Frank Report:

Let me get this straight: a girl from Colorado comes to San Francisco to start a circus act. She meets a toenail-trimming guy on the sidewalk who keeps asking her to a thing called “Turn On,” which sounds like a 1970s porno club, and she says no. Then he says, “It’s actually a talk on orgasmic meditation,” and that wins her over?

And now the feds want you to believe she was coerced?

[…]

The true manipulation here is not Daedone’s. It’s the prosecution’s distortion of motive and autonomy. A place where inspiration is mistaken for indoctrination. Where choosing to attend a seminar and walking out on your own is called coercion. Where ambition is reframed as exploitation—because the topic wasn’t stocks or supplements, but sex.

Read the entire article here.

UPDATE 68: Tuesday, June 3, 5:00 a.m. — Criminalizing a calling: the trial that could redefine religious freedom…

At the heart of the OneTaste trial isn’t just a courtroom battle, it’s a direct challenge to spiritual freedom. Prosecutors are trying to criminalize Orgasmic Meditation, a deeply personal practice rooted in belief and embodiment. If the government can redefine that as a crime, what other spiritual paths are next?

OneTasteCase:

At its core, the OneTaste case represents not just a legal proceeding, but a broader assault on the practice of Orgasmic Meditation—a practice rooted in spiritual belief and self-exploration. This case risks setting a dangerous precedent by criminalizing a form of expression and embodiment that many consider central to their spiritual path. Under the First Amendment, individuals have the protected right to explore and practice their spiritual beliefs without fear of government interference, and that freedom must be upheld here as well.

UPDATE 67: Monday, June 2, 5:30 a.m. — DOJ’s OneTaste circus: Today It’s OM, tomorrow it’s Christians…

After even the New York Times hinted the OneTaste case is unraveling, Heritage Foundation’s Mike Howell dropped the hammer. He called out the DOJ’s flimsy prosecution for what it is: a MeToo-fueled witch hunt backed by junk psychology, weaponized FBI tactics, and legal theories so broad they could torch religious liberty next. This case isn’t just absurd, it’s downright dangerous.

UPDATE 66: Monday, June 2, 5:30 a.m. — From courtroom to high school: Defense shreds the DOJ’s star witness…

The prosecution’s “star witness” Ken Blackman took the stand to allege coercion, only to be exposed as a jealous ex with a smartphone full of heartbreak. Defense attorney Jennifer Bonjean dismantled the narrative, revealing thousands of casual, consensual messages that sounded more like high school drama club than forced labor. His testimony boiled down to emotional angst, not abuse. If this is what the DOJ calls evidence, then OneTaste isn’t a cult, it’s a soap opera.

Frank Report:

Jennifer Bonjean represented Nicole Daedone. She was cross-examining Ken Blackman—the OneTaste trial.

Blackman grew up in Berkley, graduated from junior college, and worked for Apple for a time. Now, he was in Brooklyn, a witness for the prosecution. He had been an instructor at OneTaste and lived in the community. He left 13 years ago.

Defense: And you were a nerdy guy?

Witness: Sure.

Defense: You had a hard time relating to women… in your early twenties, right?

Witness: Yes, I did.

He had handed thousands of text messages to the prosecution. The government introduced the texts as evidence of a forced labor conspiracy perpetrated by the defendants Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz. If this was a story of coercion, the thousands of texts showed that OneTaste was a culture where communication was encouraged. Everyone used their phones like everyone does now. The Blackman texts reveal they called each other. They text messaged. And somewhere in all that talking, the prosecutors decided it meant chains. Bonjean probed some of the witness’s texts, previously introduced by the government.

Defense:… in the first part of these messages, you’re complaining about Yia, right?

Witness: I wasn’t complaining. I was lamenting.

Defense: You were upset that she was exploring sexuality at OneTaste?

Witness: I was. I was feeling the jealousy that she intended that I feel. Jealousy. Not coercion. In this courtroom, heartbreak stood trial.

Defense: So it’s your belief that she wanted you to feel jealous?

Witness: Yes. D

efense: Maybe she just didn’t want to be with you. Don’t you think that’s a possibility?

Prosecution: Objection.

The Court: Overruled.

Witness: No.

Defense: So, you’re absolutely confident that Yia was not with Rob because she wanted to be, but just to make you jealous, is that your testimony?

Witness: I didn’t say she didn’t want to be with him…

As this went on, the jury may have felt they were not in a courtroom but in high school.

You can read the entire article here.

UPDATE 65: Monday, June 2, 5:30 a.m. — Fabricated journals, real agenda: OneTaste accuser caught faking key evidence…

It’s official… Ayries Blanck’s journals, once paraded as emotional centerpieces in the government’s case, were fabricated. Both she and the feds have now admitted it. This bombshell, featured in Episode 1 of Eros on Trial, blows a massive hole in the narrative. The OneTaste case isn’t just collapsing, it’s exposing an even deeper war: on female sexuality, on personal sovereignty, and on any worldview that dares challenge the DOJ’s grip on power. History may one day mark this case not as a scandal, but as the beginning of a cultural reset.

Watch:

UPDATE 64: Monday, June 2, 5:30 a.m. — He filmed it all — except a crime…

The government’s own witness, Christopher Kosley, spent ten years behind the camera at OneTaste, filming, editing, and archiving nearly every course, event, and teaching. If coercion and abuse were truly “rampant,” where’s the footage? Mr. Kosley recorded it all, yet not a single video shows any crime. Just adults, fully aware of the camera, participating in spiritual workshops. The DOJ has a decade’s worth of footage, and not one smoking gun. Not one.

Frank Report:

He Filmed Everything – Except Crimes That Never Happened The government called Christopher St. John Kosley. In late 2006, he joined OneTaste. He stayed for ten years. Not as a casual participant. Not as a victim. As the guy holding the camera. He made the videos. Edited them. Archived them. Sold them. According to Kosley, almost every OneTaste course was recorded. If not on video, then audio. Nicole Daedone, the so-called cult leader, was almost always on camera. Rachel Cherwitz, her second-in-command, too. He filmed promotional clips. Course content.

Event footage. Enough to fill a digital vault. And yet, after a decade of recording “everything,” no footage has surfaced showing the alleged coercion, abuse, or criminal acts the government claims were rampant. Instead, what Kosley offers is something simpler: video evidence that the courses were organized, structured, and led by adults who knew they were being recorded. He wasn’t hiding behind a curtain. He was in plain sight, with a tripod. So the question becomes:

If OneTaste was a crime scene, where’s the crime? Kosley filmed the whole thing. Under questioning by Assistant U.S. Attorney Kayla Bensing, Kosley explained that he backed up media projects onto portable hard drives to avoid data loss. He later compiled material from various drives into a single hard drive for use by Netflix documentary producers.

That drive was subpoenaed and provided to the FBI in September 2022. He worked under Nicole. Worked alongside Rachel. He filmed classes, cut video, made promotional material. He confirmed the files shown in court.

You can read the entire article here.

UPDATE 63: Monday, June 2, 5:30 a.m. — From Netflix to the FBI: The cult narrative collapse…

The Netflix doc may have lit the match, but it’s the FBI trying to keep the fire going. What began as a sensational film has spiraled into a federal case hinging on one question: was Nicole Daedone running a spiritual empowerment practice or a sex cult? Daedone says this isn’t about crime, it’s about culture and that the feds are prosecuting a philosophy, not a felony.

The Spectator:

OneTaste had been accused in a Netflix documentary titled, “Orgasm Inc: The Story of OneTaste” of exploiting vulnerable people yearning for personal growth and sexual empowerment. Daedone’s Manhattan event was a fightback of sorts: she intended the demonstration that I witnessed to make the case for orgasmic meditation (a mixture of clitoral stimulation and mindfulness) as female empowerment.

But afterwards, Daedone told me that the FBI was circling – spurred by the Netflix documentary. And she was correct, eight months later she and Cherwitz were charged with forced labor conspiracy and are now on trial in Brooklyn Federal Court. They face up to 20 years in prison if convicted.

The prosecution hinges on whether Daedone was a pioneering CEO running an avant-garde business that would empower women – or a sex cult leader luring in and then profiting from her disciples. Had Daedone discovered the new yoga or was she plying an age-old grift?

Both Daedone, 58, and Cherwitz, 44, deny the criminal charges, and the allegations in the Netflix documentary. They intended the demonstration that I witnessed to make the case for orgasmic meditation – a mixture of clitoral stimulation and mindfulness which they say is the basis for female empowerment.

The Netflix film told the stories of numerous former OneTaste followers who claimed they were lured with promises of healing past trauma through orgasmic meditation (or OM for short) but say they were then pressured into debt for expensive training courses, lived in communal spaces under constant surveillance, and were groomed to perform sexual acts for the company’s investors and potential clients. That in effect they had been captured by a sex cult. But speaking to The Spectator, Daedone scoffs at the suggestion that she is a cult leader and describes the prosecution as “an attack on my philosophy.”

“This is a cultural vetting of the practice. Same thing with yoga, same thing with psychedelics. And same thing with us. So when people say, is this a cult? None of this is about laws being broken. They [the FBI] came up with conspiracy, which is a thought crime.” Consent, she insists, was written into every practice and followers were always free to leave, which many have admitted on the witness stand.

You can read the entire article here.

UPDATE 62: Monday, June 2, 5:30 a.m. — Bill Maher Nails it: Regret isn’t rape, and ambition isn’t coercion…

Bill Maher said the quiet part out loud. If we’re going to talk about abuse, we also need to talk about what people are willing to do for fame and power. That uncomfortable truth hits the heart of the OneTaste trial, too. The DOJ’s case against Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz isn’t built on proof of trafficking or forced labor, it’s built on dramatized regret, retroactive outrage, and an attempt to criminalize anything outside the cultural mainstream. Consent was there. Protocols were followed. But in today’s climate, personal responsibility doesn’t matter if your choices make people uncomfortable.

Watch:

UPDATE 61: Friday, May 30, 8:30 a.m. — Judge slams door on ‘coercive control’ expert…

The DOJ just lost a major pillar of its shaky case. A federal judge rejected their star expert on “coercive control,” gutting the prosecution’s attempt to spin emotional pressure into forced labor. Without this controversial testimony, the narrative just got a whole lot flimsier.

Revolver:

BROOKLYN – A key and controversial argument in the federal government’s novel case against a sexual wellness education retreat company was just eliminated as an option.

As lamented by both libertarians and social conservatives, the federal government was intending to argue that, while participants could leave at any time, former OneTaste executives used “coercive control”—psychological abuse—to force their students and staff to work for their benefit. If convicted, those executives, Rachel Cherwitz and Nicole Daedone, would face 20-year prison sentences.

