guilty by CPO Child Protection Office of sexual abuse with a minor
abuser accused of raping a girl just 13 years of age
das, President of the CPO, is compromizing
September 7, 2005, From Pandu das Blog
"No Justice Served"
- a guest message
Hare Krishna. A few weeks ago I heard from this devotee, whom I'm told is friends
with the woman who was molested as a child by Vakresvara
Pandit. I offered that she could write something and I would put it
on my main page. I didn't mean to delay, so I'm putting it up now. What follows
is her message. Hare Krishna.
I am completely outraged by this news of Vakresvara Pandit. Two panels
of judges at the CPO office have found him guilty of sexual abuse of a minor.
Yet for some reason the second panel felt that he suffered sufficiently in their
words, "Vakresvara Pandit has already lived with this decision for three
years." To be honest with you he never really followed anything set out for
him by the first panel of judges. They claim that he only began to follow things
a year before this final decision came through but I don't think that is the case
either. He was in Gita Nagari with BT Swami, in his final days, leading kirtans
and being held as an exalted person. What has been done is an injustice. He has
just had a little slap on the hand and now given a cushion to sit on at the next
festival. Why does ISKCON keep shooting itself in the foot when it comes to child
abuse? Why can't they actually show they have changed and got a backbone now?
Why can't they punish the abusers? The only thing his victim wanted was a little
justice. She wasn't after money. She didn't join the lawsuit against ISKCON. She
just wanted him not to be able to be around other young girls, lead kirtans, give
class, or to be able to hold a position of authority. It is too much to ask for
him to write a letter to her accepting what he has done and apologise for it?
That was the first thing he was meant to do and now Tamohara Das has said,
Yes, I can understand that you would have a mixed reaction to the
decision. The sentence is definitely lighter. The requirements to apologize or
pay restitution are not called for in the new sentence. Of course, VPd maintains
his innocence and he was never likely to either apologize or pay restitution.
Of course, the decision was made, not because he won't do it, but rather the
decision was somewhat of a compromise, as the judges had different opinions about
Some devotees would have liked to have seen a stronger sentence, but at least
we maintained the guilty verdict, and were able to get the restrictions extended
another two years."
So now he is pretty much walking away from this foot loose and fancy free.
I can't possibly see the reasoning behind the change of mind for the sentencing.
How can you say someone did something as horrible as this, where if they were
in a real court of law they would be behind bars for the rest of their life, and
yet say three years of light punishment (if you could call it that) is enough?
These people must not have children of their own. For what kind of a person would
let this predator out around you kids? Two of the restrictions laid down by the
first panel but not upheld by the second panel states as follows:
7) Vakresvara Pandit dasa must not have ISKCON service, or service
with an organization affiliated with ISKCON, that involves connection with adolescent
girls, other than his biological children.
10) Vakresvara Pandit should not be alone on ISKCON property with adolescent girls
who are not his biological children.
I grew up in ISKCON. I have always thought highly of my religion, but now I
am not so sure of the foundation my religion is sitting on. There is all this
talk about how the abuse was in the past and now we look after our kids. We are
showing everyone we are sorry, by apologising publicly, for what people in leadership
positions did in the past…well what about today? Has ISKCON learned anything
from the past?
Enforcement by Child Protection Office
by Bhaktin Miriam
Jul 15, USA (SUN) - At the beginning of June of this year, 2005, I heard that
a devotee who committed child abuse was being honored and allowed to give classes
and lead kirtans in Gita Nagari despite the fact that he is prohibited from doing
so by the Child Protection Office. I am not naming him (Vakresvara
Pandita Das) because the police never arrested this man, since the family
of the victim did not press criminal charges. Nevertheless, the victim did write
a 10-page letter detailing how this man had sexual intercourse with her for about
a year when she was only 13 years of age. Even though the sex was consensual,
she was much too young to give her consent. Under the law, because of her tender
age, this act is considered statutory rape.
Members of the Child Protection Office investigated this case and realized that
the devotee perpetrator gave inconsistent testimony about what happened. Meanwhile
the victim provided consistent details that she wouldn't have known unless the
perpetrator took her to those places.
The CPO report states that if the devotee that committed the sexual abuse doesn't
apologize to his victim and gives her restitution of $3,000, or more, he would
be banned from ISKCON. It looks as though he didn't; therefore, he has to be banned
from ISKCON. Yet, the current Child Protection Office director is not answering
my inquiries concerning this. Also, the CPO report states that he should not be
allowed to give classes, lead kirtans or hold managerial positions. Yet, he has
been giving classes and leading kirtans many times since the beginning of his
"sentence" - in some cases while GBC members were also present.
The former Child Protection Office director, Dhira Govinda Prabhu, complained
to the GBC and the leaders of ISKCON many times, but nothing was done to stop
this practice. The victim herself complained to the leaders, but nothing was done.
Lately, before Bhakti Tirtha Maharaja passed away, this sexual abuser had been
in Gita Nagari giving classes and leading kirtans. In fact, it was Bhakti Tirtha
Maharaja's desire for this man to do this.
Since Bhakti Tirtha Maharaja favored this man, Maharaja's disciples give this
statutory rapists great honor. The disciples want to believe that this man is
innocent. What other explanation could be found if their guru favored him? So,
these disciples have been spreading rumors that the victim fabricated the whole
thing. They are saying that the Child Protection Office, along with the GBC, dismissed
the case, or at the very least, they lifted the injunctions while Bhakti Tirtha
Maharaja was preparing to leave this world.
On June 23, 2005, I e-mailed Tamohara dasa, the new Director for ISKCON's Child
Protection Office. about this whole affair. All he said to me was that this perpetrator
filed an appeal and that the appeals panel upheld the original CPO decision on
this child abuser. Still, the panel reduced the time that this child abuser had
to follow the CPO's injunctions from five years to three years.
I asked Tamohara prabhu what was the reason for reducing this child abuser's "sentence",
but he did not reply. I then sent Tamohara prabhu another letter asking him if
the abuser apologized and paid restitution to the victim (if he didn't, according
to the CPO's injunction he must be banned from ISKCON). He did not reply to that
letter either. I then wrote another letter asking him if it's true that this perpetrator's
injunctions were lifted while this sexual abuser was in Gita Nagari for Bhakti
Tirtha Maharaja's passing away. That letter also went unanswered. I then wrote
another letter asking Tamohara prabhu if this perpetrator will get punished for
not following the Child Protection Office's (CPO) injunctions. No answer to that
Tamohara prabhu promised me a copy of the report of the Appeals panel decision.
But he never sent it to me. He has not been responding to any of my letters for
more than two weeks now. I've heard that he has not been responding to other people's
inquiries concerning this case either. The only thing that he would say is that
the appeals panel reduced this child abuser's sentence from 5 years to 3. But
he refuses to give any details, and would not give the appeals judicial report
to those who are interested or following this case.
