On Saturday, May 10, 2025, Artvoice reported that Judge Diane Gujarati, presiding over the federal trial of OneTaste founders Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz in Brooklyn, New York, has drawn attention for her rulings in the high-profile case. The trial involves a single count of conspiracy to commit forced labor against the defendants, with no underlying charges of actual forced labor or trafficking.

During the proceedings, a key prosecution witness, referred to as “Becky,” testified about her experiences within the OneTaste community from 2012 to 2014. Becky initially described her time at OneTaste as exploitative and psychologically harmful. However, under cross-examination by defense attorney Celia Cohen, evidence including videos, photos, and social media posts from 2013 was presented, showing Becky expressing positive sentiments about OneTaste.

In one post, Becky, stated that the practice had significantly impacted her life, helping her overcome feelings of loneliness. Additionally, a graduation speech from the period highlighted her gratitude for the program, crediting it with enabling her to form a meaningful relationship with her now-husband.

Judge Gujarati’s decisions regarding the admissibility of this evidence have been a focal point. The court restricted the defense’s ability to present certain materials, including 2013 social media posts and video clips showing Becky in a positive state at OneTaste events. In one instance, a graduation video where Becky praised her transformation through OneTaste was ruled inadmissible, despite her confirming its authenticity. The judge also sustained multiple objections to defense exhibits that contradicted Becky’s claims of trauma and exploitation, limiting the jury’s exposure to these materials.

Further, Judge Gujarati’s rulings have extended to other aspects of the trial. Prior to the trial, she allowed prosecutors to use materials that another federal judge had deemed tainted due to a violation of attorney-client privilege. This decision, now under appeal, has added to the scrutiny of her conduct. The defense has argued that the prosecution’s case focuses on criminalizing OneTaste’s unconventional teachings about sexuality and consent, rather than proving forced labor, and that the judge’s rulings have restricted their ability to present a full defense.

The trial has raised questions about the balance of judicial fairness, with some observers noting that the jury has not been allowed to see evidence that could provide context to Becky’s testimony. The case, which continues with additional witnesses expected to testify, is seen as a test of both First Amendment protections and the integrity of the judicial process.

Judge Gujarati has overseen several high-profile cases, but the OneTaste trial has brought her decision-making under particular scrutiny. As the proceedings move forward, her rulings will likely remain a central issue in the case’s outcome.

 

 

Source: Artvoice