To articulate the theory to the Brooklyn jury, prosecutors hoped to offer clinical psychologist Dr. Chitra Raghavan, once named one of “New York’s New Abolitionists,” as an expert witness.

While similar expertise has been offered in other cases, the judge denied the government’s request to present this witness—and her testimony—Tuesday evening.

UPDATE 60: Friday, May 30, 5:00 a.m. — No chains, no threats, no case… and the NYT knows it…

In a surprising moment of honesty, the paper admits that OneTaste staff weren’t threatened, restrained, or held captive. No violence. No blackmail. Just a group of adults grappling with spiritual pressure and complicated feelings. That’s not forced labor, that’s life. If this is the best the DOJ can do, no wonder the case is falling apart.

The New York Times:

“Such forced labor schemes usually employ a tangible threat, such as physical violence or the confiscation of travel documents. OneTaste employees have not described such blunt tactics. Rather , they say, they feared that defying Ms. Daedone and Ms. Cherwitz would ruin them not financially or physically, but spiritually.”

Read the entire article here.

UPDATE 59: Friday, May 30, 5:00 a.m. — Cherry-picked and crushed…

The government thought they had a smoking gun in six out-of-context texts. But defense bulldog Jennifer Bonjean dragged the witness right back down with a dozen more messages the DOJ conveniently ignored. Turns out, when you build a case on “selective outrage,” the truth hits like a shovel to the face.

Watch:

UPDATE 58: Friday, May 30, 5:00 a.m. — Hundreds of hours, zero coercion…

The DOJ had a mountain of footage from OneTaste, years of teachings, rituals, and spiritual deep dives. So what did they show the jury? A handful of cherry-picked clips, stripped of context, meant to sound “spooky.” But not one video shows former CEO Nicole Daedone threatening anyone, barking orders, or forcing labor. If coercion was real, why isn’t it on tape?

S

Read the article here.

UPDATE 57: Friday, May 30, 5:00 a.m. — The law isn’t your sword, Netflix…

In this fiery clip, the courtroom gets a reality check: the law is meant to protect, not to punish based on Hollywood scripts and career ambitions. But that’s exactly what’s happening in the OneTaste trial, prosecutors twisting the law into a weapon just to chase clout off a Netflix hit.

Watch:

UPDATE 56: Thursday, May 29, 2:00 p.m. — Swipe first, blame later…

Two government witnesses, both with grad degrees, testified they racked up serious debt to pay for OneTaste courses, then turned around and blamed the organization for pressuring them into it. Under cross, one finally admitted, “I made the decision to do that.” Once again, the DOJ parades “victims” who made adult choices and now refuse to take personal responsibility.

Revolver:

Thursday and Friday’s witnesses brought remarkably similar stories to the stand. Michal Neria and Lyndsi Keves had both begun their relationships with OneTaste as students, which escalated quickly into taking coaching courses and ultimately joining the OneTaste sales team. Both had opted, for a time, to live in member or staff housing and met a significant other through OneTaste. Both Keves and Neria testified that they’d been given the idea to ask their partners for financial support to pay for the expensive OneTaste courses (which could range into the tens of thousands) by OneTaste staff. Both became engaged while at OneTaste and expressed stress over their partner’s interest in nonmonogamy, which was encouraged at OneTaste. Both also had graduate degrees. Both opened credit cards at the suggestion of OneTaste staff.

Debt

The indictment asserted that Cherwitz and Daedone, as one of the “abusive and manipulative tactics in order to obtain the labor and services” of OneTaste participants, had “induced” them to “incur debt, and at times facilitated the OneTaste members in opening lines of credit, to finance expensive OneTaste courses that the defendants knew the OneTaste members could not afford.”

Keves told US Attorney Kaitlin Farrell why she opened the credit card: “There were these often, like, high-pressure sales tactics, so there was—we were at an event, and it was, like, you know, everybody is going to the women’s intensive, all of these other women that I was close with in the group, and this feeling of, you know, being left behind, a feeling of wanting to, like, get the approval of the leaders of OneTaste.”

Michal Neria told US Attorney Nina Gupta how she came to apply for a credit card to take OneTaste’s coaching course, which she testified cost $12k. “I would have to think about that,” she said. “That was a lot of money for me.” She recounted that Rachel Cherwitz took her to sit on her bed, saying, ”I feel like you need to attend” the coaching course. “When I have an intuition, I know.” “She said, ‘You know, where there’s desire, there’s a way.” She retold her conflicted feelings: “On the one hand, my brain was like, ‘You can’t pay for it.’” But on the other, “I was really impressed with her. […] I felt like she saw something special in me.”

Defense attorney for Rachel Cherwitz, Michael Robotti, questioned Keves during cross-examination on whether she felt responsible for opening a credit card to pay for classes: “You’re blaming [the OneTaste employee] for your decision to open up a credit card, is that right?” Keves was resistant but conceded, “I’m just recalling the facts, but she suggested I open a credit card, but I did it, yes.” “I made the decision to do that.”

Debt wasn’t the only way that Keves and Neria paid for courses. They also received support from the significant others they met through OneTaste.

Neria testified that Cherwitz “that I could ask him to pay and that it’s completely his decision whether to say yes or no, you know, and that—you know, where there is—again, this kind of thing of where there’s a desire, there’s a way. And in the world of orgasm, you can ask people to pay.” Misha Safyan, she testified, paid for flights and hotels.

The responsibility for asking Safyan to pay, Neria testified, rested on Rachel Cherwitz. “Rachel and other higher-ups put that idea in my head. I would have never come up with it by myself.” “So, you take no responsibility for asking Misha to pay for your courses?” Daedone’s attorney, Jennifer Bonjean, asked. Neria confirmed, “I take no responsibility.” The government raised an objection, which was sustained.

S

UPDATE 55: Thursday, May 29, 2:00 p.m. — Criminalizing the common close…

The DOJ is now calling basic self-help and standard sales techniques a federal crime. “Fear inventories” resembling 12-step work and follow-up calls using Salesforce notes are being spun as sinister “control tactics.” If knowing your customer is a crime, half of America’s businesses better lawyer up.

Revolver:

The indictment also asserted that Cherwitz and Daedone “collected sensitive information about the OneTaste members, including but not limited to information pertaining to the OneTaste members’ prior trauma, sexual histories, and relationships, as a means of influencing and controlling the OneTaste members.”

To this end, prosecutors took interest in a daily practice some OneTaste members participated in, called a “Fear Inventory,” which mirrors a similar 12-step exercise. While the exercise elicited sensitive information, it seemed possibly intended as self-help, to help participants overcome fears. Neria described the practice during her Thursday testimony. Following a morning group OM session, it was recommended that participants “pair up” with someone “neutral,” who wouldn’t be “triggered,” and each participant would “list fears and resentments you have.” Participants would then read their lists to each other and then “tear the list up.”

Another subject of focus for prosecutors was customer calls that OneTaste team members would make to customers after they’d signed up for classes. After the court sustained an objection asking if the calls sought information on past trauma, Keves described that sales staff had asked prospective attendees “what their goals were.” Learning from sales trainings, she testified, she used the information to “hone in on that kind of weakness, goal, or desire in hopes that they would buy the course.”

During cross-examination, defense attorney Robotti sought to clarify that this was a standard sales practice. Keves confirmed that spreadsheets of potential customers were often stored in Salesforce to “remember details” across sales interactions. Keves “didn’t know” if this was a common sales technique, having only worked in sales for OneTaste.

UPDATE 54: Thursday, May 29, 5:00 a.m. — The real conspiracy? Forcing a narrative…

According to OneTaste advocate Brian Mulvaney, this trial isn’t about forced labor, it’s about a forced narrative. And the co-conspirators are the FBI, Netflix, Lena Dunham, the DOJ, and the Eastern District of New York. When media, government, and prosecutors all push the same debunked storyline, it stops being justice and becomes propaganda.

UPDATE 53: Thursday, May 29, 5:00 a.m. — FBI tried to flip her, then charged her…

OneTaste defendant Rachel Cherwitz turned down the FBI not once, not twice, but three times when they tried to recruit her as a victim witness. Her refusal didn’t sit well, so they slapped her with criminal charges instead. To top it off, the feds sent a SWAT team and helicopter to arrest an unarmed woman who had already agreed to surrender. Welcome to the FBI’s version of “justice.”

OneTasteCase:

“Rachel Cherwitz, 1 of the 2 women whose on trial, …they [The FBI] actually approached her 3 times trying to get her to be a victim witness in this case, and when she said NO, they charged her as a criminal” – @ENBrown@FountainheadFm

The FBI sent a full SWAT team and helicopter to arrest an unarmed woman with no violent history, even though she was willing to turn herself in.

Listen to the podcast here.

UPDATE 52: Wednesday, May 29, 5:00 a.m. — BBC move has prosecution scrambling…

In a stunning twist, the BBC has quietly pulled Episode 9 of its podcast series featuring discredited OneTaste accuser Ayries Blanck. Once treated as gospel by both the media and the feds, Blanck’s story has now unraveled, forcing the BBC to backpedal fast and delete her spotlight episode. As Brian Mulvaney said, “She got dumped hard.”

UPDATE 51: Wednesday, May 28, 5:00 a.m. — BBC yanked it: Star witness podcast episode quietly disappears mid-trial…

The BBC just pulled Episode 9 of its anti-OneTaste podcast, the one built entirely around disgraced star witness Ayries Blanck. Why did they do this? Because even the feds had to admit she lied. Her “journal” was fake, her story collapsed, and now the shameful media is scrubbing the evidence. It’s a massive win for OneTaste, and a massive blow to the DOJ’s lawfare case, which is now clinging to secondhand hearsay from a “backup” witness who wasn’t even there.

Frank Report: 

In the middle of the trial of the USA v Rachel Cherwitz and Nicole Daedone, the BBC made an editorial decision to “suspend access” to Episode 9 of its podcast Orgasm Inc. – a 10-episode series deeply slanted against the defendants. The two women are on trial on a single count of forced labor conspiracy. The BBC podcast had a golden goose, and her name was Ayries Blanck. Episode 9 was her story.

Imagine a story so powerful it held up an entire prosecution. A voice so central it climaxed the BBC’s true-crime masterpiece. Now —Episode 9 disappears like a dream. Ayries Blanck—AK Ares Milligan – who once texted about sleeping with five men in front of her boyfriend—has cast herself as the pilgrim in the brothel. Here’s the setup: the DOJ had themselves a star witness—Ayries Blanck. She’s a victim of the defendants who she said made her have sex.

Then at the last-minute prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York acknowledged that Ayries lied to the feds, lied to prosecutors, lied to the American people. Blanck said she wrote a journal in 2015. Prosecutors described the journal as highly trustworthy. They said her journal was a map of pain, of sex, of wounds and whispered commands.