This child abuser had a member of the GBC as his lawyer, which in itself is a
conflict of interest. But when I asked Tamohara prabhu who defended the victim,
he would not answer. The only thing that he would say is that he, Tamohara prabhu,
did not get involved in the appeals procedure except to appoint the panel.
This sexual child abuser has to follow the CPO's injunctions until July 26, 2005.
So far since the beginning of his sentence in 2002, this abuser has failed to
follow the CPO's injunctions numerous times. For details of this please read my
article entitled "The Persistent Child Abuse Problem in the Hare Krishna Movement".
What is also disturbing is that he is being honored in Gita Nagari just because
Bhakti Tirtha Maharaja favored him. Also, if this sexual abuser has not been following
the injunctions, then the only alternative is for him to be banned. Otherwise,
what is the meaning of a Child Protection Office? Is this office just a public
relations campaign? If the Child Protection Office doesn't have any way to enforce
their injunctions, then what is the use of having a Child Protection Office? Please,
if you can help me bring justice for the victim, I would greatly appreciate it
The Ongoing Saga of a Child Abuser Protected by ISKCON
by Bhaktin Miriam
Jul 19, USA (SUN) - [Editors note: This article has been revised, and the individual's
name has replaced previous anonymous references to him.]
A panel of ISKCON Child Protection Office judges determined that Vakresvara Pandit
dasa committed sexual abuse with a 13 year old girl in Dallas, Texas. After investigating
the case the Child Protection Office issued an Official Decision on July 26, 2002.
The Official Decision found enough credible evidence of sexual abuse on the part
of Vakresvara Pandit dasa, and issued the parameters that defined this devotee's
relationship with ISKCON.
On top of the list, the Child Protection Office stipulated that he must write
a letter of apology to the claimant, fully acknowledge his transgressions against
her, take complete responsibility for his actions and sincerely offer to rectify
himself. The letter was to be sent to the CPO. It also stipulated that he must
pay the victim $3,000 in the next three years starting from July 26, 2002. $1,000
of that had to be paid within one year of the decision. The official decision
stated that if the abuser did not comply with the apology letter and the restitution
of $3,000, then he must be completely banned from ISKCON and ISKCON related organizations.
As of last June 2004, Vakresvara Pandit had not complied with the above stipulations.
I contacted the current CPO director, Tamohara prabhu to find out if Vakresvara
Pandit dasa had complied with these two stipulations during this past year, but
he, Tamohara prabhu refused to answer this question. So, in all probability Vakresvara
Pandit dasa did not send a letter of apology nor did he give restitution to the
victim. Yet, at no time at all was he ever banned from ISKCON.
The Official Decision also stipulated that this devotee must not assume any leadership
positions in ISKCON. This included leading kirtans and giving classes on ISKCON
property or at ISKCON functions. Yet, there is ample evidence that he led kirtans
and gave classes numerous times throughout ISKCON from July 26, 2002, to the present.
The leaders of ISKCON had been informed of this numerous times, but he nevertheless
continued to give classes and lead kirtans throughout the United States and India,
right to the present moment. He was even the temple president of Puerto Rico throughout
2002 and for a good part of 2003.
The Official Decision also stipulated that he must not reside or stay overnight
on an ISKCON property. Yet on many occasions and while he was the Temple President,
he did just that. The Official Decision further stipulated that if Vakresvara
Pandit dasa violated any of the conditions, then he was prohibited from any connection
with ISKCON or ISKCON-affiliated organizations until his case was reviewed by
the Child Protection Office. There is plenty of documentation to prove that he
did violate many of the stipulations, numerous times, yet he was never banned
from ISKCON. This devotee appealed his case, and a new panel of judges was appointed
to review it. His representative was a member of the GBC. Apparently the victim
had no one to represent her. It was an appeals process where only the abuser had
a lawyer, the victim had no one to defend her.
When I contacted Tamohara prabhu about this he would not reply. On June 8,
2005, the CPO issued the Official Appeals Decision on this devotee. The appeals
judges once again reviewed all the evidences, including the extensive appeal presented
by his lawyer. The appeals panel's conclusion was that they did not find any evidence
that supported the abuser's claim that there was prejudicial treatment of him
in the original hearing of the case. The panel also stated that they found no
compelling reason to overturn the original decision. Therefore, they upheld it.
However, after reviewing everything and coming to the conclusion that the original
official decision was valid and also that Vakresvara Pandit dasa was treated fair
by the original CPO panel judges, the appeals panel decided to reduced the time
that Vakresvara Pandit dasa had to follow the CPO's injunctions. It was reduced
from the original 5 years to 3 years. He will not have to follow any injunctions
as of July 26, 2005. The only thing that they kept is the fact that he cannot
be on the same premises with his victim unless she asks him to. Last month, I
asked Tamohara prabhu what reason or explanation did the appeals panel offered
for reducing the time 5 to 3 years, but again he would not reply. Since Tamohara
prabhu was not replying to my inquiries for several weeks, I was hoping that the
Official Appeals Decision might have some explanations. However, the appeals panel
judges did not offer an explanation, except that Vakresvara Pandit dasa has served
the movement for a long time and that he had to live with this decision since
it first came out. Apparently, the appeals panel judges overlooked the fact that
the original decision, which they themselves upheld, stipulated that Vakresvara
Pandit dasa should be banned if he does not give a letter of apology and restitution
to his victim. So, if they have upheld the original decision, then why aren't
they following it? The appeals panel of judges have also ignored another stipulation
from the original decision which they have upheld. That is, that if Vakresvara
Pandit dasa fails to follow any of the other injunctions against him, he must
be banned. As we know, or should know, there is plenty of evidence that on numerous
occasions, too numerous to list here, he has not been following the injunctions.
The GBC was kept informed that Vakresvara Pandit dasa was not following the
injunctions. On some occasions, members of the GBC themselves were present with
him while he lead kirtans. It is very disturbing that the appeals report does
not say anything about banning him for not following the injunctions. In fact,
he was not even penalized for that. The only statement that can be taken as any
kind of justification for reducing the time that he must follow the injunctions
from 5 years to 3 years is that he had only one incident of consensual sex with
the minor on his record. That statement is inaccurate. Vakresvara Pandit dasa
had sex with the child for almost a year. According to her testimony, they had
sex 7 or 8 times. The second reason for the appeals panel judges to justify reducing
Vakresvara Pandit dasa's time for following the CPO's injunctions from 5 to 3
years is that the sex was consensual. Now, that justification is so bizarre! How
can this panel not acknowledge the gravity of what happened to the victim? It's
true the victim might not have been physically forced; nevertheless, under the
Texas law, a person under the age of 14 cannot give consent to sex under any circumstances.
