Join the Fight and Support Revolver Now… Donate…
Sign up for our email list… Stay on the bleeding edge…
It’s been 50 days since the US government locked up Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz, two women convicted during a sham trial of a little-known charge called “forced labor conspiracy.” Most Americans have never even heard of it, and for good reason. This vague, elastic statute was never meant for cases like this. These women weren’t accused of abuse, trafficking, or violence of any kind. They were targeted for running a spiritual wellness company built around adult, consensual meditation practices.
On June 8, 2025, a Brooklyn jury returned a verdict that should send a chill through every educator, spiritual leader, and entrepreneur in America. With zero evidence of any sort of confinement, threats, or violence, Daedone and Cherwitz were found guilty of “forced labor conspiracy.” This is a charge usually reserved for sweatshops, not spiritual schools and meditation groups. But that didn’t matter, because this case wasn’t about justice. It was ideological “MeToo-era” lawfare dressed up as prosecution and rubber-stamped by the Eastern District of New York.
The June 8, 2025, conviction in the Brooklyn federal courthouse of Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz, co-founder and former sales executive, respectively, of the sexual wellness company OneTaste, marks a significant development in a controversial case that has drawn national attention.
The verdict, which found the wellness educators guilty of a single count of forced labor conspiracy, a crime typically associated with sweatshop operators and sex traffickers, relied on novel legal theories that could have far-reaching implications for educators, religious leaders, and community organizers who engage in intensive one-on-one interactions with dedicated students or followers. OneTaste, founded in San Francisco in 2004, gained prominence for its unconventional wellness practices centered around “orgasmic meditation,” which the company claimed could lead to personal growth, empowerment, and heightened intimacy.
However, in April 2023, following a series of critical media reports and a salacious Netflix documentary, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York indicted Daedone and Cherwitz on a single count of conspiracy to obtain forced labor. Notably, prosecutors did not charge any substantive counts of forced labor or sex trafficking, instead relying on a novel application of the conspiracy statute. The case against Daedone and Cherwitz raised eyebrows from the start.
Prosecutors alleged that the defendants had used psychological coercion and manipulation to compel participants’ labor and commitment, despite no evidence of physical confinement, violence, or overt threats. Over the course of the five-week trial, which began on May 5, 2025, the government presented testimony from nine former OneTaste staff and students who claimed to have felt pressured to devote increasing time and resources to the organization. A Verdict Built on Contradictions The trial’s outcome crystallized a fundamental paradox:
How can voluntary participation in educational programs constitute forced labor? All nine of the government’s complaining witnesses testified they received valuable benefits from OneTaste’s teachings on meditation and sexuality. No evidence showed physical restraint, prevented departure, or traditional markers of coercion. Indeed, prosecutor Nina Gupta conceded in closing: “There may not have been physical chains holding the victims in place. There may not have been locks on the door.” Instead, the government argued that losing “your job or your friends or your family or your belief system” constituted serious harm under the forced labor statute – establishing a precedent that could criminalize any religious community, athletic program, or dedicated community where participants develop deep commitments.
Yet after two days of deliberation, the jury returned a guilty verdict for each defendant. The immediate remand by the court of both defendants – after two years of full bail compliance – added theatrical punctuation to what attorneys following the case characterized as a “show trial.” Judge Diane Gujarati cited media coverage as justification for detention, though that same media attention had existed throughout their pretrial release.
The OneTaste verdict didn’t just stretch the meaning of “forced labor”; it completely blurred the line between choosing to be part of something and being legally forced into it. The prosecution openly admitted there were no physical chains, no threats of violence, and no locks on doors. Just feelings. Unprovable claims. Retroactive regret. That’s what the US government used to lock up two women—and yes, they’re still sitting in jail. Denied bail before sentencing, treated more like Genghis Khan and Jim Jones than meditation teachers. More on that later…
The National Law Review piece goes on:
As troubling as the verdict itself was the process that produced it. The defense found itself systematically hamstrung: exculpatory evidence excluded, witnesses blocked, and structural advantages tilted entirely toward the prosecution.
The government’s star witness was withdrawn on March 12, 2025, mere weeks before trial. Her case-in-chief journal entries that the government had asserted were contemporaneous 2015 documents were exposed as having been written in 2022 for a Netflix film.
Yet the prosecution proceeded as if this credibility collapse was merely a minor setback. In the immediate wake of the debacle, lead prosecutor Gillian Kassner left the case and resigned her EDNY position. She was replaced by attorneys who inherited a case built on documented deception and government misconduct.