They waved it around like it was the Magna Carta. That position shifted following interviews in which Blanck admitted her account of the journals’ creation was false. The government was forced to admit they were sold a bag of crap! Meanwhile, in a federal courtroom shaped like a toaster, prosecutors still plan to introduce Ayries’ story without Ayries.

They plan to introduce her through another woman. Anthia Gillick AKA Brooke Sheffield. Same bullshit, different mouth. On Friday, the judge asked prosecutors to clarify the scope of Gillick’s testimony. The prosecution said Gillick would recount claims made by Ayries Blanck, including that she was instructed to have sex with 30 men in 30 days. But wait—it’s not Gillick’s story. She wasn’t there. Gillick only knows what Ayries claimed. Gillick is just the delivery system. A warm-blooded vessel of hearsay. This was Ayries Blanck’s fantasy. So now what?

They can’t use Ayries so thety say, “Oh no biggie, we got backup witnesses!” Yeah. Sure. Let’s trust those witnesses too. Why not? The journal was once the cornerstone of a prosecution. Blanck at first claimed she wrote it in 2015. Then—something strange.

The pages quote books from the future. She quoted a 2019 book in a journal she claimed to write in 2015. As a result, prosecutors informed the court that Blanck would not be called as a witness in the trial of Daedone and Cherwitz, citing her lack of credibility. But for more than a years it sat there like a holy book—fingers trembling, voices rising, prosecutors pointing.

But it wasn’t real. A friend now takes the stand, hoping memory can stand in for truth. In the courtroom, they call it “state of mind.” Outside, they call it a lie. Ayries made up a journal and they ran with it. Now she’s radioactive, so they trot out her friend. “Tell the jury what Ayries told you!” Yeah, hearsay. But it’s ok—because they’re the government.

And the BBC? They’re wiping egg off their face—slowly. The prosecution? Truth is not the goal. Conviction is. Anyway—BBC took their story down. And as for the government, reports indicate, the prosecutors are failing at proving brainwashing is a tangible crime.

Read the full piece here.

UPDATE 50: Wednesday, May 29, 5:00 a.m. — Forced labor? No. Forced narrative…

Forget the conspiracy charges. What we’re really watching is a coordinated takedown—a forced narrative designed to silence powerful women who won’t play by the regime’s rules. This trial isn’t about justice. It’s about control.

UPDATE 49: Tuesday, May 27, 5:00 a.m. — Feds resurrect perjury to save Netflix’s script…

Three months after admitting Ayries Blanck faked evidence, EDNY prosecutors are dragging her story back into court—this time to prop up Lena Dunham’s Netflix doc. The government isn’t trying a case. They’re defending a narrative.

OneTasteCase:

EDNY Prosecutors are now bringing Ayries Blanck story back in to trial after admitting 3 months ago she is a perjurer. The Feds are now full throttle in aligning their criminal case with the fake testimony and fake evidence in @lenadunham’s Netflix True Crime doc

1/ 3 months ago prosecutors admitted Ayries Blanck and her Netflix journals were fake. Now they are back at defending her story

2/ May 12 EDNY AUSA Kaitlin Farrell: “There’s going to be lots of testimony about what Ms. Cherwitz said to Ayries, including, like, berating her, shunning her, calling her out in front of the other staff members in the house. That’s going to be, like, a pretty substantial portion of the end of her testimony….like I said, I am being very careful about not eliciting Ms. Blanck’s statements for their truth or at all.”

3/ Ayries Blanck created fake journals with FBI Agent Elliot McGinnis and Netflix producer Lena Dunham and Sarah Gibson

4/ DOJ-Netflix collusion doesn’t stop there. Two weeks ago prosecutors played the same splice-and-diced clips aired in Netflix mis-representing defendant Nicole Daedone’s statements to dirty her up

5/ Is it a coincidence that the Fake Journals, Ayries Blanck lies, and these defamatory Splice-&-Diced clips at the heart of EDNY’s case are also at the heart of OneTaste’s defamation lawsuit against @netflix?

UPDATE 48: Tuesday, May 27, 5:00 a.m. — Are We Criminalizing Bad Choices Now?

If the OneTaste founders are found guilty, it won’t be for violence or force—it’ll be for making people feel things. Welcome to the trial where personal responsibility dies, and unconventional sex gets prosecuted by the state.

Telegraph: 

“…if they are found guilty, we may enter a world where no one takes personal responsibility for questionable choices. One where the state feels free to criminalise unconventional sex. If so, that is not a world I want to live in.”

[…] I’m troubled by the court case. Especially now that (dramatic drum-roll) Ayries Blanck’s diaries have been disallowed as evidence, after the defence team substantiated their claim they were faked. It transpired the hand-written journals were copied from a computer document years after the events described took place. Also that the computer file appears to have been edited by various interested parties, casting doubts on its authenticity.

Furthermore, Blanck’s sister Autymn was paid $25,000 by Netflix to present archival material on behalf of her sister. Another perturbing factor is the charge itself: “conspiracy to commit forced labour”, rather than “forced labour”. The odd wording may be due to the fact complainants admit no force was exerted on them. They were free to stay or leave OneTaste, to live in a communal house or elsewhere, to take breaks and use their mobiles as they pleased.

So, it seems to me that what’s on trial might more properly be viewed as sway – the kind of charisma that makes people keen to do your bidding and seek approbation, or to feel outcast if that approval is withdrawn. Many people will have had a boss, partner, parent or even religious leader who had this power over them. It can feel deeply unethical and people who have been in thrall to such personalities often bitterly regret their choices.

But they will also likely find that other followers still lionise and defend that mesmerising figure. Daedone walks to court flanked by women supporters. Whatever your view on OneTaste, their alleged misdemeanours pale beside those of other high-profile cases going on in NYC at the moment: Sean “Diddy” Combs trial for sex trafficking and Harvey Weinstein’s appeal against rape and assault convictions.

Click here to read more.

UPDATE 47: Monday, May 26, 5:00 a.m. — The witch trials of EDNY: OneTaste case goes full Salem…

A witness just called OneTaste’s female leaders “witches,” and the DOJ didn’t flinch. What we’re watching in Brooklyn isn’t a trial, it’s a federally funded witch hunt where adult women are stripped of agency and belief is treated as a crime. This is Netflix lawfare in its rawest form and it’s happening in broad daylight.

ArtVoice:

This week, in a federal courtroom in Brooklyn, a young woman sat on the witness stand for the prosecution, looked at the jury, and said something that should stop us all in our tracks: “I take no responsibility for my actions.”

The woman, “Michal”, is a former participant in the now-infamous wellness collective called OneTaste. She joined the organization in 2014 because, she readily admitted, she had never experienced an orgasm. OneTaste promised to help her achieve that, through a controversial practice known as orgasmic meditation—part mindfulness, part sexuality, and fully consensual.

Michal testified that she signed up for courses, took coaching, and traveled across the country—all of her own volition. She used her own credit cards. She asked for and accepted money from a boyfriend. She moved into a communal home. She flew to San Francisco for expensive training programs. She did so, she says, because she wanted to experience the thing she feared she never could: sexual pleasure.

Today, she blames the organization and its leaders—Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz—for her choices.

She called them “witches.” That’s not hyperbole. Michal described Daedone and Cherwitz as mystical women, imbued with supernatural wisdom and powers of manipulation. “Rachel Cherwitz was known as, like, a witch… she could make things happen,” Michal testified.

Michal’s testimony comes with considerable weight, not only in court but in the court of public opinion. She was a central figure in the 2018 Bloomberg exposé—“The Dark Side of OneTaste”—that prompted the FBI’s investigation and ultimately led to the current prosecution. She also appeared in the 2022 Netflix documentary Orgasm Inc., which helped cast OneTaste as a sinister cult in the public imagination before any charges were ever filed (and we now know that it was produced from fraudulently created materials).

To the defense, it all points to a narrative scripted long before the trial began.

“This is a witch hunt,” the defense attorneys have argued. “And like every witch hunt, it begins by demonizing women who hold influence and ends by stripping others of responsibility for their own decisions.”

That’s the core of the defense argument: that the government has turned regret into a criminal charge. That it has infantilized adults—many of them well educated, employed, and sexually autonomous—simply because they now say they were uncomfortable. Too uncomfortable, it seems, to be held accountable for their own choices.

The DOJ isn’t alleging physical force. They’re not alleging kidnapping or threats. They’re alleging that persuasion, ideology, and group dynamics were so powerful that consent became impossible; that words, philosophy, and spiritual beliefs were tantamount to forced labor.

But the First Amendment does not vanish just because the speech makes someone feel vulnerable. And agency doesn’t disappear just because someone later wishes they’d made different decisions.

Yes, OneTaste may be strange. It used esoteric, erotic, and spiritual language. But so do yoga retreats, wellness influencers, and a growing number of “feminine empowerment” platforms across the internet. Unconventional isn’t illegal, and seeking transformation isn’t exploitation.

The danger here isn’t just to Daedone and Cherwitz. It’s to all of us. If the government can prosecute ideology as coercion, if it can treat spiritual pursuit as labor trafficking, if it can turn adult regret into a criminal case—then we’re not simply criminalizing conduct.

We’re criminalizing belief.

You can read the full article here.

UPDATE 46: Monday, May 26, 5:00 a.m. — Harry Potter and the Sorceress of OneTaste?

The EDNY prosecution has officially gone off the rails, asking witnesses about witches, muggles, and magic. This isn’t a courtroom anymore. It’s a fantasy novel. Only this time, the witches are real women… and the witch hunt is sponsored by Netflix and the DOJ.

Here’s a closeup of the image:

UPDATE 45: Monday, May 26, 5:00 a.m. — From Netflix script to federal courtroom…

The red “N” is a lie…

UPDATE 44: Monday, May 26, 5:00 a.m. — Bonjean blows a hole in the government’s “coercion” narrative…

On Day 9, defense attorney Jennifer Bonjean made it clear: Max Pixley wasn’t a victim, she was a willing participant. From gratitude-filled resignation emails to public praise for her OneTaste “way seeker” community, the government’s case is starting to crack wide open.

ArtVoice:

In a pivotal moment on Day 9 of the OneTaste federal trial, defense attorney Jennifer Bonjean took aim at the government’s portrayal of coercion and psychological manipulation by leading witness Max Pixley through a tightly controlled and revealing cross-examination.

Bonjean, representing OneTaste founder Nicole Daedone, focused on what she called “evidence of agency, not abuse”—namely, Pixley’s own enthusiastic words about the organization, her decision-making around leaving, and her continued voluntary involvement even after formally resigning.