The original panel judges were well aware of the victim's age when they came up
with an appropriate punishment. Apparently, the appeals panel judges ignored the
victim's age so that they could reduced Vakresvara Pandit dasa's required time
to follow the injunctions. The Texas criminal law considers sex with a minor "aggravated
sexual assault." Furthermore, the Texas law stipulates, "if the child victim is
under the age of 14, the offense is enhanced to a felony of the first degree,
punishable by imprisonment for life or for a term of not more than 99 years or
less than five years, and a fine not to exceed $50,000."
Consequently, to reduce Vakresvara Pandit dasa's time to follow the injunctions
because she consented to sex does not hold water under the criminal judicial system,
nor with any moral conscious society.
Another thing that the panel of judges in the appeals procedure overlooked is
the sexual abuser's total lack of remorse or sense of responsibility for what
he had done. And in many instances, he even failed to follow the injunctions against
him. In fact, he blatantly broke as many of the CPO's injunctions as he could.
Many complains were issued against him and the GBC did not take any action to
try to stop him. On the contrary, they made things very difficult for the former
CPO director because he wanted them to enforce the injunctions and they would
not, despite their false promises that they would.
When I again started investigating this case last month, in June 2005, I found
the current CPO director uncooperative. He responded minimally, saying only that
the appeals judges upheld the original decision and that Vakresvara Pandit dasa's
restrictions were reduced to 3 years. Besides that, Tamohara prabhu would not
respond to any other inquiries, and he also did not send me the appeals report
as he promised.
Sexual abuse is a very serious crime. According to Texas law, having sex with
a minor is consider "aggravated sexual assault." The Child Protection Office determined
that Vakresvara Pandit dasa was guilty of having sex with a 13 year old child.
Texas law stipulates that a child under the age of 14 cannot give consent to sex
under any circumstances. There is lots of documentation that Vakresvara Pandit
dasa did not follow the CPO's injunctions. In some cases, members of the GBC were
present when he was leading kirtans. Members of the GBC have also received several
notices that Vakresvara Pandit was not following the injunctions. But nothing
was ever done. He did not write a letter of apology or gave restitution to his
victim. He was supposed to be ban if he did not comply with both stipulations.
He was also supposed to be ban if he did not follow the CPOs injunctions. Yet,
he is still in ISKCON. To add insult to injury, the appeals panel judges reduced
his term to follow the injunctions by two years because he only had one child
abuse victim and because she consented. Yet, the law says that she couldn't possibly
consent under any circumstances. Despite being found guilty by both the original
and the appeals panel judges appointed by the Child Protection Office directors,
Vakresvara Pandit dasa has not shown any remorse, nor did he accepted responsibility
for what he has done. Yet, he was awarded leniency by reducing the term to follow
the injunctions. This whole case is nothing but a sham and an insult to all the
child abuse victims.
A Response to Tamohara Prabhu
by Bhaktin Miriam
Jul 21, USA (SUN) - [Revised] Dear Tamohara prabhu, Please accept my humble obeisances.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada. Prabhu, also, I apologise if your feelings were
With all due respect, this is not about our feelings. We are forgetting the main
focus here, which is justice for abused sons and daughters of devotees. It is
about protecting children. It is about doing this ugly service right now and doing
it right so no devotee ever has to take it up again. It is about instilling zero
tolerance for child abusers in ISKCON And my frustration, prabhu, comes from seeing
four glaring and demonstrable facts:
1) Vakresvara Pandit never apologized to the victim and defied this stipulation
of the CPO.;
2) VP never compensated the victim and again defied this CPO decision, also.
3) VP participated and was active in leading kirtans and giving lectures at several
temples and has been for years since the official decision by the CPO that prohibited
him from doing these activities. At home, I even have a c.d. still sold in NY
of him featured as a kirtan leader from two summers ago at a temple gathering
which includes Radhanath swami giving lecture! So, again, prabhu, this injunction
of the CPO was disobeyed - and with impunity.
4) VP was supposed to show a letter of the injunctions to the presidents of every
temple he went to, and, once again, he defied yet another of the CPO's resolutions.
So, prabhu, given these facts, which no one contests, how is it that VP gets reduced
terms on his injunctions? Why are we rewarding VP for his defiance of the CPO's
resolutions and thereby making a mockery of the whole process? In ISKCON culture
we have a lot of trouble with facts, prabhu. In fact, in ISKCON we have a lot
of trouble with honest language. And honest language, along with a willingness
to confront truth, is a necessary tool against obfuscation and propaganda. I am
quite sure many devotees who are in denial about child abuse in ISKCON would rather
all this was discussed in Sanskrit, for example.
Another instance of thought control, is our fixation on proper tone, etiquette,
offenses, etc., etc., all tried and true Vaisnava tactics to discourage critical
thinking and rational analysis by an authoritarian culture with no accountability
standards and not accustomed to being challenged on any issue. Only, on this matter
of child abuse, I will not play along.
Prabhu, you say that you provided as many facts as you could. How unfortunate
that you feel that way. The questions that I asked and which you did not reply
were very legitimate. I think all devotees have a right to know these things.
We have not only a right, but also a duty to ask how this could happen. You say
that you cannot comment on the appeals panel's motivations, discussions and deliberations.
But, prabhu, I never asked you those things. What I asked is if the victim also
had a lawyer. You didn't answer that. I also asked if the sexual abuser sent a
letter of apology and gave restitution to the victim. You didn't answer that either.
I also asked what was the justification (which has to be in the report) for reducing
the sexual abuser's "sentence" when he had defied most of the injunctions and
has not shown one iota of remorse or concern for the victim. You didn't answer
that either. You never even sent me the appeals report as you promised.
Sorry for rubbing this on you again. But, prabhu, please try to see things from
my perspective and that of the victims of child abuse. I was asking legitimate
questions and my letters were not responded to. I felt very, very frustrated being
ignored like that. Prabhu, please try to see that things cannot be done behind
close doors. I can understand the issue of confidentiality. But my questions were
not the sort of things that have to be kept secret. Devotees have the right to
be kept informed about how such an important decision could be so flawed - even
after a 9.5 million-dollar child abuse lawsuit. Transparency, Prabhu.
It's a fact VP did not follow the injunctions on numerous occasions. You know
this is true, and there is plenty of documentation about these facts because he
never took the trouble to hide his defiance. I also found out that not long ago
he gave a lecture in India. Prabhu, your assertion that there was only "one" instance
when VP did not follow the injunctions is simply not an accurate statement at
best. At worst, its yet another misrepresentation of the facts that are readily
available to anyone willing to make a few phone calls.
I ask, what is the use of the GBC writing a letter saying that the injunctions
should be followed if they themselves saw him breaking the injunctions with their
own eyes and didn't do anything to stop it? What is the use of the GBC letter
if to this day they know fully well that VP was breaking the injunctions stipulated
by the CPO? That letter had the net effect of just one more public relations stunt
because VP recently broke the injunction yet again by leading kirtan and giving
lectures in Gita Nagari. And all this just begs another question: what exactly
does the CPO do? What is its purpose if it cannot even enforce even the most elemental
of injunctions and then even rewards the perpetrator for not following them?