But the legal breakdown didn’t stop at credibility issues or withheld evidence. What happened next should alarm every business owner, founder, and entrepreneur in America.
In a move that defies basic principles of fairness, the FBI used stolen attorney-client communications to help build its case, and the judge let it happen. More from the National Law Review:
The first alarming precedent emerges from the court’s handling of attorney-client privilege. FBI Agent Elliot McGinnis obtained stolen privileged documents from OneTaste’s corporate files through a disgruntled former contractor and used them to build an investigation plan. Rather than excluding this tainted evidence, Judge Gujarati ruled that Daedone and Cherwitz lacked standing to challenge the government’s use of their own company’s privileged materials.
This ruling creates a roadmap for prosecutorial abuse: steal a company’s privileged documents, use them to build a case against executives, then argue those executives cannot challenge the theft because they personally don’t “own” the corporation’s privilege. The implications extend far beyond this case. Any executive, founder, or corporate officer now faces potential prosecution built on stolen privileged materials with no meaningful remedy.
Consider the chilling efficiency of this precedent. A competitor, disgruntled employee, or government informant can steal privileged attorney-client communications. The FBI can use these stolen documents to identify witnesses, develop theories, and build prosecutions. The targets – the very people the privilege was meant to protect – are left defenseless, told they lack “standing” to challenge the use of their own legal advice.
As if rewriting privilege law wasn’t enough, the court also signed off on something even more dangerous: a radical redefinition of what “forced labor” even means. The National Law Review piece goes on:
The second precedent redefines forced labor itself. For over a century, trafficking and forced labor prosecutions required clear elements: physical restraint, threats of violence, debt bondage, or concrete mechanisms preventing departure. The OneTaste verdict introduces vague and undefined social pressure and/or attraction as evidence for criminality.
Under this new interpretation, teaching combined with student dedication equals trafficking. Throughout the trial, prosecutors conflated consensual sexual acts between adults with OneTaste’s educational philosophy, giving the proceedings the flavor of a sex crimes prosecution without any sex crimes charged. The nine complaining witnesses acknowledged their intimate encounters were consensual at the time, yet the government used them to criminalize Nicole Daedone’s teachings about sexuality and consciousness. The government’s case effectively put protected speech on trial, transforming philosophical instruction into evidence of labor trafficking.
The government’s theory depended upon retroactive claims of victimhood. Defense cross-examination revealed government witnesses who spent years praising OneTaste’s impact on their lives. The government recast them as victims who simply hadn’t realized their exploitation at the time due to “brainwashing.” This temporal alchemy could allow prosecutors to transform any intense experience into labor trafficking: simply find former participants willing to reframe their dedication as manipulation.
If you think we’re exaggerating how far this case stretched the definition of forced labor, just listen to the government’s own words straight from the trial transcripts. These aren’t defense spin jobs or internet conspiracies; this is direct from the prosecutors who tried the case. They weren’t just targeting actions. They were targeting thoughts, philosophies, spiritual frameworks, and belief systems:
“I think, as your Honor understands, 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 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.”
—Tr. 190:22–191:6 (AUSA Farrel)
This quote says it all, doesn’t it? The government’s theory wasn’t about physical harm or labor; it was about ideas and feelings. They claimed that teaching someone to consent too deeply was, somehow, coercion.
“The Defendants argue that these were grown women, these were adults. And they were educated, they were smart. They did walk in here with degrees and careers and they were clearly thoughtful, conscientious people. Members of the Jury, that just shows how powerful the coercion was in this case.”
—Tr. 5220:17–22 (AUSA Bensing)
So, according to this logic, the smarter the women were, the more proof that they were brainwashed. Huh?
That means independent thought wasn’t a defense; it was repackaged as evidence of deeper manipulation and more crimes. That’s not law. That’s narrative control.
“And that’s not because OMing was actually spiritual. They connected OMing to spirituality for legal protection, and so people would follow Nicole Daedone’s teachings.”
—Tr. 4977:10–12 (AUSA Gupta)
Even the suggestion of spirituality was painted as “fraudulent.” The government didn’t just attack actions here; they accused people of actually faking faith for influence. As if that’s suddenly a crime now.
“Although OneTaste claimed to promote female liberation, it was, in fact, a company that was based on sexual coercion of certain female workers. And this was not an accident; this was entirely by design.”
—Tr. 4892:24–4893:3 (AUSA Gupta)
This was the prosecution’s lazy fallback: labeling every piece of Daedone’s philosophy as some kind of manipulation racket. But the trial didn’t convict her of sex trafficking. So why was the entire strategy built around sex-crime messaging? Headlines, sensationalism, pushing that #MeToo-era messaging.