Central to Bonjean’s questioning was a November 4, 2013 resignation email from Pixley to the leadership team, in which Pixley wrote that she would be willing to stay on for two more weeks to ensure a smooth transition if “it seemed appropriate.” When Celia Cohen, another defense attorney, confronted Pixley with this language, Pixley initially stated she hadn’t given notice—before quickly conceding that she had, in fact, offered to stay on temporarily. Pixley explained, “It was not really common practice at OneTaste to give two weeks’ notice because they felt that if someone wanted to be out… if they energetically and spiritually didn’t want to be involved… there was no like keeping them around for two weeks.” Still, she acknowledged she had done so anyway, calling the resignation “an expression of gratitude” and stating she hoped to ensure a solid structure for whoever would take over.

That sentiment of care continued to shape Bonjean’s cross. The defense introduced Pixley’s public posts from 2013 in which she expressed deep appreciation for her community, describing herself as “surrounded by friends who are way seekers and world changers.” She admitted under oath that these statements were sincere at the time and that she had voluntarily participated in OneTaste’s practices, including Orgasmic Meditation (OM), daily communal living, and self-development routines.

Pixley also acknowledged that after her resignation, she remained involved with the OneTaste community.

You can read more here.

UPDATE 43: Friday, May 23, 5:00 a.m. — The Salem Strategy: DOJ edition…

In today’s OneTaste trial update, the prosecution seriously asked which staff members were considered “witches.” The witness claimed pretty much all the women were. If this is their definition of justice, we’re one broomstick away from a full-on burning.

OneTasteCase:

Day 13 Afternoon Trial Update:

Today in Federal Criminal trial USA v. Cherwitz & Daedone out of EDNY —

Prosecution: And you mentioned that Rachel Cherwitz was considered a witch?

Witness: Yes!

Prosecution: Was there anyone else in OneTaste who was considered a witch?

Witness: Yeah. Pretty much all of the staff, all of the female staff.

UPDATE 42: Friday, May 23, 5:00 a.m. — Bloomberg knew and said nothing…

In 2021, Bloomberg’s Ellen Huet admitted to Nicole Daedone that her OneTaste reporting was one-sided. So why hasn’t she corrected the “bombshell” story that helped launch a federal case?

Here’s a closeup of Ellen’s message to Nicole:

UPDATE 41: Friday, May 23, 5:00 a.m. — From tears to talking points…

Brian Mulvaney breaks down what really happened in court: a witness sobs through a love letter to Nicole and Rachel… then snaps right back into government-scripted testimony. If this is “coercion,” it’s the most emotional one-woman show on the DOJ’s payroll.

UPDATE 40: Friday, May 23, 5:00 a.m. — Reason Magazine Calls It: The case against OneTaste is weak…

Feminism or forced labor? Reason’s Elizabeth Nolan Brown digs into the bizarre federal prosecution of OneTaste—and calls it what it is: a weak, weird, and dangerous case that never should’ve made it to trial.

UPDATE 39: Friday, May 23, 5:00 a.m. — Mike Howell: From Waco to OneTaste… Weaponized government just got a big ol’ upgrade…

Heritage Oversight Project’s Mike Howell says these “forced labor” brainwashing claims are straight out of the same playbook used at Ruby Ridge and Waco. Once these fringe tactics get greenlit, they don’t disappear, they get weaponized.

Mike Howell:

When you study the arc of gov’t weaponization you look at events like Ruby Ridge or Waco and learn how those w guns/badges can use wild theories to crush people.

It then becomes established tactics and process.

“Forced labor” brainwashing theories would be awful precedent.

UPDATE 38: Friday, May 23, 5:00 a.m. — Confused = coerced? That’s the government’s case…

Another witness admits she was never told she couldn’t leave OneTaste and even wanted to stay. But somehow, that’s still being framed as “forced labor.” Welcome to the emotional policing era of the DOJ.

Image

UPDATE 38: Friday, May 23, 5:00 a.m. — The ‘Witch Trials’ of OneTaste…

The EDNY prosecution is now asking witnesses which OneTaste staffers were considered “witches.” Welcome to 2025, where the DOJ channels Salem instead of seeking justice.

Marcus Ratnathicam:

Today in federal criminal trial USA v. Cherwitz & Daedone out of EDNY. (This is not a joke):

Prosecution: And you mentioned that Rachel Cherwitz was considered a witch?

Witness: Yes

Prosecution: Was there anyone else in OneTaste who was considered a witch?

Witness: Yeah. Pretty much all of the staff, all of the female staff.

UPDATE 37: Thursday, May 22, 9:30 a.m. — Netflix and the feds, now that’s a conspiracy…

WarRoom’s Natalie Winters and Mike Howell just said what everyone’s thinking: when the FBI teams up with Netflix to build a criminal case, it’s not justice, it’s propaganda. And it should terrify every American.

Natalie Winters called out the fake journals, astroturfed evidence, and Netflix-produced propaganda as just more tools in the government’s war on inconvenient groups in a segment with Mike Howell of the Oversight Project. Howell said what a lot of people are thinking: the FBI teaming up with Netflix to help build a federal case should set off alarm bells for every American. It’s a disturbing example of government and media working together in all the wrong ways.

You can read the entire article here.

UPDATE 36: Thursday, May 22, 9:30 a.m. — The Trafficking Victims Protection Act wasn’t meant for this…

The law was created to stop real traffickers, not to criminalize adults seeking meaning, connection, and purpose. But in this trial, the government’s twisting it into a weapon against consent.

UPDATE 35: Thursday, May 22, 9:30 a.m. — OneTaste trial unites the left and right—for all the right reasons…

What started as a culture war sideshow is now exposing Biden-era lawfare in full view. When even Vanity Fair and the New York Times say it’s probably time to walk away, you know the government’s gone too far.

Revolver: 

The OneTaste trial was never about justice. From the beginning, it’s looked like a textbook example of Biden-era lawfare: politically motivated charges, government overreach, and a clear attempt to punish ideas and lifestyles that don’t fit the approved mold. The case isn’t about forced labor. It’s about forcing a belief that the government has the right to decide what kinds of relationships, communities, and teachings are acceptable. And that’s exactly why conservatives, libertarians, legal experts, and even former prosecutors are speaking out.

They may not agree with OneTaste’s lifestyle, but they understand something deeper. This isn’t just an attack on a wellness group. It’s a test run for a much broader crackdown on speech, consent, religion, and unconventional thought.

Click here to read the entire piece.

UPDATE 34: Thursday, May 22, 9:30 a.m. — Coached or coordinated? You decide…

Another EDNY witness had over ten FBI meetings before testifying. Brian Mulvaney doesn’t mince words—this isn’t law enforcement, it’s a scripted performance.

https://twitter.com/onetastecase/status/1925340921627124071

UPDATE 33: Tuesday, May 20, 9:30 a.m. — The door was always open…

Prosecutors want jurors to believe that adults with cell phones and free will were somehow “forced” to stay at OneTaste. But there were no guns, no chains, no cult compound. Just people exploring something different in San Francisco. This isn’t Jonestown. It’s not even a felony. It’s a fantasy the government is trying to sell harder than OneTaste ever did.

Frank Report:

What it comes down to is: The door was never locked. There were no guns. No fists. No shackles. Nobody had a knife. This wasn’t some dungeon. Nobody chained to radiators.

No guy with a whip standing by the espresso machine.

WELCOME TO SAN FRANCISCO: NOW PUT YOUR PANTS BACK ON

At this company, people practiced something called orgasmic meditation. But this case isn’t about orgasmic meditation. That’s a sideshow.

OneTaste was a place full of people looking for something—maybe a new beginning. And the door was open.

But clever Fern calls witnesses to tell their stories. About sex. About sales. Salacious stories like it’s a Netflix drama—open relationships, fantasy games, BDSM! He says “open relationships” like it’s a slur. “BDSM” like it’s a bomb. He throws OM at the jury – orgasmic meditation—like a flashing neon sin.

It was fifteen minutes of stroking, with permission.

People left. People stayed. People moaned. Nobody died. No guns. No chains. This wasn’t Jonestown.

Sure, it wasn’t your average cubicle gig. People showed up, got their chakras stroked, and had the time of their lives. It was San Francisco.

Fern wants to put Rachel Cherwitz in prison for 20 years. Rachel, because she believed in the work and sold it. She led teams. She pushed people. She helped them, too. Some loved her. Some left.

OneTaste figured out their niche and did what every good American business does – sells it: OneTaste charged tuition and upsold the seminars.  Rachel gave herself to the practice and sales.

Click here to read the full article.

UPDATE 32: Tuesday, May 20, 8:30 a.m. — Consent on trial…

Amma Namaste calls out the deeper stakes in this case: the erasure of consent and the rollback of women’s personal agency under the guise of protection.

Apparently, the new legal definition of “coercion” is:
“I changed my mind, and now someone else should pay.”

She said yes.
She did the thing.
She sometimes even bragged about the thing.
Then she got therapy, or shame, or a new boyfriend – and now she was lured into a trauma vortex by charisma and a bad haircut.

Welcome to the new courtroom – where regret is evidence, remorse is legal precedent, and the most protected class of citizen is the post-empowered woman who’s just not sure anymore.

Are you watching?

There’s a disturbing pattern unfolding in real-time, dressed in the garments of justice but pulsing with the energy of something else entirely: retribution cloaked as protection.

Two high-profile legal battles – Nicole Daedone of OneTaste, and Sean “Diddy” Combs – are currently making their way through the courts. On the surface, these cases appear to be about abuse, coercion, and sexual misconduct. But when we scratch beneath the headlines, and what emerges is something far more foundational:

We are watching the dismantling of consent. The erasure of personal agency. The regression of women from sovereign beings to wards of the state.
Before we get too deep into this let’s establish a baseline. Coercion is real. Abuse is real. Got it? Good.

Now let’s get into the part people like to forget….

Click here to read the full article.

UPDATE 31: Tuesday, May 20, 8:30 a.m. — Regret isn’t a crime…

This brutal rewrite of the DOJ’s opening argument strips the poetry and exposes the premise: adult women with full agency made choices they later regretted. That doesn’t make them victims. And it sure doesn’t make this a crime.

It is hard to improve on Assistant U.S. Attorney Sean Fern’s opening statement in the Eastern District of New York courtroom in the case against Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz.

While Fern’s delivery was poetic it lacked a certain candor which I have attempted to correct with a revised version of his opening statement which has additionally the novel benefit of that unlike Fern’s version actually says what he really means.

In the courtroom’s fluorescent haze, Sean Fern stood before the jury and said: Ladies and gentlemen, for over a decade, Nicole Daedone and her second-in-command, Rachel Cherwitz, worked to coerce adult women, women who had credit cards, wi-fi, and cell phones, who at first thought they voluntarily joined a sex-positive community, to perform labor, including sexual labor.

These women typically came from traumatic backgrounds as bad as anything you might see on a Lifetime original movie. They were looking to improve their lives.