You say that in the past, VP was not following because some of these temple presidents
didn't know of his status. Prabhu, it's not up to the temple presidents to make
sure VP is following the injunctions. Its up to VP to follow regardless of whether
the temple presidents know or not, and his open defiance of the injunctions should
carry more sanctions not rewards! Besides this, all temple presidents received
a copy of the CPO reports. So, they were informed. Also, didn't Vakresvara Pandit
have to show the temple leaders a letter stating his status? So why are we being
so disingenuous, prabhu?
Prabhu, you say that the judicial system is basically working and we must back
up the decision. How are all the well-known and demonstrable facts that I just
mentioned above supporting this statement of yours? How can you say that a judicial
system is effective when there is no justice? And, prabhu, Vakresvara Pandit's
case is not the only case in which the perpetrator did not or is not following
the CPO injunctions. We both know this, prabhu. So, if you insist the system is
working, please, explain to the concerned devotees how this is so in light of
the recent developments because, sincerely, this is not what we are observing.
None of these so-called "flaws" has to do with "proposing and enacting better
methods and process", as you say. The best process and methodology or a beautiful
document full of words of pious concern for children may be created anytime, but
if the political will is not there to enforce it, the "process" is meaningless
no matter how good it is on paper.
It's not about "process", prabhu; its about the CPO rewarding a perpetrator who
defied its injunctions after he had been found to have committed a felony of the
first degree, aggravated sexual assault, against a 13 year old girl, punishable
in a criminal court from anywhere, life imprisonment to no less than five years,
and a fine not to exceed 50,000 dollars. That's what we are talking about. These
are facts, prabhu.
What all this data regrettably illustrates is how all these scandals-even after
a 9.5 million child abuse settlement-still can't make ourselves think and act
on child abuse with responsibility and grave concern. And devotees like me, who
are concerned about child abuse in Prabhupada's movement, have not only every
right, but, also, a duty, to ask and find out why VP is being rewarded for defying
the relatively mild injunctions of the CPO.
You say that you fully support the appeals panel decision to reduce VP's sentence.
But you forget to mention on what grounds, with what facts, you support this travesty
that rewards VP for violating and making a mockery of the whole process, and,
thereby, adding more insult to the injuries that the victim has had to contend
with to this day.
That is why I wrote the article. This decision was one more insult and injustice
added to the life time and painful memory that VP represents to the victim. I
thought that the CPO was established to see justice and protect children. But
now we are telling the world that even after a 9.5 child abuse settlement, we
still "don't get it!" The demonstrable truth is that VP and others like him were
punished mostly on paper. And now the CPO has not only validated that artificial
posture, but, also, presented the defiance of VP with a prize and a reward, as
if he had shown exemplary maturity and concern about the damage that he caused!
But this is not the way out of this dark issue. To accept yet another instance
of injustice passively is merely not only to increase the arrogance and contempt
that this child abuser has already shown, but also the arrogance and contempt
of the authorities that refuse to get real about this blight.
Again, I apologize for "my tone". I didn't write the paper with the intent to
hurt your feelings. I am sorry if I did. But I do want to get down to the bottom
of this thoroughly disagreeable subject, not only in my life, but also in the
life of the victims and ISKCON.
Open Letter to the ISKCON Child Protection Office
by Pandu das
July 24, 2005
Dear Tamohara prabhu,
Hare Krishna. Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to ISKCON Founder
Acarya Srila Prabhupada. As you know, Vakresvara Pandit das, who is both famous
and infamous as a kirtan leader and in other roles in ISKCON, was found by an
ISKCON Child Protection Office ("CPO") Committee to have been guilty of numerous
sexual molestations of a female child over a period of about one year in or around
1993. The finding of guilt was stated in a CPO Official Decision dated July 26,
2002, and was affirmed by a CPO Appeal Panel ("AP") decision dated June 8, 2005.
In the state with jurisdiction over these crimes, the sexual molestation of a
child constitutes "aggravated sexual assault," and "indecency with a minor," each
of which are felonies in the first and second degree, respectively. The criminals
who are found by the State to be guilty of these crimes routinely die in prison.
The findings of the CPO reveal Vakresvara Pandit das ("VPd") as a sexual "predator,"
as described by one criminal defense attorney and ISKCON member who was requested
by your predecessor to review the CPO findings. As you also must know, VPd has
repeatedly denied the allegations; but directly told the Committee that his responses
should not be believed, that he would lie to defend himself. The findings of the
Committee revealed that the child victim gave a testimony that withstood a very
high degree of scrutiny for truth, while VPd's testimony was obviously constructed
of falsehoods. The previously mentioned attorney commented in this regard that,
"As a prosecutor, I would take this case to trial and count in large part upon
VPd to help convict himself." VPd's failure to honestly repent for his sexual
crimes stands as strong evidence that he is a serious danger to ISKCON and its
Undoubtedly, you are consciously awaiting the passing of July 26, 2005; as, in
spite of the AP having affirmed guilt, they chose to truncate VPd's restrictions
in ISKCON so that they terminate on that date. The AP's decision in this regard
shows a strong appearance of impropriety, which must be addressed if the ISKCON
CPO is to maintain credibility.
In spite of the repeated findings of guilt, the AP (under coercion?) effectively
decided that VPd's crimes did not merit any punishment at all, and that there
was no need for VPd or various ISKCON leaders to have obeyed the earlier dictates
of the CPO. One need only consider the parties representation to see the injustice.
VPd was represented by an attorney who is a GBC member (an obvious conflict of
interests), while your failure to respond to several requests to identify the
victim's attorney indirectly reveals that she had no attorney at all.
The panel's justification for practically negating VPd's punishment, saying that
he'd already lived with this decision against him since July 26, 2002, was ridiculous.
It is public knowledge that Vakresvara Pandit, and several ISKCON leaders, clearly
disobeyed the CPO's prior order. If there was any confusion, it was purposefully
created by VPd, as the order clearly stated his responsibility to obey the ruling
and to inform the president of every temple he visited of the decision. The panel's
statement that it was one incident was also false. The CPO found that the victim
was truthful in her claim that, over the course of nearly a year, "We did have
sex around seven or eight times;" not one incident. Finally, as you've agreed,
there was no legal consent. Indeed, in every state in the USA, the stated so-called
"consent" to sex given by a thirteen year old child is legally void; and sex with
a child constitutes rape. Tolerance for such rape can only exist far outside the
bounds of Vaishnava conduct. Each and every reason stated in the AP's justification
for reducing the sentence was false.
