The following is an article which appeared in The Pioneer. The false cases on Sai Baba could not stand legal scrutiny and thus the accuser withdrew his complaint. Below are the excerpts from the article. On March 14, a lingering, insidious smear campaign against Sathya Sai Baba quietly fizzled out when Channel Nine MSN removed a biased anti-Baba broadcast from its official Website. Ardent Sai defamer Robert Priddy admitted on his blog that Channel Nine MSN “would not have removed the video had there not been legitimate complaints about the content and disinformation in their video”.
Sai Baba devotees following the so-called sex scandal case were gratified to find that over the past few years many accusers were exposed as liars and worse. The main accuser, who inspired a BBC documentary, withdrew his California court case against the Sai Baba Society on realising exposure was nigh.
As usual, when false accusations are made against Hindu gurus, a high-decibel media campaign begins. But when the innocence of the accused is established, the cacophony melts into stoic silence. It is to the credit of devotees that anti-Sai Baba information has been purged from US Government and UNESCO Websites, among others.
Mr Alaya Rahm’s sexual abuse allegations against Sai Baba gained international notoriety when featured on the documentaries, Seduced By Sai Baba and Secret Swami. His allegations were published in Britain (The Daily Telegraph) and India (India Today). Mr Rahm filed his lawsuit, Alaya Rahm vs Sathya Sai Baba Society, in the Superior Court of California on January 6, 2005 (Case No. 05cc01931).
The trial was set for April 28, 2006, but on April 7 the plaintiff self-dismissed his own lawsuit. He attempted to sue for money damages, but no offers of settlement were made and no money or other consideration was paid; the case was dismissed “with prejudice” and is binding under the international doctrine of res judicata. This means Mr Rahm can never file another lawsuit against Sathya Sai Baba, in the US or in India, for the same claims made in this case.
Mr Kreydick signed his typed deposition on April 7, 2006. The same day, the defendant (the Sathya Sai Baba Society) filed Mr Kreydick’s deposition as part of the official record, and Mr Rahm self-dismissed his case! Obviously, he did not feel confident to take his case to trial, though he was represented by an experienced sexual abuse trial lawyer.
Further, in Form Interrogatory No. 6.3, Set One, Mr Rahm admitted to being a daily user of illegal street drugs and alcohol from 1995 to 2005. Thus, throughout his allegations and the filming of the BBC Documentary Secret Swami and the Danish Documentary Seduced By Sai Baba, Mr Rahm was under the influence of illegal street drugs and alcohol. This was suppressed from the general public by his family and anti-Baba associates.
Who inspired these venomous former devotees to launch investigations into vile rumours? Devotees say the ‘Anti-Sai Movement’ is an extremist hate group which habitually makes wild allegations, including the laughable claim that the Baba is allied with terrorists! One magazine published a fake picture of Sai Baba holding hands with Idi Amin!
The truth is that neither Sai Baba nor any organisation associated with him has been charged or implicated for sexual abuse, either directly or indirectly, and that reputable media agencies and independent journalists have not been able to confirm a single instance of sexual abuse linked to Sai Baba or his organisations. Gutter allegations tend to choke on their own stink.
for full article read Source: The Pioneer
No comments:
Post a Comment