“Ms. Daedone is allowed to believe and teach whatever she wants. She is not on trial for her lectures. She’s on trial because she, Rachel Cherwitz, Rob Kandell and others used aspects of her teaching to force OneTaste employees to provide labor in combination with many, many other tactics.”
—Tr. 5250:4–12 (AUSA Bensing)
This is the tightrope the EDNY walked: claiming belief wasn’t on trial, then repeatedly arguing that those very beliefs were the problem and were on trial. The government blurred the line so much, there was no line left. In the end, they seemed as confused as the rest of us:
“The defendants’ renewed motion is meritless. As an initial matter, the defendants have not established any violation of any First Amendment right to religious freedom—much less any infringement of any purported such right in a criminal case. That Daedone misappropriated aspects of many world religions to make her teachings more ‘theatrical,’ Tr. 2040, or lend credibility to the meditative sexual practices that she rebranded and marketed, does not render OneTaste a religion entitled to First Amendment protection. Indeed, the defendants have repeatedly argued that OneTaste was a sexual wellness start-up, and not a religion.”
—Government motion at ECF 381, May 19, 2025
And there it is, folks… EDNY laid it out in black and white. The government decided that because OneTaste didn’t look like a religion they recognized, it wasn’t protected. Translation: Your beliefs are only valid if the state says they are. Scary, right?
And when you zoom out even farther and look even closer at EDNY’s moves, a bigger pattern emerges. The OneTaste case wasn’t some legal misstep. It was yet another example of the Eastern District of New York playing fast and loose with the law in pursuit of an ideological win. And it’s not the first time they’ve done this, but God willing, it’ll be the last.
Legal experts widely agree that OneTaste’s conviction is on track to be overturned on appeal. It could be the exact same conclusion judges came to when EDNY tried and failed to convict Douglass Mackey. A bipartisan appellate panel of three federal judges took one look at the Mackey case and found there was no evidence of any crime. None. And that’s when the whole thing collapsed.
The wheels of justice move slowly, and sometimes they blow a tire and go careening right off a cliff. But if you’re built for battle and grounded in truth, the tide does eventually turn. Justice has a way of catching up.
That’s exactly what we’re seeing today. The US Court of Appeals has just thrown out Douglass Mackey’s conviction for posting a clearly satirical anti-Hillary meme back in 2016.
In March 2023, Mackey was found guilty of “conspiring to deprive citizens of their right to vote,” all because he shared a meme that didn’t prevent a single person from voting. But that didn’t stop the Biden DOJ from making an example out of him. He was smeared, prosecuted, and dragged through a political show trial. He even missed the birth of his own son because of it.
But Mackey didn’t cave. He stood up to the machine, and today, he won.
A federal appeals court has not only tossed out the conviction, but they also reversed it entirely and told the lower court to enter a judgment of acquittal. In plain terms, they just told the world that Mackey is not guilty.
So if the Mackey case didn’t hold water, what makes the EDNY think the OneTaste conviction will?
Mike Howell of The Oversight Project spoke exclusively to Revolver about this case and the disturbing implications of federal officers working with streaming companies to manufacture crimes for prime time:
“More people should know that the Feds work with Netflix. In this instance, they used fake evidence. That’s insane and should be national news.
The precedent from this case has the potential to be a major tool for weaponized government moving forward. It will come back to haunt conservatives, whether through attacks on religion, the family, politics, or civil society. Weaponized prosecutors will see forced labor conspiracy violations everywhere.
The government should not be coordinating with streaming services. I can’t believe I even have to say that. Operation Mockingbird never ended, it just morphed into an embarrassing version of it involving Netflix and Lena Dunham. I’m sure former Cold War spies are rolling in their graves seeing Lena Dunham take up their mantle.
There isn’t much in the way of precedent for accountability for those in government. We just don’t see them held accountable. That is no different for prosecutors who are often rewarded for their weaponized excesses.”
READ MORE: Obama’s 2016 NPR interview comes back to haunt him in ways he never imagined…
Are these prosecutors actually interested in upholding the law, or are they just collecting headlines and progressive brownie points? Is the goal to snag a flashy win at trial, then quietly take the humiliating “L” later, after the media has moved on? And how much taxpayer money are they burning in the process? These are questions that deserve answers.
And to make matters worse, the man currently running the EDNY is Joseph Nocella Jr., appointed by President Trump in May 2025 as interim US Attorney. And he’s no outsider. Nocella is a career prosecutor and a Nassau County judge. And he’s not distancing himself from this miscarriage of justice; he’s actually celebrating it.