While you have admitted that the AP's falsely stating that the child consented
to the sex required correction, it does not appear that you have fully considered
the ramifications. You cannot simply alter the AP's Official Decision to erase
that portion, or any portion of the justifications for reducing VPd's punishment.
The only legitimate adjustment of an Official Decision is to treat any conclusions
based on known falsehoods as null and void. This is a logical imperative. This
point must be made clear, which I beg you to carefully consider: The responsible
authorities both found that guilt was clearly established according to the accepted
rules. The AP's negation of the rectification plan, in spite of that guilt, marked
"a compromise" (quoting you) between the authorities' findings and those who refused
to accept them. That makes clear the weakness of the ISKCON Child Protection Office
and sets a precedent wherein the denial of the CPO's authority is an acceptable
and effective means of countering its decisions.
The Official Decision of the AP sets a clear precedent with the potential to eliminate
virtually all punishment for child molestation, freshly in the wake of a $9.5
million child abuse settlement that bankrupted ISKCON. The world is watching,
as is the LORD, and the credibility of the Child Protection Office and of ISKCON
is at stake. The armies are beginning to assemble on both sides, and it is time
for you to consider whether the Child Protection Office will fight on behalf of
the predator or his victim. Please choose wisely. Hare Krishna.
Una Carta Abierta a la Officina de Proteccion de Ninos de ISKCON
Por Pandu das
(Disculpen que el texto no tenga acentos graficos.)
Querido Tamohara prabhu,
Hare Krishna. Por favor accepte mis humildes reverencias. Todas las glorias al
fundador acarya de ISKCON Srila Prabhupada.
Como usted sabe, Vakresvara Pandit quien es un famoso e infamoso kirtanero y tambien
tiene otros puestos en ISKCCON, fue encontrado culpable por la Officina de Proteccion
de Ninos de ISKCON (CPO) de haber cometido various actos de molestaciones sexuales
con una nina durante cerca de un ano alrededor de 1993. en Julio 26, del ano 2002,
el reporte Oficial de la Officina de Protecion de Ninos de ISKCON encontro a este
individuo culpable de molestacion y en el 8 de junio de 2005, esto fue afirmado
por un grupo de juezes de apelacion nombrados por la CPO. en el estado con la
jurisdiccion sobre estos crimines, la molestacion sexual de ninos constituye "asalto
sexual agravado" y "indecencia con un menor de edad" cada uno son crimines de
primero y segundo grado, respectivamente. Los criminales que son encontrados de
ser culpables de estos crimines murenrutinamente en la prision. Los resultados
del CPO revelan que Vakresvara Pandit es un "depredador sexual", segun lo descrito
por el abogado de defensa criminal y miembro de ISKCON que fue solicitado y quien
fue contactado por su precursor para repasar los resultados que fueron concluidos
por la CPO.
Como usted tambien debe saber, Vakresvara Pandit prabhu a negado en varias ocasiones
las alegaciones; pero al mismo tiempo les dijo al comite que no deberian creer
sus respuestas por que el mentiro para defenderse. Los resultados del comite revelaron
que la victima dio testimonio que soporto un grado fuertisimo de escrutinio por
la verdad, en cambio el testimonio de Vakresvara Pandit era construido obviamente
de falsedades. el abogado previamente mencionado comento en este respeto que,
"como abogado, yo llevaria este caso a la corte y contaria en gran parte con Vakresvara
Pandit para ayudar a que se condene a si mismo." La falta de Vakresvara Pandit
de no honestamente arrepentirse por sus crimines sexuales demuestra fuertemente
que el es un peligro serio a ISKCON y a sus miembros.
Indubablemente, usted esta esperando que pase la fecha de 26 de Julio de 2005;
apesar de que los juezes de apelacion afirmaron la cupabilidad de Vakresvara Pandit,
ellos eligieron de truncar las restricciones de Vakresvara Pandit de modo que
terminen en esta fecha. esta decision de los juezes del apelacion demuestra un
aspecto fuerte de la impropiedad, que debe ser correjido para que la CPO de ISKCON
pueda mantener su credibilidad.
Apesar de los resultados repetidos de culpabilidad, los juezes de apelacion (con
coercion?) efectivamente decidiero que los crimines de Vakresvara Pandit no merecieron
ningun castigo, y que no hubiera necedidad de que Vakresvara Pandit o los various
lideres de ISKCON obedecieran los dictados anteriores del CPO. Solamente uno tiene
que considerar los partidos de representacion pare reconoser la injusticia. Vakresvara
Pandit fue representado por un abogado que es miembro del GBC (un obvio conflicto
de interes), mientras que su falta de responder a repetidas peticiones de nombrar
al abogado de la victima revela indirectament que la victima no tuvo ningun abogado.
La justificacion de los juezes de apelacion por practicamente negar el castigo
de Vakresvara Pandit, diciendo que el ya vivio con esta decision desde el 26 de
Julio de 2002 es ridicula. es conocimento publico que Vakresvara Pandit y various
lideres de ISKCON, claramente desobedicieron las ordenes previas del CPO. Si hubo
alguna confucion, esto fue al proposito causado por Vakresvara Pandit, pues la
orden claramente decia que era la responsabilidad de el de obedecer las reglas
y de que tenia que informar de esta decision a todos los presidentes de cada templo
que el visitaba. La declaracion de los juezes de apelacion que era solamente un
incidente es tambien falsa. La CPO encontro que la victima dijo la verdad cuando
dijo que sobre un curso de casi un ano, "Tuvimos sexo alrededor de siete u ocho
veces;" no era un incidente. Finalmente, como usted ha convenido, no hubo un consentimiento
legal. De hecho, en cada estado de e.e.U.U., el "consentimiento" supuesto indicado
al sexo dado por un nino/nina de trece anos es negado legalmente; y sexo con un
menor de edad constituye una violacion. Toleracion por esta violacion solamente
puede existir lejano fuera de los limites de conducta Vaishnava. Cada una razon
dada por justificacion de los juezes de apelacion para reduccion la sentencia
de Vakresvara Pandit son falsas.
Mientras que usted ha admitio que la declaracion de los juezes de apelacion de
que la nina consintio al sexo es falsa y se requiere correccion, parace que usted
no ha considerado completamente las ramificaciones. Usted no puede simplemente
alterar la decicion oficial de los juezes de apelacion y borrar esa porcion, o
cualquier otra porcion de la justificacion de reducir el castigo de Vakresvara
Pandit. el unico cambio legitimo de una decision official es de tratar cualquier
conclucion basada en falsedades sabidas como nulo y sin valor. esto es un imperativo
este punto se bede hacer claramente, a lo cual le ruego que por favor lo considere
cuidadosamente: las ambas autoridades responsables encontrator que la culpabilidad
fue claramente establecida segun a las reglas aceptadas. La negacion del plan
de rectificacion que los juezes de apelacion negaron, apesar de que lo encontraron
culpable, senala un "un compromiso" (le estoy cotizando) entre los resultados
de las autoridades de la CPO y los que rechazan aceptarlas. esto indica la debilidad
de la Officina de Proteccion de Ninos de ISKCON (CPO) y figa un precedente en
el cual una negacion de la autoridad de la CPO es un medio acceptable y manera
efectiva para contradecir sus decisiones.
