Barry Pittard Exposed

Exposing the lies, deceit and dishonesty of the most mean-spirited and vindictive ex-devotees of Sathya Sai Baba.

Thursday, November 22, 2007

Attorney William Brelsford Accused Of Incompetence

On February 28th 2007, Barry Pittard wrote a blogged article entitled “Sai Baba’s ‘Minister of Propaganda’ - Dr G. Venkataraman”. In this article, Barry Pittard said (in part):
“However, a civil lawsuit against the directors of the Sathya Sai Society of America law went badly wrong for the litigant, Alaya Rahm of southern California, who was advised by his attorney, William Brelsford, to self-dismiss his case. This resulted in terms so absurdly unfavourable to Rahm that some of us have wondered whether his pro bono lawyer William Brelsford can even look himself in the mirror of a morning. Had the family not suffered enough - having already courageously lent themselves to former devotee efforts with Denmark’s national broadcaster DR, BBC television, FBI and State Department, UNESCO, etc., - I, for one, favoured initiating a complaint process about William Brelsford to the California Bar Society.”

To begin with, Alaya Rahm is not from Southern California and does not reside there. He resides in Arkansas (as confirmed in court records). Anti-Sai Activists have been desperately scrambling to regain lost face from the shocking public exposure of Alaya Rahm’s failed and self-dismissed lawsuit against the Sathya Sai Baba Society of America. Attorney Brelsford knew that he could not win the case due to overwhelming evidence against his client (Alaya Rahm) and advised him to self-dismiss his case.

Claiming to be intimately familiar with Alaya Rahm’s failed lawsuit, Ex-Devotees embarrassed themselves when they publicly lied and erroneously claimed that Alaya Rahm’s case was heard by Judge John M. Watson on April 28th 2006 (despite the official court records scans on my website proving otherwise) and they left this error in place for over a year. This glaring mistake was finally corrected and it was casually dismissed as a ‘clerical error’.

In Ex-Devotee’s response to Alaya Rahm’s failed lawsuit, the main thrust of their retort heavily relied on self-serving quotes allegedly taken from a letter written by attorney William Brelsford on their behalf (in which he was cited as a credible authority and voice of legal expertise).

Fast forward 8 months and Barry Pittard (engaging in his typical blame-tactics) broke the silence by accusing William L. Brelsford of incompetence and being ‘seriously deficient’. Barry Pittard further stated that he ‘favoured initiating a complaint process about William Brelsford to the California Bar Society’. Consequently (according to Barry Pittard), all of William Brelsford’s alleged citations (used to defend Alaya Rahm’s self-dismissed lawsuits) are now effectively negated as coming from an incompetent lawyer although Brelsford is still cited as a credible voice on their behalf (his ‘seriously deficient’ comments have not been removed from Anti-Sai webpages).

Ex-Devotees have a nasty habit of blaming everyone else for their numerous failures and can often be seen misrepresenting facts, distorting information and even resorting to outright prevarication to make their shabby and half-baked arguments against Sathya Sai Baba (who has never been charged with any crime, sexual or otherwise). Now Ex-Devotees are defaming William Brelsford and are accusing him of incompetence for Alaya Rahm’s self-dismissed lawsuit although:

  1. Alaya Rahm’s court case was self-dismissed because he sued the wrong defendant in the wrong court in the wrong country.

  2. In “Response To Form Interrogatories” Alaya Rahm fully admitted that he had been a daily user of illegal street drugs and alcohol since at least 1999 - 2005. Consequently, during Alaya Rahm’s “Divine Downfall” and India Today Anti-Sai interviews and during the filming of the BBC Documentary “Secret Swami” and the “Seduced By Sai Baba” Danish Documentary, Alaya Rahm was under the influence of illegal street drugs and alcohol while relating his alleged sexual encounters with Sathya Sai Baba. This crucial information wholly undermines Alaya Rahm’s credibility and irreparably compromises the integrity of his claims. Needless to say, this information has been purposely suppressed from the general public by Anti-Sai Activists and the media.