Picture a room full of people, everybody’s rubbing and moaning, and women are being victimized. The victims, in this scheme, lays back, eyes closed, getting her clitoris stroked, usually by a man, for 15 minutes, as many as five times a week.

The women were forced to schedule their clitoris stroking in advance, and then lay back with a timer running, and forced to pay thousands of dollars for it —forced because they were told it was for personal growth.

The women didn’t need shackles. Just a slow breaking down of the woman until no thought, no bond, no autonomy remained. Was there bruising? No, but their energetic field was totally ravaged.

The women never said “no.” They were forced to say “yes.” They didn’t have to be locked in a room to be caged. Somewhere between the clitoral stimulation and the unpaid invoices, these women were driven into submission.  They couldn’t leave, because they no longer remembered they had once arrived.

The women were forced to share a bed in a communal house which they were forced to pay to get into, sometimes having to wait months until there was an opening for a bedroom and a shared bed. Some of the victims will tell you they did not feel “seen” in the communal living space.

If this case had been about men getting their genitals stroked, I promise you, we would not be here today. It would not be called forced labor. We’d call it a bachelor party. But when it is women, it’s forced labor. It’s coercion.

Click here to read the full article.

UPDATE 30: Tuesday, May 20, 8:30 a.m. — Who’s doing the brainwashing?

A key witness admitted she felt no regret, except for the so-called brainwashing she only remembered after 10 to 14 FBI sessions. That raises a serious question. If her memory changed after repeated federal interviews, was it the defendants doing the brainwashing, or was it the government?

https://twitter.com/onetastecase/status/1924514282525413463

UPDATE 29: Monday, May 19, 8:30 a.m. — What the OneTaste Trial Means for Churches, Christians, and Anyone the State Dislikes

The federal government is attempting to convict two OneTaste executives using a vague and dangerous theory of “coercive control.” But there is no federal law against coercive control. Applying this label to adult relationships opens the door for political persecution. Today it is a wellness company. Tomorrow it could be churches, ministries, or any group that teaches moral accountability. This is lawfare disguised as justice, and it is setting a precedent that should alarm every freedom-minded American.

In our country, there is no federal law that expressly criminalizes coercive control. At the state level, in 2020 Hawaii made coercive control in certain family relationships a petty misdemeanor. California and other states have imported the concept into their domestic civil laws.
The response has been otherwise tepid. That is understandable. Legal scholars have questioned whether criminalizing coercive control can be squared with the First Amendment and constitutional vagueness and overbreadth doctrines. My client OneTaste, Inc. is a sexual wellness company that teaches the practice of “orgasmic meditation.” Two former OneTaste executives, Rachel Cherwitz and Nicole Daedone, are now on trial. Given the R-rated allegations in the indictment, one would expect Cherwitz and Daedone to be up on sex trafficking, prostitution, or sexual assault charges. Not so—they face up to twenty years in prison each for something called “forced labor conspiracy.” In the federal government’s telling, as part of a conspiracy to obtain labor from their victims, Cherwitz and Daedone prevented OneTaste members from exercising “independence and control,” isolated the members from others, leveraged “sensitive information” against them, and ultimately excluded them from the group. In pre-trial filings, the government forecast it would provide evidence about how Cherwitz and Daedone used “means of coercive control” to extract labor from their adult victims.
Whatever you think of Daedone’s Buddhist-influenced teachings, the theory undergirding the government’s coercive-control prosecution should give all Americans, including conservative evangelical Christians like me who believe sex outside one-man-one-woman marriage is a sin, reason for pause. The criminal case against Cherwitz and Daedone, replete with allegations of recruitment, trauma, and shunning, can be readily repackaged and deployed against churches, religious institutions, or other designated enemies of the moment. Against conservative Christians, the playbook would be straightforward. Evangelization becomes recruitment.
Labor is extracted through church ministries. Holding others accountable for sin and instructing the faithful to avoid temptation is control. Church discipline and excommunication become the last steps in a campaign of shame and humiliation. There is no limiting principle. The same rationale can be applied to other religions. Taken to its logical conclusion, coercive control applied to intraorganizational dynamics criminalizes what could be subjectively perceived as harmful influence. To be clear, sex traffickers and rapists deserve prison or worse. And none of this is to say troubled and abusive interpersonal relationships are not a problem.
Christians know strong churches are primed to solve such problems by reconciling people to God through faith in Jesus Christ and then to each other. But those very efforts could be chilled by prosecuting Cherwitz and Daedone under our federal criminal laws. Vice President Vance is right about what is happening in Britain, but we should be at least equally mindful of government overreach in our country. America has imported much that is good from the United Kingdom—criminalizing coercive control is not one of those things. The Trump administration, which has acted to roll back lawfare and restore conscience rights, should shut the lid on the Pandora’s box this Biden-era prosecution is opening.

Click here to read the full article.

UPDATE 28: Monday, May 19, 8:00 a.m. — The OneTaste Trial: No Forced Labor, No Clarity, No Clitoris…

Two former OneTaste leaders stand accused of conspiracy to commit forced labor. But in court, prosecutors are struggling to prove any actual forced labor took place. The case is starting to feel less like a criminal trial and more like a confused morality play, with the government fumbling through both the facts and the fundamentals.

Click here to read the full article.

https://twitter.com/reason/status/1923770761145155617

UPDATE 27: Monday, May 19, 8:00 a.m. — The OneTaste trial: prosecuting belief, not crime…

Assistant US Attorney Sean Fern isn’t building a case around criminal acts. He’s targeting past beliefs, reframing regret as coercion. As the OneTaste trial unfolds, it’s becoming clear this isn’t about justice, it’s about punishing “thought crimes.”

Click here to read the full article.

https://twitter.com/onetastecase/status/1924144735209316610

UPDATE 26: Sunday, May 18, 5:00 a.m. — The DOJ’s anti-American war on consent…

On May 6, 2025, the DOJ kicked off its unprecedented case against Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz, founders of the wellness company OneTaste. Prosecutor Sean Fern isn’t just pursuing a forced labor conviction—he’s trying to rewrite the law itself. With no claims of violence, trafficking, or physical restraint, Fern is asking a Brooklyn jury to retroactively erase consent and redefine a spiritual-sexual wellness practice as “labor.” This isn’t justice. It’s lawfare, using emotional testimony and vague trauma claims to turn adult women’s regret into a felony case.

The Frank Report:

His name was Sean Fern, an Assistant US Attorney in the Eastern District of New York, and he was making legal history in the Brooklyn federal courthouse.

He was making his opening statement in the case of the USA v Rachel Cherwitz and Nicole Daedone — on trial for a single count of forced labor conspiracy. The date was May 6, 2025.

Prosecutor Seeks to Redefine Consent in Orgasmic Meditation Trial
The courtroom was filled with the echo of trauma, as Fern told a tale of villainy where the victims are grown women with credit cards.

Fern wants to expand the legal concept of “serious harm,” the essential element of forced labor.

Fern wasn’t talking about violence. The defendants didn’t beat anyone. The women weren’t chained.

They were broken girls looking for peace. Instead, he said they got gaslit and made to serve.  They were mind-melded, tracked like deer, gaslit, and left as shells of their former selves.

Fern alleged that the defendants’ company, OneTaste, institutionalized sexual servitude—the company’s flagship practice. Orgasmic Meditation – fifteen minutes of genital rubbing – was an act of labor.

The women weren’t trafficked in the legal sense. They weren’t caged. They paid to be there. Fern argued that adult women lost their agency. They were hypnotized with orgasm. They got horny and hopeful and ended up in hell.

Fern, seeking to change the law in America, wants a Brooklyn jury to set a precedent – to give the government the authority to invalidate consent retroactively.

And he wants the two women who made a handful of adult women regret their consent to go to prison.

Read more here.

 

UPDATE 25: Sunday, May 18, 5:00 a.m. — When Netflix writes the script: inside the OneTaste trial…

The DOJ isn’t just prosecuting OneTaste, they’re reenacting a Netflix doc. From opening arguments to emotional framing, the government’s case reads more like a scripted drama than a pursuit of justice.

UPDATE 24: Thursday, May 15, 11:30 a.m. — Prosecution’s star witness admits to federal felony on the stand…

The DOJ just put a confessed federal criminal on the witness stand in the OneTaste lawfare trial. On day seven, Dana Gill, Government Witness #4, admitted under oath that she committed immigration fraud for cash. Yes, really. She entered a fake marriage, lied to US officials, and manufactured a social media trail to cover it up. Now, she wants the jury to believe this time she’s telling the truth. This is the credibility standard in the DOJ’s war against OneTaste.

Art Voice:

On Tuesday May 13, day seven of the federal show trial U.S. v. Cherwitz and Daedone, the prosecution wheeled out another former OneTaste member to accuse the defendants of manipulation and abuse. But this time, the government’s witness brought more than just her grievances—she brought her own criminal record.

Dana Gill, Prosecution Witness #4, took the stand with the familiar lines. She praised OneTaste, spoke about how the practice and people helped her, how she felt accepted in a way she never had before, and then spoke about how being part of OneTaste had her “deviate from her values” – without clarifying which values those were.

On the stand, Gill admitted—under oath—to committing multiple federal felonies. This was not some iffy ambiguous crime, but clear-cut immigration fraud. For $10,000.

It wasn’t a misunderstanding. It wasn’t a youthful mistake. It was a paid job to marry a stranger—so he could get a green card.

Defense attorney Mike Robotti questioned her further:

Q Now, ma’am, you’ve lied to the United States Government before?
A I have.
Q You entered into a sham marriage; is that correct?
A I married an undocumented citizen—or an immigrant for his green card.

This wasn’t a man she knew or someone she loved. Gill admitted she barely know the man—he was the boyfriend of a co-worker at a café she worked at. Her motive was simple: she needed money to pay off debt. Robotti did remind her that other people paid off debt without illegal acts, to which Gill conceded.

Q So this was a choice you made to pay off your debt by committing a crime, right?
A Yes.
Q And you take personal responsibility for that, right?
A Yeah.
Q And it wasn’t just showing up to the interview, right? This was a whole elaborate scheme, correct?
A Uh-huh.

Robotti pressed harder. Gill admitted to creating a social media trail—posting staged photos with the man, playing the doting step-aunt with his niece, fabricating stories of their relationship, and lying to U.S. immigration officials.

Q And you know it’s a crime to lie to government officials, correct?
A I do.
Q And just like you know it’s a crime to lie under oath today, correct?
A Correct.

So here we are. A woman who orchestrated an elaborate federal crime, cashed in $10,000, and lied to the U.S. government repeatedly… is now on the witness stand, swearing she’s telling the truth this time.

Is this credible? Is this who the DOJ is hanging its case on?

And here’s the other question no one in the courtroom can ignore: if Dana Gill was willing to commit federal crimes in 2012 for a $10,000 payoff, what would she do for the compensation she might receive in 2025?