La Decicion Official de los juezes de apelacion figa un claro precedente con el
potencial de virtualmente eliminar todo castigo de molestaciones de ninos, depuesde
de una reciente penalidad de 9.5 millones por abuso de ninos que insolvio a ISKCON.
el mundo esta mirando, igualmente el Senor, y la crebilidad de la Officina de
Proteccion de Ninos de ISKCON esto en fuego. Los ejercitos de ambos lados estan
comezando a montarse, y es hora para que usted considere si la Officina de Proteccion
de Ninos lucharo a nombre del depredador o su victima. Por favor elija sabiamente.
from PADA Newsletter Sept. 04, 2005 - Even most abominable person can be
I, NARA NARAYAN DAS, WOULD LIKE TO ADD MY COMMENT TO THIS LETTER OF GENUINE
CONCERN AND JUSTIFIED ALARM:
On Aug 22, 2005, at 2:05 PM, Jaya Murari dasa wrote: ...
I saw that Bhakti-Tirtha Swami had invited Vakresvara Pandit to lead kirtans at
I AND SEVERAL OF MY CHILDREN ATTENDED THE COURT ORDERED APOLOGY BY THE ISKCON
LEADERS TO THE ABUSED GURUKULIES. THE POINT OF CHILD MOLESTERS BEING NOT ONLY
ALLOWED INTO THE ASSOCIATION OF DEVOTEES (INCLUDING CHILDREN AND INCLUDING CHILDREN
THAT THEY HAVE THEMSELVES MOLESTED) WAS RAISED BY SCANDALIZED AND OUTRAGED GURUKULIES.
[PADA: OK, this is the main problem. Many of the adults, most of the big swami
leaders like Hrdayananda, Sridhara, Narayan, and so many others, they sit around
and either do nothing or they support the pedophile's regime. The molested children
have to raise the issue themselves? And forget all about our pals like Sanat and
Mukunda, their "plan" to save the molested children is: kill all of
Prabhupada's children. They are even worse than the molesters or the GBC.]
# I WAS ASTONISHED TO FIND THAT TAMOHARA DAS, THE CPO HEAD, USED THIS OPPORTUNITY
TO SOFT PEDAL THE OBJECTIONS TO MOLESTERS PARTICIPATING IN ISKCON ACTIVITIES,
AND EVEN WENT INTO A BIZARRE EXPLANATION AS TO HOW THE RIGHTS OF THE MOLESTERS
CANNOT BE VIOLATED BY PREVENTING THEM FROM ATTENDING ISKCON PROGRAMS.
WHEN CONFRONTED WITH OBJECTIONS TO VAKRESVARA DAS AND OTHERS WHO FLAUNTED THEIR
PENALTIES AND WERE REWARDED WITH CHOICE PRESTIGIOUS PREACHING OPPORTUNITIES, TAMOHARA
APPEARED TO BE SURPRISED, AND PROMISED TO "INVESTIGATE" ALTHOUGH HE
DID NOT TAKE THE TROUBLE TO EVEN APPEAR TO TAKE NOTES.
[PADA: Another big problem. Many times someone steps forward as the official
ISKCON/ GBC representative who is taking charge of a problem, but they are covering
up the problem?]
# WHEN ASKED AS TO HOW A KNOW ULTRA VIOLENT CHILD ABUSER COULD LATER BE DESIGNATED
AN "OFFICIAL" ISKCON GURU, TAMOHARA RESPONDED THAT "EVEN THE MOST
ABOMINABLE PERSON CAN TAKE TO DEVOTIONAL SERVICE", HENCE IT WAS "OK".
[PADA: This was the rationale given in 1979 by Sridhara Maharaja to the GBC,
he said that the guru sometimes acts abominably and we should "wait and see"
(as the banning, beating, molesting and murder go on). And sure enough, Sridhara
Maharaja waited and the beatings, molestings and murders kept going on while he
said, "Do not fix this, wait and do nothing, Krishna shaksat hari tvena successor
gurus sometimes behave like thug criminals, why not"?]
# THE PERSON ASKING THE QUESTION MADE IT CLEAR THAT HE HIMSELF HAD BEEN ABUSED
BY THAT "SOON TO BE GURU" AND HAD SEEN SIX YEAR OLD BOYS BEATEN SO BADLY
ABOUT THE HEAD THAT BLOOD FLOWED FROM THEIR EARS ....NONE OF THE ISKCON LEADERS
EVEN TRIED TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE AS THOUGH IT WERE REAL AND OF ACTUAL REAL CONCERN.
AS A SINGLE PARENT WHO HAS RAISED SEVEN CHILDREN AT VARIOUS STAGES OF THEIR
LIVES, I COULD NOT EVEN BEGIN TO FIND A COMMONALITY WITH THE SO CALLED "APOLOGY"
BEING FOISTED ON THESE POOR NEGLECTED AND ABUSED FORMER "HOPE OF ISKCON"
*** Vakresvara was assigned a rectification plan,
THE CPO OFFICER, TAMOHARA DAS, DID NOT EXPRESS EVEN THE SLIGHTEST INTEREST
IN TRULY INVESTIGATING THE MATTER AND BRINGING VAKRESVARA'S HEAD BACK ON A "SHARP
STICK" OR WHATEVER WOULD BE DEEMED APPROPRIATE TREATMENT FOR A COMPLETELY
UNREPENTANT RAPIST OF CHILDREN.
*** He was also supposed to show the CPO decision to the authorities at every
temple he visited, and either he didn't do that, or no one cared. ...
APPARENTLY, THE CPO FOLLOWS THE "VERDICTS" OF A PANEL OF "JUDGES"
WHO ARE UNRELATED TO THE LEGAL SYSTEM OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. IF THE
JUDGES CHOOSE TO BE "LAX" THE CPO HEAD EXPRESSED THAT "HIS HANDS
ARE TIED". WHAT WAS NOT EVER MADE CLEAR IS THE CONJUNCTIONS BETWEEN THE CPO,
THESE MYSTERIOUS AND UN NAMED "JUDGES" AND THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES
OF AMERICA AND THEIR VERY SPECIFIC ENFORCEMENT OF LAWS DEALING WITH CHILD ABUSE,
CHILD RAPE, INCEST ETC.