  3. Alaya Rahm claimed that Lewis Kreydick & Family were all aware of “incidents” relating to his alleged molestation and named them (on record) as people who:

    1. Witnessed the INCIDENT or the event occurring immediately before or after the INCIDENT.

    2. Made statements at the scene of the INCIDENT.

    3. Heard statements made about the INCIDENT by any individual at the scene.

    4. Had knowledge of the INCIDENT.

    Needless to say, Kreydick’s sworn and video-taped deposition wholly refuted all these points made by Alaya Rahm. The Society did not actively go out and attempt to discredit Alaya Rahm. Rather, they simply interviewed a witness named by Alaya Rahm himself and obtained a shocking and damaging deposition against him.

  4. The legal proceeding provided a forum in which Alaya Rahm’s claims could be thoroughly and critically examined. Through this process of investigation, it was discovered that Alaya Rahm and his family spoke at a number of retreats and conferences between 1995 and 1999 (during the time that the alleged sexual abuse events were said to have occurred). Inconsistent with Alaya Rahm’s later accusations, these conference talks (many of which were recorded and have been transcribed: Refs: 01 - 02), contain no suggestion of any wrongdoing. The earlier words spoken by Alaya would appear to refute his later accusations, especially Alaya’s whole-hearted and enthusiastic praise of Sathya Sai Baba and the writing of a love poem to him after allegedly being sexually abused dozens of times.

  5. Notably, in pretrial discovery, Alaya Rahm claimed (by his own admission) that he had suffered no psychological trauma that would have required medical or psychiatric care. Furthermore, Alaya identified no psychologist who had ever examined him! As a matter of fact, Alaya Rahm never saw an “expert psychologist” and his parents never sent him to one. Rather, the only help that Alaya obtained was a 3 day seminar from the Landmark Forum on “Empowerment, self help and personal growth” that cost $795 in June 2005 (5-9 years after his alleged abuse and 5 months after he filed his lawsuit)! That’s it.

Barry Pittard conveniently ignored all of these crucial and pivotal facts about Alaya Rahm and instead blamed attorney William Brelsford although no one (not even one critic or other ex-devotee) was identified to the court to support, help or defend Alaya Rahm in his allegations against Sathya Sai Baba.

Barry Pittard is the picture of a lost-soul on the street, babbling to walls, trees and clouds, which cannot and do not respond to the rhetoric he repeats like an automaton. As a matter of fact, one can often see how Ex-Devotees thrive on repetition. “Deceive The Naive” is their motto and their parrot-like antics are used as psychological ploys to hypnotize, befuddle and mislead.

Barry Pittard and Robert Priddy’s gutless personal attacks and viperine scribblings (which they attempt to peddle as Holy Writ) are evidence of their renewed desperation and blog delirium. The stronger critics attack Sathya Sai Baba, the more they expose the truth about themselves. They are (as other’s have pointed out for a long time) a small and vocal group of angry, bitter and mentally unstable defamers who care more for sensationalism and sleaze and care less for honesty and the truth.


Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, November 06, 2007

Pamela Stephenson & 'Shrink Rap' Misrepresented

Barry Pittard’s Reference To Dr. Pamela Stephenson:

On Barry Pittard’s defamatory and conspiratorial Anti-Sai blog, he said the following about Pamela Stephenson & her TV show “Shrink Rap”:

“I recently saw Pamela Stephenson interviewed by Andrew Denton in Enough Rope on ABC television (Australian Broadcasting Corporation). She is the former celebrated actress and comedian, and star of such television shows Not The Nine O’Clock News. She is now a clinical psychologist in Hollywood and a professor of psychology at the California Graduate Institute.

Vile Public Critics
In her recently-made television series Shrink Rap, her famous interview subjects were willing to bare their more vulnerable feelings and lesions, and in a serious way beyond what usually passes for celebrity (so-called) ‘revelations’. Her subjects thus far have been Sharon Osbourne, Stephen Fry, David Blunkett, Sarah Ferguson, and Robin Williams. In a note for the show, Stephenson says:

‘Shrink Rap is an attempt to allow people not to be under pressure of performing, not to feel that they have to present the ideal self, the one that is always adorable and perfect and funny and together. This allows people to bring forward the true self, to not always tell the official story’.

