GBC authority and responsibility

[Guest guest]

> For someone who claims that he doesn't know much he is happy to say quite

> a lot. Unfortunately all of the above is UNTRUE.

 

How it comes that you in America are knowing things better than Hari Sauri

Prabhu in India?

[Guest guest]

> "I don't know much about the details on what is happening with the

> court case ... "

>

> Then he states:

>

> "There was somelegal techincality that made it very difficult to

> withdraw the papers he originally signed but as far as I know its a mute

> point now because since then, the particular cases that were filed have

> all since gone through court proceedings and are now over and done with.

> The ritviks are not pursuing those cases anymore because they lost most of

> them. They are now pursuing some new ones and I am quite sure that

> Satadhanya isn't signing on any of them."

 

> Hari Sauri should at least issue an apology for deliberately misleading

> the conference.

 

I have stated at the outset that I wasn't clear on all the details.

Having thus made it clear that what I do know may not be completely accurate

I see no need to issue an apology for 'deliberatly misleading' this

conference. If you want all the techinical details you can write to one of

the members of the legal committee that is dealing with this case. Your

gurumaharaja, Gopal Krishna Goswami can probably give you all the techinical

details.

 

I would appreciate it if you didn't jump down people's throats when

they are trying to be helpful. It really makes a terrible atmosphere in our

Society and personally it makes me not want to communciate at all if as soon

as I say something someone comes in and puts the boot in. There are polite

and respectful ways to frame your questions, suspicions and statements and I

would humbly like to request you to adopt a more reasonable tone in your

communications.

 

Your humble servant,

Hari-sauri dasa

[Guest guest]

Just as a matter of interest, since I've been reading this thread,

Madhusudani Radhi, what is the source of your facts?

 

If hereafter I quote you I must also quote your source without which your

points can't really be considered facts.

 

Looking forward to your reply.

 

Hope you are well. Hare Krishna.

 

ys

 

ada

 

> For someone who claims that he doesn't know much he is happy to say

> quite a lot. Unfortunately all of the above is UNTRUE.

>

> Fact 1: Only one case was filed by the IRM in Calcutta. The GBC did an

> official reply. The only name on that document is Satyadhanya's.

>

> Fact 2: The reply submitted by the GBC contained a falsified document.

> Thus the Ritviks filed another connected case due to the perjury committed

> within the GBC reply.

>

> Fact 3: Thus Satyadhanya's name remains as the only name on a very live

> and active case. There is NO legal impediment to withdrawing his name and

> submitting it again in someone else's name. It WILL cause some legal

> disadvantage to the GBC case but there is nothing to stop it happening.

>

> Fact 4: No cases have been lost. On the contrary it is the GBC whose

> case now looks very weak having been exposed as having submitted a

> falsified document. The GBC have missed the deadline set by the court in

> terms of replying to the perjury charge.

>

> This is where things stand at the moment.

>

> Hari Sauri should at least issue an apology for deliberately misleading

> the conference.

>

> Thus Satyadhanya is still very much on the scene.

[Guest guest]

> We would very much appreciate if you probably feel empowered to inspire

> him to finally answer the letters concerned devotees sent him, days, weeks

> and months ago about this and other issues.

 

I am sure whether I will get any more response than you mataji, but

I am willing to try since you asked. I have forwarded your letter to the EC

and lets see what they say.

 

Your humble servant,

Hari-sauri dasa

[Guest guest]

>

>

> Why is he allowed to do anything on this case? In the US child molesters

> are not allowed to do anything signifigant. Why are out standards less than

> the so called"meat-eating karmis"?

 

While I don't disagree with your sentiment in general, bear in mind that two

of

those standards are "innocent until proven guilty" and "beyond a reasonable

doubt", two standards that do put a lot of restraint on action.

 

I see a significant danger that at some point in the future this pendulum could

swing the other way, and that innocent people, accused out of some other

motive than justice, get swept away on the tide.

[Guest guest]

Because I keep myself informed by studying the statements of ALL

parties with an open mind. The information I have given is public

information, and has been posted on the net by various parties along with

supporting court documents. One simply needs to read - that's all.

Reagrdless of how 'off' the ritviks maybe, facts are facts. They have NOT

lost any cases in Calcutta, and Satyadhanya's name remains as the only name

on an ACTIVE and very live case. This is just a fact.

 

If you do not believe me, then please ask anyone to substantiate the

statements that Hari Sauri made - it can not be done. Ask them to state

WHICH cases involving Satyadhanya the Ritviks have 'lost' etc. etc.

[Guest guest]

> Because I keep myself informed by studying the statements of ALL

> parties with an open mind. The information I have given is public

> information, and has been posted on the net by various parties along with

> supporting court documents. One simply needs to read - that's all.

> Reagrdless of how 'off' the ritviks maybe, facts are facts. They have NOT

> lost any cases in Calcutta, and Satyadhanya's name remains as the only

> name on an ACTIVE and very live case. This is just a fact.

 

If you are in New York and Hari Sauri Prabhu is in Mayapur, near Calcutta,

how is it that you have the facts and he doesn't?

 

> If you do not believe me, then please ask anyone to substantiate the

> statements that Hari Sauri made - it can not be done. Ask them to state

> WHICH cases involving Satyadhanya the Ritviks have 'lost' etc. etc.

 

If you got your facts from 'public information' that was posted by various

parties along with supporting court documents then please inform me WHERE I

and others interested can also view those public documents which will verify

your claimed facts. No offense intended but your word is not good enough,

for if I'm to quote you I must also quote your exact source.

 

ys

 

ada