To Sanjay Rath--Please read or someone forward to Sanjay

[Guest guest]

Hello Sanjay:

 

Some woman named Wendy Vasicek running a discussion group

called "Astro-Jyoti" repeatedly called you a fraud. I stood up for

you and argued that you have never been convicted of a fraud EVER and

therefore she shouldn't call you a fraud, I was banned from this

group for saying so.

 

Now Sanjay, calling you fraud when you were NEVER convicted of a

fraud is serious DEFAMATION. I have the postings where she called you

a fraud or you could visit her and read for yourself.

 

You should sue Wendy Vasicek for defamation. I'll show you how to

send her the sub-peona. Her postings can be and will be sub-peoned in

a United States court.

 

If she destroys her postings about you being a fraud and my rebuttal

to her, it would constitue "destruction of evidence" which is a

felony punishable by 10 years imprisonments in the US.

 

Sanjay, I leave it up to you whether you wish to pursue legal

proceedings against this woman named "Wendy Vasicek, the owner of

Astro-Jyoti list" on .

 

Noted below is a copy of my communication with Patrice Curry after I

and my postings were banned on Wendy's group.

 

Sanjay, I'm hurt by the false allegations of fraud made against you

and will testify ANYWHERE in the United States if you choose to sue

for defamation.

 

Thanks

MD

 

======================================================================

Hello Patrice:

 

Thanks for writing back to me. What upsets me is that

Wendy finds the energy and time to post a detailed

message as to why Sanjay is a fraud. However, she

doesn't have the energy to digest a strong rebuttal.

 

Isn't this a conundrum? Wendy finds energy for calling

Sanjay a fraud, yet she doesn't have energy to face

the consequential argument.

 

I'm glad you had a good experience with Sanjay. He

helped me a lot (personally) without charging me a

penny.

 

I think you should let my messages be seen on the

board rather than reject them due to Wendy's illness.

 

Illness shouldn't used as an excuse if the same

illness didn't prevent Wendy from calling Sanjay a

fraud.

 

Mukund

 

--- Patrice Curry <patricecurry wrote:

 

> Hello Dear Mukund,

>

> I'm replying privately to you. As I wrote you, I can

> no longer allow these messages off the topic of

> Jyotish itself to continue.

>

> I understand that you wish to be heard and continue

> this, but now isn't the time. I've already accepted

> this responsibility and agreed to moderate. These

> are exactly the kinds of postings that I'm to

> prevent from taking the list in other directions at

> this time.

>

> I haven't heard from Wendy yet, perhaps she'll let

> me know differently, but at this time I'm calling a

> hold on this while she is away and terribly sick. My

> view is that these posts can't help but be upsetting

> as far as Wendy's energy needed to heal, and this is

> her list and her heart is in it, as well as not

> truly constructive at this point for the list in

> learning Jyotish.

>

> In reference to what you've written below

> specifically, no I'm not telling you that or

> anything of that nature, and would never say what

> you have adduced. I have no interest in this

> argument or thread.

>

> I know Sanjay personally myself and enjoyed his

> company as well as sincerely appreciate the time he

> gave in efforts for my studies.

>

> I hope you can appreciate this situation and timing.

>

> Peace,

> Patrice

>

> ________

> Hello Patrice:

>

> So what you're telling me is that Wendy is justified

> in calling

> Sanjay Rath a fraud which any reasonable person

> would say is a

> malafied adjective.

>

> Yet, I couldn't say Wendy is a non-entity for me

> which is TRUE as I

> had never heard of her in the Vedic astrology

> community where I know

> MOST of the significant players/writers/publishers.

>

> So, I should sing Wendy's praise event though she

> repeatedly called

> Sanjay Rath a fruad. Will you or Wendy please tell

> me how Rath

> personally defrauded Wendy?

>

> I've studied law and calling someone a fruad (even

> in the cyber-

> world) when that someone hasn't been indicted or

> convicted of fraud

> constitues a serious ground for defamation.

>

> Yep. This board is JUST WHAT it had come across in

> the last couple of

> days--"you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours." If

> I don't play this

> game and DARE defend Sanjay Rath who hasn't be

> convicted of fruad,

> I'm the BAD GUY?

>

> Partrice, please read this note objectively and

> you'll see the point

> I'm making.

>

> Thanks for posting my notes. You have the decency of

> allowing a very

> valid dialoug. And, hoping you post this note as

> well.

>

> Mukund