Holding Barbarians at Bay
But, prior to its release, she found herself editing things out far more than she had earlier thought she would need to. It was not the celebrities themselves who called for this degree of censorship but Stephenson’s own deepening awareness of state-of-the-art maliciousness among media commentators and other unconscienable attackers. Stephenson had her own experience of having earlier been one of Great Britain’s best-known television celebrities (and is, moreover, the wife of one of the world’s most famous comedians Billy Connelly). Therefore, the need occurred her to go to still greater editorial lengths to protect her famous interview subjects. She was acutely aware of the extreme readiness of unscrupulous critics to make insensitive and distorted use of what her subjects revealed about themselves. In an interview for The Independent, she observed:

‘I can control what we have in the programme, and take out things that might be misunderstood, but there’s no guarantee of how it’s going to be received. I will feel terrible on people’s behalf if anyone is publicly punished for saying how they feel.’

Neo-Neanderthal Journalism Needs Extinctifying
There needs of course to be a new regimen of sensitivity and responsibity in the media. This is not to say, necessarily, censorship of either journalists or of content presented by those they write about. (Although it is a sad comment that the very advocates of an open society have, all too often, to self-censorship against philistine triumph). Rather, it is about creating an altogether different climate in which genuine feelings of interview or other subjects can be discussed more openly and commented on sensitively and intelligently, sans attack and cynical exploitation. Rupert Murdoch thinks he can influence an eco friendly ‘greening’ of his newspapers. So then, let him and other prime movers and shakers support those developmental programmes which create greater awareness in journalists (and especially the emerging trainee ones) that might approach that sensitivity and deep ethics being role-modeled by Pamela Stephenson.”

Smoke-Screens, Denial And Speaking Ill of Others:

The anonymous “ExBaba Admin” said Barry Pittard further commented on his article by saying:

“A similar nastiness of attack is made - including by those such as Dr G. Venkataraman, on his official website, and other Sai Baba defenders, on former devotees. What is the wish of so many former devotees in many countries? What is it that many (although the top leaders do not tell this to the rank-and-file devotees) have asked of the Sathya Sai Organization to do? It has been to request proper third party investigation of abuse allegations made against Sai Baba and certain of those around him. Instead of clarity, these shameless leaders offer smoke-screens. They remain silent about the integrity of those who have brought issues before them personally. The more we speak with others who have exposed immorality and spiritual betrayal in their gurus, the more do we find remarkable patterns - those of smoke-screening, cover up, denial, and speaking ill of those who have raised serious issues that need to be addressed by any responsible organization.”

Barry Pittard’s Nastiness & Muckraking Exposed:

Barry Pittard’s misrepresentation of Pamela Stephenson and her TV show ‘Shrink Rap’ to further his smear campaigns against Sathya Sai Baba is nothing new. Barry Pittard did the same with his article on Tim Sullivan and his article about a Judge warned about a pervert. Barry Pittard publicly and shamelessly lied about Ullrich Zimmermann twice (Refs: 01 - 02).

Barry Pittard and Anti-Sai Activists are notorious for publicly smearing and ridiculing Sai Devotees and Sai Proponents who do not believe their hearsay and unsubstantiated allegations against Sathya Sai Baba. Barry Pittard waged vicious smear campaigns and attacks against Rabbi Zeller and Dr. Sunny Anand although these two Sai Devotees never spoke one word against Barry Pittard or his group of Anti-Sai thugs.

Not only does Barry Pittard openly endorse, promote and associate himself with the vicious liar, pervert and defamer Sanjay Dadlani (Ref), he also wrote an article about Hal Honig (a high-profile Sai Devotee) and made the following accusations:

  • Alleged Honig was a homosexual.

  • Publicly accused Honig of running a pedophile ring from his apartment (despite Honig’s open-door policy to any Sai Devotee needing a place to stay when he is not in the USA).