That’s not hypothetical.

Read more here.

UPDATE 23: Thursday, May 15, 11:30 a.m. — Cartoon court: how the feds manufacture victims and call it justice…

This is what lawfare looks like when the government runs out of evidence. Instead of proof, they’re serving up therapy-speak, witness coaching, and anatomy lessons in court. OneTaste’s trial isn’t about justice, it’s about narrative control. And when the witnesses don’t cry on cue, the feds and their TDS cult “expert” are right there to help jog their trauma memories.

UPDATE 22: Thursday, May 15, 6:30 a.m. — OneTaste Trial: FBI used ‘cult expert’ who thinks Trump has mind control powers…

As revealed in Revolver’s exclusive deep dive, the feds relied on Hassan—an unhinged “cult expert” who believes President Trump uses mind control, to help shape their lawfare case against OneTaste. He advised key witnesses, labeled OneTaste a cult, and pushed the exact framework now being used to retroactively rewire the story around alleged “trauma.”

Mike Howell is now wondering if the FBI has “Ms. Cleo” on their payroll…

UPDATE 21: Thursday, May 15, 6:30 a.m. — Read the Revolver Exclusive that reveals the Trump-hating kooky ‘cult expert’ the FBI used to unleash lawfare against OneTaste…

Revolver: 

In the middle of a quietly unfolding federal trial against former executives of a Silicon Valley wellness company called OneTaste, something truly extraordinary happened. Through the grind and determination of civil litigation, subpoena battles, and courtroom discovery, OneTaste stumbled onto a trail of evidence that doesn’t just raise questions about their own prosecution; it raises red flags about the very foundations of how federal agencies have been operating since the start of the lawfare era.

At the center of this discovery is a man named Steven Hassan, a self-described “cult expert” who authored a book titled “The Cult of Trump: A Leading Cult Expert Explains How the President Uses Mind Control.”

This is the man whose work is now featured on the FBI official website. And the man whose “BITE Model,” a subjective framework built on emotional, behavioral, and thought control, is being used to train FBI agents on how to identify “cult victims.”

This questionable training has been directly linked to criminal cases involving spiritual communities like OneTaste, where former members were encouraged to reinterpret their past experiences as “trauma” with the help of taxpayer-funded “victim services” and workshops hosted by Mr. Hassan.

According to documents reviewed by Revolver, federal prosecutors directed OneTaste’s defense attorneys to “look to the media,” specifically referencing a BBC podcast featuring Steven Hassan and several former members, saying it would help them understand the crime under investigation. That podcast, which is now the subject of a legal complaint by OneTaste, contains no formal criminal allegations or defined legal violations. It offers only personal stories, cult rhetoric, and opinion-based commentary. The only criminal allegation it puts forward is the story of Ayries Blanck, the government’s lead witness up until four weeks before trial. Once the defense proved she had perjured her testimony and fabricated false evidence in coordination with Netflix, prosecutors were forced to drop her.

And here’s what hasn’t been reported—until now.

According to sources close to the case and court-reviewed communications, Steven Hassan wasn’t just a media pundit or an FBI-approved “cult expert.” He was also the personal therapist for both Michal, the central figure in the 2018 Bloomberg article that triggered the FBI investigation (more on that shortly), and Ayries Blanck, the same witness who, according to court filings, allegedly worked with FBI Agent McGinnis to create fraudulent evidence.

You can read the entire piece by clicking below:

Exclusive: Meet the TDS Cult ‘Expert’ Behind the FBI’s Lawfare Machine

UPDATE 20: Wednesday, May 14, 3:00 p.m. — Forced labor conspiracy? No. But we got a really awkward lesson in sex ed…

The federal trial against OneTaste continues, and so far, the Department of Justice has delivered more awkward anatomy lessons than actual evidence of forced labor. This week, courtroom transcripts revealed prosecutors asking witnesses to identify parts of the female body on a diagram, all in an attempt to link the group’s nontraditional wellness practices to criminal coercion.

But here’s the real takeaway: witness after witness has testified they weren’t held against their will. They could leave. They did leave. They kept their phones, saw their families, and even collected unemployment. So what exactly is this case about? By all appearances, this isn’t a trial about forced labor conspiracy, it’s a trial about beliefs the government doesn’t like.

Reason:

At ‘Orgasmic Meditation’ Trial, Feds Can’t Find a Clitoris—or Evidence of Forced Labor

A week and a half into the federal trial, it seems more clear than ever that prosecutors are trying to put OneTaste’s teachings and Daedone’s and Cherwitz’s beliefs on trial.

The government’s whole theory of the case rests on the idea that OneTaste’s teachings around sexual openness and promiscuity, as well as being open and receptive to foreign or uncomfortable experiences more generally, were a form of psychological abuse.

This isn’t just speculation—Farrell said as much in a May 7 comment to Judge Diane Gujarati. “Our theory of the case is that the defendants put some [of] the testifying witnesses, our victims, in psychological distress and also taught them concepts that taught them basically to consent to everything and to be willing to engage in certain sexual activities,” Farrell told the judge.

Farrell alleged that some OneTaste participants engaged in activities they might have otherwise rejected “because they were taught this was a philosophy or a religious practice that was good for them, and if they continued to do it they would reach enlightenment.”

Think about what the government is really arguing here: that expressing ideas that others internalize can be a form of criminal psychological abuse and an attempt at human trafficking (a label forced labor falls under) if anyone says they acted on your ideas in a way that benefited you.

Click here to read more…

UPDATE 19: Wednesday, May 14, 3:00 p.m. — The US Constitution enters the chat…

On Day 7 of the OneTaste trial, defense testimony hit a nerve the government has been dodging all along: empowerment isn’t exploitation. The courtroom heard that Nicole Daedone fostered an environment where women could speak and express themselves without shame—and that, like it or not, the Constitution protects that.

UPDATE 18: Wednesday, May 14, 3:00 p.m. — No regrets… until the government showed up…

Witnesses testified they got exactly what they signed up for at OneTaste—and they had no regrets. That is, until the government swooped in and told them they were brainwashed.

UPDATE 17: Wednesday, May 14, 5:30 a.m. — The FBI’s Dirtiest Player: Agent McGinnis Exposed…

We’re deep into the OneTaste trial, and one name keeps surfacing like a bad penny: FBI Special Agent Elliot McGinnis. From manufacturing evidence to burying attorney-client materials, McGinnis is the poster boy for lawfare gone rogue. This new X thread lays out the receipts. If you want to understand how the feds twist justice into political theater, start right here.

We live in the upside down. Special Agent Elliot McGinnis, of @NewYorkfbi is as corrupt as they come.
-Manufacturing evidence
-Directing witnesses to destroy evidence
-Concealing attorney client privileged material
-Using personal email to avoid oversight
The list goes on.

This stems out of the @fbi’s “investigation” into @OneTasteinc for potential sex trafficking, forced labor, money laundering, and other offenses. After 5 years, there was a federal indictment with a single charge of forced labor conspiracy.

BUT, there was no forced labor. That didn’t stop the government though. US Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, Breon Peace, a Biden appointee, charged Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz based on McGinnis’s corrupt case.

Image

The case is now in front of the Supreme Court. Remember when I testified and said the fbi and the government will crush you? That isn’t just true of whistleblowers. It’s true of anyone they want to crush

Image

McGinnis has a lengthy, sordid history in law enforcement, yet, as far as is known, he is still employed by the @fbi. In April, a member of Congress sent @fbiDirectorKash this letter.

McGinnis has a lengthy, sordid history in law enforcement as detailed by @realfrankreport here in Part 1 of their reporting on the OneTaste case:

FBI’s McGinnis: From NYPD Brutality to Rogue Agent?

FBI Special Agent Elliot McGinnis and Bloomberg’s Ellen Huet: How a Flawed Article Sparked a Dubious Investigation By a Dubious Agent

The Missing Image: A Call for FBI Agent McGinnis’ Real Photo in a Tale of Falsehoods

 

UPDATE 16: Tuesday, May 13, 8:30 a.m. — The U.S. Government Is Now Defining ‘Brainwashing’ However It Wants…

All the government witnesses are supposedly “brainwashed,” but none of them can define what that even means—and they all admit they loved the OneTaste defendants. That’s the case: trauma rebranded, definitions optional.

Prosecuting beliefs… the New American way…

UPDATE 15: Monday, May 12, 9:30 a.m. —‘I Was So Happy’: Prosecution Witness Struggles to Define Alleged ‘Brainwashing’ at OneTaste…

In a striking moment during the OneTaste trial, a key prosecution witness recounted her time with the organization, stating, “I was so happy. Like, I loved it there. I loved my friends. I loved – I loved Rachel. I loved Nicole. And so the happiness was real.” Despite this heartfelt testimony, she later claimed to have been “brainwashed,” even though she couldn’t define what that actually meant. This kind of contradiction raises real questions about the prosecution’s case, and what exactly they think “coercion” looks like.

The Frank Report:

Becky Uma Halpern was a grown woman, not a prisoner of war. The jury heard her talk about how she met her husband and found meaning in life because of the people on trial. She took every OneTaste course because it helped her. She loved the community, the practice.

Becky Uma Halpern said she was happy. Happy in the way people rarely are when they speak under oath.

She testified, “I was so happy. Like, I loved it there. I loved my friends. I loved — I loved Rachel. I loved Nicole. And so the happiness was real. And all those videos, like, that’s what’s making me emotional looking at it. It was nice. Like, I had a great time.”

Imagine a courtroom where love and abuse are recited in the same breath, where happiness is remembered—and prosecuted.

The government insists she is a victim. But Becky Uma Halpern was not caged. She did not scream, “let me out.“ She was an adult.

Love Was a Symptom of Brainwashing
In the redirect examination, government witness Rebecca Uma Halpern appeared visibly shaken as she recounted her experience with OneTaste.

She sat there, crying, and when it came time to explain how she could be happy in a place she now said hurt her, she said she was brainwashed.

She testified: “So the happiness is part of the brainwashing. Right? Like, it’s — that’s — because people don’t stay in places where they’re not happy.”

She was smiling, thriving, orgasming her way through life—but now, years later, it was trauma in disguise. To love and to be destroyed—simultaneously.

She loved them. She hated them. She said they were good to her. She said they broke her. There are moments when language fails.

When a witness, overwhelmed by the need to justify her contradiction, reaches for a word that says everything and nothing.

“Brainwashed,“ she said.

Defense Presses Halpern: “Do You Even Know What Brainwashing Means?”
Defense counsel Celia Cohen pointed out that in Halpren’s 11 interviews with the government between 2018 and 2024, she never said she was brainwashed.

Somewhere in the last five or six months, she picked up this word to explain how she could be happy and still have everything be OneTaste’s fault.