IN FACT, TAMOHARA DAS SUGGESTED THAT IT IS BETTER TO GO TO THESE MYSTERIOUS
AND ANONYMOUS "JUDGES" THAN TO FILE CHARGES WITH THE US LEGAL SYSTEM,
AS THAT WOULD "PROTECT" THE ABUSE VICTIMS FROM LAWSUITS AND CHARGES
FILED BY THE ALLEGED ABUSERS WHO WOULD THEN EXPOSE THE ABUSE VICTIMS TO RIDICULE
AND PUNISHMENT FOR "LYING" ABOUT THEIR ABUSE ISSUES!
I DO NOT KNOW IF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH (WHICH HAS TAKEN EVERY STEP NECESSARY
TO PREVENT PEDOPHILE PRIESTS FROM BEING LEGALLY CHARGED WITH THE HORRIBLE CRIMES
THAT THEY HAVE COMMITTED) HAS WRITTEN A BOOK ON HOW TO KEEP THE PRIESTHOOD OUT
OF JAIL BY EXPOSING THE VICTIM AND PROTECTING THE PRIEST .....BUT IF THEY HAD,
THEN THE CPO MANAGERS MUST HAVE MEMORIZED IT WORD FOR WORD, AS THIS IS EXACTLY
THE POSITION THAT THEY HAVE TAKEN IN REALITY, ALTHOUGH PAYING LIP SERVICE TO "INTERFACING
WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT ETC"......
I QUESTION THAT "INTERFACE" AS IF THERE WERE AND ACTUAL INTERFACE,
VAKTESHWARA DAS WOULD HAVE CERTAINLY HAVE SPENT FIVE TO FIFTEEN YEARS IN JAIL
FOR CHILD RAPE. (STATUTORY RAPE APPLIES TO CHILDREN MUCH OLDER THAN 1`2 YEARS
OLD). AS SUCH, AN APOLOGY AND ONE MONTH'S LIKELY SALARY FROM HIS JOB ($3,000.00)
WOULD SEEM LIKE A "SLAP ON THE WRIST WITH A WET NOODLE" BY COMPARISON
TO BEING RAPED HIMSELF BY PRISONERS WHO HATE CHILD MOLESTERS TO THE POINT THAT
THEY OFTEN KILL THEM.
THE ELABORATE PROTECTION OF THE SEX ABUSERS, AND THE DISTANT MARGINALIZATION
OF THEIR VICTIMS HAS NO RELATIONSHIP TO KRISHNA CONSCIOUSNESS, NOR CAN IT APPEAR
AND BE TOLERATED IN OUR SAMPRADAYA EVEN FOR ONE MOMENT.
> > For his visit to Gita-nagari, two GBC members got approval from the
CPO to officially lift the restrictions so that he could lead kirtan for BT Swami's
HOW CAN BT SWAMI BE HONORED BY VAISHNAVAS IF HE FLAUNTS CHILD RAPISTS AT HIS
DEATHBED? AT SOME POINT, WE MUST FACE THESE FACTS! WHAT IF THE PARENTS OF THE
RAPED 12 YEAR OLD GIRL WERE PRESENT .......WOULD HE STILL HAVE THE CRIMINAL WHO
ABUSED THEIR CHILD SING HOLY SONGS FOR HIM? WHAT IF THE GIRL WERE PRESENT? WOULD
SHE BE EXPECTED TO OFFER OBEISANCES TO HIM BECAUSE HE WAS FAVORED BY A DYING SWAMI?
A VAISHNAVA CANNOT KEEP ONE STANDARD IN A CERTAIN PLACE, AND ANOTHER IN ANOTHER
PLACE. EVEN THOUGH BT SWAMI WOULD NEVER PRESUME TO TAKE UP THE TITLE OF "ACHARYA"
YET, AS AN INITIATE OF SRILA PRABHUPADA FUNCTIONING AS SOME SORT OF REPRESENTATIVE
OF SRILA PRABHUPADA, HE MUST REALIZE THAT "CAESAR'S WIFE" MUST BE ABOVE
SUSPICION! ......EVEN THAT THE GIRL WAS NOT PRESENT, AND THE PARENTS OF THE GIRL
WERE NOT PRESENT, STILL, THE HUMILIATION SUFFERED BY THEM WOULD BE JUST AS REAL
AT A DISTANCE OF THOUSANDS OF MILES AWAY FROM THAT SPOT, AS IT WOULD BE IF THEY
TOO, WERE GATHERED AT THE BEDSIDE OF BT SWAMI IN HIS LAST DAYS.
HAS IT REALLY COME TO THIS? .....THAT THE MOST VENAL MORALLY DEGENERATE AMONGST
US ARE KEPT ON AFTER THE FUNERAL TO "CHANT AND GIVE CLASS" AT GITANAGARI?
WE SHOULD SAVE SUCH PASTIMES FOR OUR FUTURE ISKCON BRANCHES IN THE PATALA LOKA
>> Then the decision on Vakresvara's appeal was decided, and the appeal
panel found that he was guilty but decided that he'd already served enough punishment.
>>(Recently the appeal panel reconvened, partially in response to my
complaints, said that theydidn't know he'd failed to follow his rectification
plan, and extended his restrictions from leadership for two more years. Apparently
he still doesn't have to apologize or pay restitution.)
FROM WHAT WAS SAID AT THE COURT ORDERED APOLOGY TO THE GURUKULIES, THE CPO
HAS SYSTEMATICALLY OVERLOOKED IF NOT OVERSEEN THESE EVENTS.
*** In response to my question I was given a violent threat and was thoroughly
condemned by BT Swami's disciples.
THOUSANDS OF PEDOPHILE CATHOLIC PRIESTS HAVE BEEN "OUTED" SUED, JAILED,
AND DE-FROCKED ... HOW SHAMEFUL THAT ISKCON LAGS SO FAR BEHIND THESE VENAL MEAT
EATERS, BOOZE DRINKERS AND MISLEADERS OF THE INNOCENT PUBLIC.
*** The situation that we've been experiencing is that the leaders say they're
fully in support of the CPO; but when someone they like does something bad, it's
not OK to pursue it.
THE PROBLEM IS WITH THE CPO, NOT WITH WHO SUPPORTS IT. THERE IS THIS MYSTERIOUS
PANEL OF "JUDGES" WHO "TIE THE HANDS" OF THE CPO! ......WHOEVER
THEY ARE, THEY GIVE MOLESTERS AND RAPISTS A FREE RIDE BACK TO THE TEMPLE VYASASANA
IN ORDER TO PREACH TO THEIR VICTIMS AND THEIR VICTIMS GENERATIONAL FRIENDS. WHEN
WILL SOMEONE COME TO THEIR SENSES!
*** Either there can be no investigation, or whatever, but there will be nothing
substantial done about it. Those who call for child protection to actually be
enforced against the leaders or their friends are labeled as aparadhis, threatened,
and driven away.
YOU ARE SIMPLY A "PAWN" IN THE HANDS OF THESE MYSTERIOUS "JUDGES"
WHO "TIE THE HANDS" OF THE CPO, WHO THEN IS REDUCED TO BLAND STATEMENTS
WHERE KSATRIYA RAGE IS DUE!