  • Publicly alleged that Honig was running a people-trafficking ring, shipping poor Negros from New York’s ghettos to India for sexual purposes.

  • Published vicious hearsay rumors from an anonymous informant against Honig.

  • Publicly boasted that he notified the New York Mayor’s Office, which allegedly issued a case number (that is not indicative of guilt) against Honig.

  • Publicly boasted that he notified Interpol against Honig.

  • Publicly boasted that he informed the FBI at the U.S. Embassy in Canberra, Australia about Honig.

  • Publicly boasted that he sent his pedophile ring allegations to the U.S. State Department, Washington and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Canberra, Australia against Honig.

Of course, Honig has never been charged with (or formally informed of) any crime subsequent to Pittard’s complaints over eight months ago. Barry Pittard’s alleged sensitivities to muckraking, nastiness and stalking (on and off the internet) are huge pseudo-moralistic and hypocritical pretenses. Barry Pittard engages in the very same reprehensible behavior he loves to point out in others.

Numerous are the instances of former followers defaming, ridiculing and libeling Sathya Sai Baba, Pro-Sai Activists and Sai Devotees. Barry Pittard and Robert Priddy have published pictures of Sai Devotees in their defamatory articles and when the same is done to them, they hiss, whine and snivel about “copyright infringement”.

Barry Pittard blatantly misrepresented the former U.S. State Department warning on a free press-release website and had the audacity to claim in bold-caps that “U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT NAMES SATHYA SAI BABA Re PEDOPHILE ACCUSATIONS” (Ref). To Date: Sathya Sai Baba has never (ever) been charged of any crime, sexual or otherwise. Not even one alleged victim has filed a basic police complaint or court case against the Guru in India despite being offered free “world-class legal resources” by Barry Pittard himself.

Barry Pittard wages an unremitting smear-campaign against Sathya Sai Baba that accuses him of “serial pedophilia” and the sexual abuse of “boys” and “children”. These comments are fallacious, unsubstantiated and wholly untrue. “Pedophilia” is the sexual abuse or exploitation of a boy, girl or child 12/13 years of age or younger (Ref). There are no testimonies from boys, children or parents of children that support the erroneous claim that Sathya Sai Baba is a pedophile (paedophile) who engaged in sexual interactions with children. As a matter of fact, the youngest, non-anonymous testimony came from a 16 years old teenager (Jed Geyerhahn) who claimed he was not sexually abused. All the other alleged victims were 18 years of age or older. This once again goes to show how those inimical towards Sathya Sai Baba resort to cheap propaganda and blatant disinformation because the truth simply does not argue in their favor.

Just recently, Robert Priddy psychotically lied about a Sai Devotee (Darpan) and erroneously accused him of making a bogus composite image of the Moon with Sai Baba’s face on it. Despite the picture being an obvious composite, Robert Priddy stalked Darpan, sought out his picture and publicly posted it on his blog along with Darpan’s email address. Needless to say, Robert Priddy never cared to research the matter in depth and completely missed the hard-to-miss post where Darpan admitted the image was not real and that the only reason he created the image was to give others an idea as to what he alleged he saw on the Moon. Read About It For Yourself. Barry Pittard cited Robert Priddy’s post about Darpan and praised it! These are the shameless muckrakers who hypocritically whine about meanness, nastiness and stalking (all the while ignoring the meanness, nastiness and stalking of Sanjay Dadlani, Tony O’Clery, Reinier Van Der Sandt and themselves).

About Pamela Stephenson Connolly & Shrink Rap:

In 2007 Dr. Connolly presented a series of programmes for British television channel More 4 called Shrink Rap, in which she interviewed various celebrities using psychotherapeutic techniques. Those questioned were reality show star Sharon Osbourne, writer and performer Stephen Fry, Sarah Ferguson Duchess of York, former British cabinet minister David Blunkett and actor-comedian Robin Williams.