During defense attorney Jennifer Bonjean’s recross, she asked Halpern for a definition of brainwashed.

Q Can you provide me with an accepted definition for the word “brainwashing”?

A I can provide you with my own definition.

Q I’m not interested in your own. I’m interested in an accepted definition of the word brainwashing.“ Do you have one to provide?

A I’m not claiming to be an expert.

Q Okay. So this is just you using it …to make a point, right?

A I’m saying that’s my understanding and that’s my experience.

Q Right. But again, just based on your own definition that none of us know what that is, right?

A I think it’s a common word that people understand.

Q Is it? … – then …What is the definition of brainwashing?

A And I’ll say again: I’m not claiming to be an expert.

Q So you don’t have a definition for the word “brainwashing,“ right?

A Do you want my definition?

Q I want to know if you have an accepted, widely-accepted definition for the word brainwashing“ to provide us.

A We’re just repeating the same.

Q So that’s a no?

A No to what question?

Q Whether you can provide us with an accepted definition of the word “brainwashing,“ meaning accepted amongst the public and all of us here in this room, other than your personal definition.

A No. What I can provide is my own personal definition, yes.

Witness Says No Regrets, Then Cries
During final recross-examination, Halpern told the jury she did not regret an orgasm-based meditation practice she did for three and a half years. She said she practiced OM hundreds of times, enjoyed most of them, and doesn’t regret her experience.

She loved the defendants. She said it again and again. Then she said she was brainwashed. And ended by saying she had no regrets. She cried as she left.

The jurors, like everyone else, were left wondering who she was crying for. They didn’t know which part of her to believe.

 

UPDATE 14: Monday, May 12, 5:00 a.m. — Stone Cold Truth: Roger Stone Says OneTaste Indictment Is a Netflix-FBI Production…

Roger Stone isn’t holding back. As the feds continue their lawfare crusade against OneTaste, Stone just lit a match under the entire case—calling it exactly what it is: a Netflix-scripted, FBI-executed smear job.

UPDATE 13: Friday, May 10, 1:00 p.m. — Douglass Mackey: A Young Man Who Knows Lawfare All Too Well, Outside the OneTaste Courtroom…

UPDATE 12: Friday, May 10, 5:00 a.m. —WarRoom Exclusive: Mike Howell Slams FBI’s Cozy Ties to Netflix in Explosive Clip…

Mike Howell isn’t mincing words: “The FBI shouldn’t be working with Netflix—or any media outlet, period.” He points out the long, shady history of FBI-media collusion dating back to J. Edgar Hoover and the G-Men era. But now in 2025, the feds are allegedly fabricating evidence in coordination with a streaming platform? “C’mon.”

Mike took to X with a blunt truth bomb:

The @OneTasteCase account just dropped a brutal reminder of how insane this has gotten. The FBI is accused of colluding with Netflix, using post-dated journals as evidence… and let’s not forget the 20+ agents who flooded the courtroom in a case that’s completely non-violent.

UPDATE 11: Friday, May 9, 3:30 p.m. — Even Vanity Fair Can’t Ignore It: The OneTaste Trial Is a Legal Dumpster Fire…

When Vanity Fair, a liberal, legacy outlet starts raising red flags over a lawfare trial, you know something’s seriously off. In a surprisingly brutal write-up, VF yanks back the curtain on the government’s crumbling case against OneTaste, highlighting fake journals, a disappearing lead prosecutor and the kind of shaky legal theory no serious courtroom would ever entertain. Here are some of the most jaw-dropping takeaways from the article:

Turns out the government’s “smoking gun” journals were copy-paste jobs—literally. Created years after the fact and funded by Netflix, they were passed off as authentic. The prosecutor who vouched for them? Quietly exited stage left.

Vanity Fair:

In March, with a trial date soon approaching, the government made a jarring concession. The handwritten journal entries Blanck’s sister read aloud in the documentary, which formed central evidence in the case, had been physically copied from an electronic file created years later. Lawyers for Daedone and Cherwitz had for months been arguing that the diaries were fabricated for Netflix’s purposes, noting that the streamer paid Blanck’s sister $25,000 for use of her archival materials. The prosecutor who had been vouching for the authenticity of the journals left the case.

Before opening arguments even kicked off, OneTaste founder Nicole Daedone went on offense, mobilizing supporters, launching a full-blown PR blitz, and slamming Netflix with a defamation suit. Now, with the feds backpedaling, even the Daily Mail says the case is “teetering on the brink of collapse.”

Vanity Fair:

The trial’s opening arguments began on Tuesday, but Daedone had already been on the offensive. Aside from OneTaste suing Netflix for defamation—the complaint was dismissed by a judge, but OneTaste is appealing—Daedone has posted videos of her supporters, a sizable group of women, walking in unison outside the Brooklyn courthouse where she is being tried. She has conducted a spirited PR campaign; following the prosecution’s backtracking on Blanck’s journals, a Daily Mail headline declared that the case “teeters on the brink of collapse.”

First you’re a kook, then a threat, then a criminal…

Vanity Fair:

“First they call you a kook, then they say you’re a danger to society,” Daedone said, comparing the treatment she had received to that of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “Then they dig into your history, and then they move into legal. And it was like, Wow, that’s what happened.”

Daedone describes OM as a consciousness practice—not sex. Think yoga meets psychedelics, not porn. And she’s making her case with confidence, eye contact, and Schopenhauer quotes.

Vanity Fair:

Daedone explained as we spoke that orgasmic meditation is an attention-training practice that uses sexual energies but is not itself sexual. She saw her work in a lineage with yoga, Buddhism, and psychedelics—sources of previous American panics that won acceptance as time passed and attitudes loosened. Relaxed and gregarious, she held unflinching eye contact and flitted freely between references to Schopenhauer and Andrea Dworkin.

The case is raising eyebrows across the political spectrum. Critics say it’s built on shock value, not substance, and even Matt Gaetz is calling out FBI overreach.

Vanity Fair:

The case against OneTaste has attracted attention from some specific frequencies on the ideological spectrum. In February, the libertarian magazine Reason published a lengthy deconstruction of the charges, accusing prosecutors of relying merely on “salaciousness, scandal, and the all-too-familiar sense that female sexuality is something to be suppressed and controlled by the state.” Matt Gaetz, at a moment when Donald Trump’s supporters have become increasingly fluent in discussions of “lawfare,” bemoaned FBI overreach in a recent segment on his One America News show—and weighed in on orgasmic meditation.

Great point—being “cultish” isn’t a crime.

Vanity Fair:

Daedone’s publicist, Juda Engelmayer, who was sitting by her side, chimed in. “Ultra-Orthodox Judaism, it’s cultish,” he said. “Not a crime.”

Despite the FBI’s early sex trafficking angle, no such charges were filed. Instead, prosecutors went with a rare stand-alone forced labor conspiracy count, a legal stretch that’s never been tried on its own before. Typical “lawfare” move.

Vanity Fair:

The accusations could be construed as allegations of sex trafficking, which had initially been a focus of the FBI’s investigation into OneTaste. But as lawyers for Daedone and Cherwitz noted in a reply filing, the government did not bring any charges of that severity. Engelmayer has been emphatic about communicating to reporters that the case against OneTaste, to his and defense attorneys’ knowledge, marks the first time that forced labor conspiracy has been charged as a stand-alone count, without an accompanying crime that would typically represent an instance in which the conspiracy—an agreement to commit the crime—was enacted. (A spokesperson for the Eastern District of New York’s US Attorney’s Office declined to comment.)

Frank Parlato knows a cult case when he sees one and this isn’t it. The man who helped take down NXIVM took a hard look at OneTaste and came to a different conclusion: this case reeks of prosecutors chasing headlines, not justice.

Vanity Fair:

When Frank Parlato first read about OneTaste in 2018, he was convinced that something was amiss. It was what looked like familiar territory: For a brief period beginning in 2007, Parlato worked as a publicist for NXIVM, then a little-known self-help organization. A decade later, after turning his attention to reporting for his website, the Frank Report, he played an early role in revealing that his old boss Keith Raniere had operated a sex cult.

After Engelmayer approached him about OneTaste, Parlato told me, “I made a very serious news-gathering effort in an investigation to determine whether they were being fairly or, in my opinion, unfairly prosecuted.” In his coverage, he has described the case in his hyperkinetic house style, writing, “Parlato Lives Rent-Free in Prosecutors’ Heads, While Actual Evidence Lives Nowhere.”

Parlato proposed to me that the OneTaste case amounted to “criminalizing regret.” He compared participants’ lodging allegations to going to Harvard and later realizing that the education hadn’t been as valuable as expected. As he sees it, the charges, brought in the same jurisdiction as those against Raniere, are simply an attempt at bringing about another high-profile cult case, or, as he described it, “NXIVM 2.0.” For their part, 20 Brooklyn prosecutors appeared at a recent pretrial hearing in a show of support.

Even the prosecutor who took down NXIVM is raising eyebrows. Moira Penza called the OneTaste case “unusual,” noting the government’s last-minute witness collapse, evidence fumble, and total team swap. Her verdict: “You don’t want to be trying a case with those things stacked against you.”

Vanity Fair:

The prosecutor who led the investigation of Raniere, Moira Penza, who left the US Attorney’s Office in 2019, told me that she found a few aspects of the case against Daedone and Cherwitz unusual. The government had pursued a novel strategy, lost a key witness and evidence at the finish line, and swapped out all its prosecutors on the case. “Keith Raniere wasn’t doing TED Talks and appearing in South by Southwest and talking to Gwyneth Paltrow,” Penza said, describing Daedone’s media profile.

Still, Penza said, “As a former prosecutor, I can tell you you don’t want to be trying a case with those things stacked against you.”

Nicole Daedone isn’t trying to be a martyr—but she knows this fight is bigger than her. She sees the case as a reflection of a culture uncomfortable with people who want more—who’ve “touched something” beyond the norm. In her eyes, this isn’t just a trial. It’s a battle over possibility itself.

Vanity Fair:

“I am not a martyr,” Daedone insisted, but she understands her struggle in a broader sense, as something “more telling about the culture than it is about me in a lot of ways.”

As we discussed the circumstances leading up to her indictment, I asked if it was fair to characterize OneTaste participants as seekers. She had an instant reaction and a partial objection: The term had a diminishing connotation. They were “almost invariably someone who had touched something,” Daedone said, “or had a sense that something more was possible.”

UPDATE 10: Friday, May 9, 1:00 p.m. — The Witness Cries, the Government Lies, and the Case Continues to Crumble…

Day 5 picks up right where Day 4 left off, with the prosecution’s star witness in full emotional retreat after unraveling on cross. She tearfully recalled the power of OM and how it helped her remember who she really was… not quite the story the government hoped for. Meanwhile, the feds keep pouring taxpayer dollars into a trial that looks more like theater than justice.