Joseph Nocella, Jr., United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York and Christopher G. Raia, Assistant Director in Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation, New York Field Office (FBI), announced the verdict.
“The jury’s verdict has unmasked Daedone and Cherwitz for who they truly are: grifters who preyed on vulnerable victims by making empty promises of sexual empowerment and wellness only to manipulate them into performing labor and services for the defendants’ benefit,” stated United States Attorney Nocella. “I commend the witnesses who testified at trial notwithstanding the trauma that they experienced at the defendants’ direction. It is my hope that the just conclusion of this process will bring them closure, and that future charlatans think twice about exploiting human beings in this manner.”
We support Trump and believe he’s fighting to make justice in America real again. God knows he’s been through the ringer. But this case should’ve never happened under his watch. And the man he put in charge should never have applauded this verdict. That moment is a stain. A contradiction. A massive red flag for every American watching what’s unfolding in our federal courts.
And this isn’t just about the EDNY. Look across the river to SDNY, where the Southern District launched what was supposed to be the takedown of the century. They painted Sean “Diddy” Combs as the “Black Jeffrey Epstein,” a powerful predator running a Hollywood trafficking ring, the likes of which we’ve never seen before. That case exploded across the headlines. It was everywhere… until it wasn’t, and it quietly died.
U.S. government prosecutors repeatedly told jurors that Sean “Diddy” Combs was the ruthless ringleader of a criminal conspiracy, the key figure in a sprawling racketeering and sex trafficking scheme. Combs must be convicted on all five criminal counts, the prosecutors argued, and only then can justice be served.
In the end, the jury was not convinced.
The panel of 12 New Yorkers returned a mixed verdict at the climax of Combs’ federal trial Wednesday, convicting the music mogul on two interstate prostitution counts but acquitting him on the vastly more serious charges of racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking, which each carried a maximum prison sentence of life behind bars.
In interviews, legal analysts and former federal prosecutors said the verdict was a blow to the Southern District of New York, which spent seven weeks unwinding an expansive narrative, introducing reams of graphic evidence and calling more than 30 witnesses to the stand. In contrast, the defense team did not call a single witness.
“This trial was a major gamble, and Combs won that bet,” said Anna Cominsky, an associate professor of law and the director of the Criminal Defense Clinic at New York Law School. “Everything is stacked against the defendant going into a federal case, in particular one like this.”
“His attorneys were smart and they owned the bad facts,” Cominsky added. “They fought on the things that mattered, and it paid off.”
Was this ever really about the rule of law, or just a chance to grab splashy headlines? At this point, you have to wonder: are prosecutors in EDNY and SDNY truly this incompetent, or are they chasing fame while quietly pushing the left’s agenda?
READ MORE: Ruthless migrant ‘scooter gangs’ terrorize NYC…
After one questionable trial after another and a growing stack of failures, we’re left asking the obvious question: where’s the accountability? Where’s the follow-up? Did SDNY and EDNY just get these trials wildly wrong? Was any of it real? Or was it just another balloon floated for clicks, fear, and political weaponization?
Meanwhile, back in Brooklyn, Daedone and Cherwitz remain locked up. Why?
Fifty days and counting, denied bail, even after complying with every condition for the past two years. The EDNY tried the same trick with Douglass Mackey, hoping to keep him locked up during appeal. But he won that fight. Nicole and Rachel should too.
These women are not a flight risk. They’re not a danger to society. They’re being treated like enemies of the state for teaching meditation and personal growth. This is not justice. This is punishment by prosecution, and it needs to end.
SBut like always, this isn’t just about OneTaste. It’s about what’s happening to our court system right under our noses, where politics, media narratives, and ideology are taking the place of facts, fairness, and actual law.
And if you think this kind of thing won’t touch your life, your beliefs, or your community, think again. It always starts with the fringe cases, the ones nobody wants to defend. But little by little, those cases lay the groundwork, and then one day, you look up and realize they’ve built the whole machine.
If you want to dig deeper into the OneTaste case, check out our earlier investigative coverage here:
Netflix, the FBI, and a Federal Frame Job That Took Down a Wellness Company…
Exclusive: Meet the TDS Cult ‘Expert’ Behind the FBI’s Lawfare Machine
Annual Ad-Free Subscription… Join the Fight and Support Revolver Now…
Check out the new merch! — Donate…
Sign up for our email list… Stay on the bleeding edge…
NEWSFEED — FOLLOW ON X — GAB — GETTR — TRUTH SOCIAL — BLUESKY
Join the Discussion