|
ALAYA RAHM'S FAILED LAWSUIT:
A Shattered Illusion And Major Blow To The Anti-Sai Movement
Alaya Rahm's sexual abuse
allegations (against Sathya Sai Baba) gained world-wide exposure
when his accounts were internationally broadcast on the Seduced
By Sai Baba and Secret Swami documentaries. In addition
to these two documentaries, Alaya's allegations were nationally
published in Britain (by The Telegraph newspaper) and in
India (by the India Today magazine). Furthermore, Anti-Sai
Activists have translated Alaya's allegations into various
languages and disperse them on the internet through many Anti-Sai
sites, forums, blogs and online groups. If anyone was perceived to
have a "solid case" against Sathya Sai Baba, for alleged
sexual impropriety, it was Alaya Rahm. With many claims of
witnesses and corroborated accounts, the packaged version of
Alaya's allegations (as presented by Anti-Sai Activists) seemed
credible. The perception that Alaya has/had a "solid case"
against Sathya Sai Baba is now an illusion.
When asked why no alleged victim ever attempted to file a
court case (first-hand, against Sathya Sai Baba) in a court of law
in India, Anti-Sai Activists repeatedly claimed that the Indian
Judicial System is "legally corrupt" and that the justices
are either devotees of Sathya Sai Baba or are being manipulated by
high-ranking Indian Politicians. Alaya's lawsuit was not
filed in India. It was filed in the Superior Court Of California,
in the USA. Consequently, the argument of "legally corrupt"
courts with judges being devotees of Sathya Sai Baba, or being
manipulated by high-ranking Indian Politicians, cannot be used as
an excuse with this case. Since the case was self-dismissed
by Alaya himself, no verdict was issued and therefore no criticism
or suspicion can be used against the judge presiding over the
case.
Facts About The Lawsuit: Alaya Rahm vs. Sathya Sai Baba
Society, filed in the Superior Court of California on January
6th 2005, County Of Orange - USA, Case No. 05cc01931. California's
statute of limitations allows an individual to file a lawsuit, for
alleged sexual molestation, up to their 26th birthday if they
claim the events occurred before the age of 18. Alaya Rahm filed
his case 2 days before the statute of limitations would have
expired. Alaya's birthday is January 8th 1979. The court set this
case for trial on April 28, 2006. Rather than taking the case to
trial, Alaya (the plaintiff) self-dismissed his own lawsuit
on April 19th 2006. Alaya attempted to sue for money damages.
No offers of settlement were made in this case and no money or
other consideration was paid for a dismissal of the lawsuit.
This case was dismissed "with prejudice" and is binding
under the international doctrine of res judicata. This
means that Alaya Rahm can never file another lawsuit
against Sathya Sai Baba (in the USA or in India) for the same
claims made in this case (Reference). Alaya
never sought medical or psychiatric treatment for alleged
trauma and could not itemize any wage losses. Other alleged
victims could have come forward and testified on Alaya Rahm's
behalf, however not even one single victim came forward (in
answers to discovery) to support, defend or help Alaya (despite
rampant and unsubstantiated claims, by Anti-Sai Activists, to
there being "over a hundred" alleged victims in the USA).
Alaya did not give a reason for self-dismissing his court case.
Although Alaya's accusations received some publicity before he
filed his lawsuit, his claims were not thoroughly investigated
until after the lawsuit was filed. The legal proceeding provided a
forum in which Alaya'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'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.
During the handling of the lawsuit, witnesses were identified and
interviewed who were present at the ashram in India when the
events were alleged to have occurred, which formed the basis to
Alaya's lawsuit. One of these witnesses was Mr. Kreydick. Mr.
Kreydick purchased Alaya's ticket and accompanied him to India in
1995, accompanied Alaya to India in 1997 and was present in some
of the alleged interviews in which Alaya later claimed to have
been sexually abused. The deposition from Mr. Kreydick was taken
as discovery in this lawsuit.
Mr. Kreydick testified that: 1)
He had a personal, close and confidential relationship with Alaya
from 1995 to 1997; 2) Alaya
confided private and personal information with him that Alaya
apparently had not divulged to his parents (such as his numerous
sexual activities with girls during his teen years);
3) He spoke with Alaya on a daily
basis when he was at the ashram in 1995 and 1997;
4) Discussed the details of each
interview Alaya received during that period; and
5) Even though Alaya openly
shared confidential details about his sexual past with Kreydick,
Alaya never related or suggested, during this period of
time, that any misconduct, wrongdoing or sexual actions had
transpired between him and Sathya Sai Baba. Kreydick testified
that Alaya related only positive, enthusiastic and miraculous
experiences with Sathya Sai Baba.
The video deposition from Mr. Kreydick was taken on March 16th
2006 and the typed deposition was signed on April 7th 2006. Alaya
Rahm dismissed his case shortly after Mr. Kreydick's deposition
was taken.
|