While quasi-therapeutic in approach, the interviewees were briefed that the conversations were interviews and not strictly therapy. Connolly focused on relating various childhood experiences and traumas to the adult difficulties of the celebrities. “They knew that the last thing I wanted to do was do any harm to them.” Which led to another ethical dilemma. “I couldn’t guarantee how it will be received.” Having got her subjects to expose themselves, she did her best to protect them. The two-and-a-half-hour interviews were edited down to 50 minutes. If they said something too sensitive for their own good, she cut it out. (Ref).

Barry Pittard cited the following quote from Pamela Stephenson:

“I can control what we have in the programme, and take out things that might be misunderstood, but there’s no guarantee of how it’s going to be received. I will feel terrible on people’s behalf if anyone is publicly punished for saying how they feel.”

Although Barry Pittard attempted to argue that Stephenson said this because she was aware “of state-of-the-art maliciousness among media commentators and other unconscienable attackers”, she actually said this in relation to her interview with David Blunkett (British Labor Party Politician) and how she was aware that political pundits would jump on his every word (Ref).

Barry Pittard is trying very hard to justify and make excuses for his defamations and smear-campaigns against Sathya Sai Baba that are not rooted in verifiable or reliable sources. Barry Pittard defames and libels Sathya Sai Baba under the pretense of “protecting” alleged victims and his sources. Barry Pittard is well aware that he cannot answer relevant questions about the Sai Controversy without jeopardizing his credibility and the alleged integrity of the Anti-Sai movement. Even going back to 2001, Anti-Sai sympathizers criticized Barry Pittard about the hearsay allegations made against Sai Baba (Ref).

Barry Pittard resorts to libel, rhetoric and propaganda because he and his Anti-Sai friends have been completely unable to make any legal leeway against Sathya Sai Baba:

  • Despite ceaseless name-dropping.

  • Despite years of unremitting calumny, ridicule, slurs and defamations.

  • Despite erroneously and fraudulently claiming that Sai Baba is a “serial pedophile” who runs people-trafficking rings (allegedly shipping Negros to India from New York’s ghettos for sexual purposes, as alleged by Conny Larsson), absurd claims which have never been proven or supported in any way whatsoever.

  • Despite making criminal allegations like murder, racketeering, money-laundering, homosexual abuse, rape, etc. (although Sai Baba and the Sai Org have never been charged with any crime).

  • Despite getting various media to run exposure articles against Sai Baba and then publicly boasting on their Anti-Sai websites how they were responsible for the media exposures.

  • Despite claiming there is substantial (albeit secret and withheld) evidence and proof against Sai Baba (although they are unable to hire even one money-hungry lawyer to represent alleged victims despite the Guru’s “empire” being allegedly worth billions of dollars).

Barry Pittard & Pamela Stephenson - In Conclusion:

In conclusion, there is absolutely no comparison between Pamela Stephenson’s interviews on her Shrink Rap show and the allegations made against Sathya Sai Baba on Anti-Sai websites by ex-devotees.

Barry Pittard should follow his own advice about eliminating “Neo-Neanderthal Journalism” (which he fully engages in on his defamatory Anti-Sai blog). Far be it for Barry Pittard to preach about “sensitivity” and “deep ethics” when he displays neither of these characteristics himself.

The closer one looks at Barry Pittard and

Anti-Sai Activists, the more one sees of a group that is clinically and negatively obsessed with revenge and anger. This type of unprincipled and besotted behavior is a documented phenomenon that is characteristic of apostates. Former follower’s polyloquent grievances are being fueled by Alaya Rahm’s Self-Dismissed Lawsuit Against The Sathya Sai Baba Society, Unesco’s Regret In Their Press Release Against Sai Baba and the U.S. State Department Removing All Indirect References To Sathya Sai Baba From Their Official Website.

The truth is finally prevailing and former followers are desperately trying to get somewhere besides nowhere. Intelligent people are finally beginning to ask vital questions about the Sai Controversy and are being slapped on the face with claims of “anonymity”, “confidentiality” and “secrecy” by ex-devotees. Thankfully, this secret is now out of the bag and critics are still hoping to fool the few gullible and naive who thrive on the very same deceit and dishonesty that they do.


Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,