UPDATE 9: Friday, May 9, 1:00 p.m. — Manufactured Justice: Netflix, the FBI, and Prosecutors Caught in the Same Script…

Is this a courtroom or a Netflix production set? As explosive details surface about fabricated evidence, media collusion, and FBI theatrics, the carefully crafted narrative is starting to fall apart. The OneTaste lawfare trial isn’t just exposing a case, it’s exposing an agenda…

UPDATE 9: Friday, May 9, 5:00 a.m. — “Coercive Control” Is the Left’s New Weapon Against Freedom…

The concept of “coercive control” sounds protective on the surface, but it’s really a Trojan horse — a sneaky way to criminalize personal choices, beliefs, and relationships. Episode 8 of Eros on Trial breaks it all down.

UPDATE 8: Thursday, May 8, 2:00 p.m. — FBI Agents Still Camped Out at OneTaste Lawfare Trial… Why?

The FBI just can’t quit this trial. Nine agents sat in the courtroom gallery all day. They’re not out chasing cartels, not tracking violent criminals, but showing solidarity in a thought-crime case built on media spin and zero evidence.

UPDATE 7: Thursday, May 8, 2:00 p.m. — OneTaste Trial Bombshell: Is Netflix Writing the Government’s Script?

The line between media and government just got dangerously thin.

UPDATE 6: Thursday, May 8, 8:30 a.m. — Attorney James Lawrence Blasts Lead Prosecutor for Criminalizing ‘Thoughts’ in OneTaste Lawfare Trial…

Attorney James Lawrence is sounding the alarm. In a blistering memo, he warns that the DOJ’s case doesn’t just target OneTaste, it opens the door to put churches and religious Americans in the crosshairs for simply practicing their faith.

Lawrence:

Some Americans, including Christians who seek to obey Jesus Christ’s call to sexual purity in Matthew 5:27-28, may find OneTaste’s teachings distasteful and/or morally objectionable. Meanwhile, OneTaste points to faithful Christians, Muslims, and Jews who have followed Daedone’s teachings within their marriages to build stronger relationships with one another. The R-rated allegations in the government’s case aside, it would be one thing if Cherwitz and Daedone were on trial for sexual assault, sex trafficking, prostitution, or facilitating adultery, but they are not. Cherwitz and Daedone are being prosecuted for exerting coercive control over other adults under a statute aimed at sex trafficking—in many ways their beliefs are on trial. Under the First Amendment, if Cherwitz and Daedone’s beliefs were “popular,” they would be “easy enough to defend,” but “[i]t is in protecting unpopular religious beliefs” like theirs “that we prove this country’s commitment to serving as a refuge for religious freedom.

The Trump Administration is taking religious freedom and anti-Christian bias seriously. In February, President Trump issued an executive order on “Eradicating Anti-Christian Bias.” Exec. Order No. 14202, Eradicating Anti-Christian Bias, 90 Fed. Reg. 9365 (Feb. 12, 2025). In the order, President Trump noted that “the previous Administration engaged in an egregious pattern of targeting peaceful Christians.” Id. at 9365. President Trump ordered that his “Administration will not tolerate anti-Christian weaponization of government or unlawful conduct targeting Christians,” and “protect[] the freedom of Americans and groups of Americans to practice their faith in peace,” while “ensur[ing] that any unlawful and improper conduct, policies, or practices that target Christians are identified, terminated, and rectified.” Id. at 9366. Dropping the case against Cherwitz and Daedone, which would remove a cudgel a future administration could use to threaten Christians and other people of faith with up to twenty years in prison, 18 U.S.C. § 1589(d), would be consistent with this order.

If the government is successful in amending the TVPA to criminalize coercive control, Christians and other religious believers could find themselves the target of prosecutions by future administrations. Consider what could be coming for evangelical Christians. As noted above, the academic project to frame conservative evangelical Christians and their beliefs as “coercive” is well underway. Using the prosecution of Cherwitz and Daedone as a roadmap, future administrations can point to evangelicals’ efforts to “intentionally recruit” people with a “history of trauma” as part of their efforts to spread the Gospel. Christian discipleship, particularly small groups in churches where members hold themselves accountable for sin, becomes an instrument of “control” and “intimidation.” To the extent members are encouraged to avoid temptation, those efforts “isolate” victims. Labor is extracted from members who serve in church ministries. Finally, public excommunication, the last resort in church discipline cases, becomes the last step in a campaign of “shame and humiliation.” Other faiths that engage in similar shunning practices run the same risk.

Read the full memo in pdf form…

UPDATE 5: Thursday, May 8, 8:00 a.m. — Lead Prosecutor in OneTaste Trial is Overtly Prosecuting ‘Thought Crimes’…

Lead prosecutor Assistant US Attorney Kaitlin Farrell made it clear what this case is really about: criminalizing beliefs and twisting consent into coercion.

MS. FARRELL: I think, as your Honor understands, our theory of the case is that the defendants put some the testifying witnesses, our victims, in psychological distress and also taught them concepts that taught them basically to consent to everything and to be willing to engage in certain sexual activities that even at the time they would have viewed as something they wouldn’t consent to, but they did so because they were taught this was a philosophy or a religious practice that was good for them, and if they continued to do it they would reach enlightenment.

UPDATE 4: Wednesday, May 7, 11:oo p.m. — OneTaste Trial: Witnesses Confirm They Wanted In…

Voluntary choices are now being twisted into “forced labor.”

https://twitter.com/onetastecase/status/1920172644722164215

UPDATE 3: Wednesday, May 7, 11:30 a.m. — Jury Selection Is Over, Opening Arguments Are In — The Real Fight Starts Now…

Tension is rising, the pressure is building inside the courtroom, and the fight over truth and justice is heating up.

UPDATE 2: Wednesday, May 7, 9:30 a.m. — FBI Agents Pack OneTaste Courtroom in Chilling Show of Power…

The OneTaste trial is officially underway and already the courtroom is feeling more like a federal PR stunt than a fair and just proceeding. At least 20 FBI agents packed into the gallery on day one, creating what some folks inside described as a blatant show of power and support for the FBI’s lead agent, Elliot McGinnis. According to court records, McGinnis didn’t just investigate this case. He helped shape the narrative using false testimony and doctored evidence.

The agents filled nearly every seat, blocking regular citizens from entering. By the afternoon, the courtroom was wall-to-wall with EDNY and FBI officials. Even co-defendant Rachel Cherwitz’s husband couldn’t get in to support his wife.

In fact, so many federal agents and EDNY officials showed up that the court had to open an overflow room. This isn’t justice. It’s process abuse in plain sight, and taxpayers are footing the bill for an FBI fan section clapping for lawfare.

Political Ploy? Intimidation?

UPDATE 1: Tuesday, May 6, 3:00 p.m. — Congressman Inquires About FBI Agent’s Corrupt Misconduct as OneTaste Trial Begins…

Congress is finally taking notice of the FBI’s dirty tactics in the OneTaste lawfare case.

https://twitter.com/DailyMail/status/1919605099665453068

The Daily Mail:

An FBI special agent leading the investigation into two former leaders of an ‘orgasmic meditation cult’ featured in a hit Netflix show has been accused of fabricating evidence by a Member of Congress, DailyMail.com can exclusively reveal.

The representative has written to new FBI director Kash Patel, alleging the agent ‘transformed the Netflix-created content into federal evidence’ to go after ex-OneTaste wellness company executives Rachel Cherwitz and Nicole Daedone.

Both women face trial this week in New York, accused of a forced labor scheme that allegedly involved participants in OneTaste courses and employees between 2006 and 2018.

Now DailyMail.com has seen a letter to FBI director Patel from a Member of Congress – who is also a member of the House Judiciary Committee and a former law enforcement official – ‘seeking answers’ about the special agent in the case. DailyMail.com has decided not to name the agent in the letter, whose ‘actions appear to represent a fundamental corruption of the investigative process and a failure of agent accountability,’ writes the Congress member.

Read the story at the Daily Mail.

Corrupt FBI Tactics in OneTaste Trial Now Under Congressional Scrutiny…

Podcaster Aubrey Fuller breaks down the latest twist in the OneTaste trial, where a Congressman is calling out the corrupt FBI agent driving the lawfare…

BACKGROUND:

Revolver and OneTaste are teaming up to shine a light on lawfare.

The federal case against wellness company OneTaste is more than just a courtroom battle. It’s a clear example of how the justice system has been weaponized to punish those who think or live outside the mainstream. This six-week trial comes from a years-long smear campaign born out of the #MeToo era, and it’s now playing out in federal court under flimsy charges, fraudulent evidence, sketchy witnesses, and media-driven propaganda.

One Taste’s intention is simple. They want this case dismissed and intend to use the red-hot nature of this high-profile trial to shine a light on the much bigger lawfare crisis. This isn’t just about OneTaste. It’s about due process and the basic American belief that everyone, no matter their beliefs, lifestyle, or background, deserves a fair trial.

We’ve brought you coverage of J6, the case against President Trump, the Douglass Mackey case, the Dr. Eithan Haim case, and more. This case falls into that same vein of coverage.

Stay tuned and check back often. We’ll be posting real-time updates, inside scoops, and key developments as this lawfare trial unfolds.

For more background on the lawfare against OneTaste, read these two previous articles and check out the videos below.

Netflix, the FBI, and a Federal Frame Job That Took Down a Wellness Company…

The Lawfare Case You Weren’t Supposed to Notice Just Got Darker: FBI Lies, Fake Evidence, and a Dirty Judge

Matt Gaetz Calls Out the Fed’s OneTaste Witch Hunt…

Matt Gaetz is calling out the lawfare. The feds got OneTaste of power and now they’re hooked, fabricating evidence and targeting consenting adults. If they can do it to this wellness company, they can do it to anyone…

“If people were harmed by OneTaste, they should have a fair chance to make their case in court. But FBI agents fabricating evidence against consenting adults living an alternate sexual lifestyle doesn’t sit well with me. Because once the feds get OneTaste of that kind of power…it can be weaponized against anyone.”

https://twitter.com/OANN/status/1918481887623852277

Lawfare in the Spotlight: OneTaste Founder Tells Dr. Phil Her Side…

OneTaste founder Nicole Daedone breaks her silence in this powerful Dr. Phil interview, sharing her side of the story and exposing the lawfare campaign against her and her wellness company.

Full Interview:

Kyle Seraphin: The FBI Got Caught Targeting OneTaste…

Former FBI agent Kyle Seraphin knows exactly how the game is played. He’s calling out corruption and pulling the curtain back on one of the ugliest lawfare cases in recent memory.

https://twitter.com/revolvernewsusa/status/1917961066828484672

Check back for more updates on this developing story…