YOUR ETERNAL SERVANT,
Perhaps some of you have seen a letter or two that I had published regarding
the a child protection issue on the Vaishnava news sites lately. (My main points
of this are toward the end, but I need to give a little background.) Back in the
Spring at Gita-nagari, I saw that Bhakti-Tirtha Swami had invited Vakresvara Pandit
to lead kirtans at Gita-nagari, and I remembered reading something about him being
a child molester.
[PADA: According to a report, it was a public knowledge that Vakresvara had
been told not to visit ISKCON properties. Certainly, "leaders" like
Bhakti Tirtha would have beeen aware of this ... because notice was given especially
to the leaders. So it would seem that ISKCON leaders have been, and still are,
inviting molesters on to ISKCON properties. And they are doing so knowingly, and
worse ... they have been doing that all along or at least since 1978. In short,
the GBC tells the ex-gurukulis, the rank and file, even the media, that they are
"cleaning things up," but as as soon as they get the opportunity, they
invite molesters? Not only do they invite molesters, the GBC gives prominent posts
to the very people who turned ISKCON into "molester webs and nests"
like they have with Bhavananda. So it seems like a pattern, first they poisoned
Prabhupada himself, and by their vociferous and relentless molester-izing of ISKCON,
they are poisoning and bankrupting his mission. That seems to be their plan. In
short, it seems like they are begging for more lawsuits against ISKCON.
In addition, as soon as one of the GBC's odious criminal thug enforcers gets
out of jail for conspiracy to commit murder, then they'll give him a big post
as they did with Tapah punja. So ... they have no interest in "cleaning things
up." They want to attract crooks, thugs, molesters, and they still do. If
one is a molester or a criminal etc. one will be given a welcome mat by the GBC.
Whereas this poor mata-ji, who is writing this report, she is being given the
same jack-boots treatments that all the other Prabhupada devotees received from
the GBC. No wonder, since she does not want her religion to be over-run by criminals,
thugs and child molesters. So, as soon as one says that the child molesters/ crooks
have to go, then the GBC will jack boot out those who object . And that is why
their temples are almost empty, most people do not want to defend the GBC's pedophile
sympathy/ worship cult. So this is all for the best. More and more people are
no longer giving them support, and others are contemplating more media exposes,
lawsuits etc. to attack the GBC. We think this is all for the best, because it
is part of Krishna's plan to dry them up by removing their support structure.
Notice, this woman is now starting her own protest web site, so our side is gaining
from strength to strength.]
* Leslie and I checked up on the facts, partly because I'm an elected community
board member and she's on the child protection team. We found out that he was
found guilty in 2002 of having a year-long sexual relationship about 9 years earlier
with a 13 year old girl, what the jurisdictional state law would classify as multiple
counts of aggravated sexual assault and indecency with a minor.
[PADA: Why do we, the rank and file level, always have to "investigate"
criminal and molester items within ISKCON? Why isn't the GBC managing these things
for ISKCON and for its citizens? And since there is no open discussion of any
of these problems, most of this is simply swept under the carpet. And thus only
a few problems are ever allowed to surface and be discussed -- at all. That means:
a lot of the abuse is probably not reported at all because of the way it is suppressed,
and/or it falls through the cracks even when it is reported?
What amazes us at PADA is, why would an ISKCON leader want such a molester
to "lead the kirtan" for his departure, considering all the trouble
we have had with molesters? This will unfortunately give the molesters all the
more access to ISKCON properties. Worse, this gives the message the the chanting
of molesters is some divine wondrous thing you'd want to have at your death bed.
We saw a couple of nice Catholic nuns handing out food to the homeless at Rathayatra,
and it would seem to PADA that the sincere prayers of these nuns would more effective
than the prayers of child molesters? What kind of message is the GBC giving? OK:
molesters are or were links in the parampara, molesters deserve prominence, and
the prayers of molesters takes one to vaikuntha, etc.. Again. This is like "a
secret skulls society," except that to gain membership you need to compromise
* Vakresvara was assigned a rectification plan, of which the first two parts
were to write a letter of apology and to pay $3000 to the girl, with a consequence
of being banned from Iskcon if he would not do these things. restrictions from
leadership for two more years. Apparently he still doesn't have to apologize or
[PADA: A "plan" was made to recitfy Lokanatha swami and others as
well, yet they never seem to be held accountable.]
* I wanted to know how BT Swam felt about Vakresvara's child molestation case,
and why he felt it was ok to honor a child molester like that, but I couldn't
ask him, and his disciples weren't giving me any answers.
[PADA: There is no good answer.]
* About a month after BT Swami's departure, I had lost as much sleep as I could
tolerate, and I posted a question about it on the BT Swami e-mail list asking
if anyone knew how he felt about the case. Leslie and I felt that the strength
of the CPO was clearly undermined by these events. In response to my question
I was given a violent threat and was thoroughly condemned by BT Swami's disciples.
[PADA: Well join the club. As soon as anyone says that child molesters are
not Krishna's successors, then the GBC/ Sridhara/ Narayana team are right "on
the job" of making threats of violence or death and/or saying we are "poison"
-- so they can get someone else to beat or kill us. Threats of violence is how
this cult was launched. And we think violence was used against Prabhupada, he
was poisoned right from square one as well. Some Sridhara Maharaja followers also
recently told us we were offenders, because we protest child molester gurus, they
think this is offensive. So they are trying to fomet violence, this person is
offensive, he is poison and so on.]
* I was essentially told that whatever BT Swami does is perfect and cannot
be questioned, and that I was a guru-aparadhi for suggesting that he might have
done something wrong. I feel that I have been practically driven out of Gita-nagari
[PADA: Right, Bhakti Tirtha's GBC's pattern is: harassing, character assassinating,
shunning, and when that does not work then, banning, beating and murdering. "Whatever
it takes" to keep children worshipping molesters and/or keeping molesters
on ISKCON properties and so on. This is why we call them: "The enforced cult
ritualistic worship of homosexual pedophiles regime." They "enforce"
the worship of pedophiles -- with violence. And guys like Bhakti Tirtha have been
the violent thug enforcers of the pedophile worship. Of course, he does not beat
up people himself, rather he incites his disciples to ban, beat, threaten and
so on. This is what Hitler said as well, but I never killed anyone. Well yes,
but you incited others to kill on your behalf.]
* In one meeting I had with the other community board members, one of them
told me that BT Swami had invited Kirtananada to Gita-nagari, and they had a visit.
[PADA: Yep, notice that Bhakti Tirtha likes to meet with homosexual pedophiles
who think they are as pure as Jesus, and who orchestrate mass molesting, murders
and countless other crimes. Yet he never has a spare moment to meet with the Prabhupadanugas?
Bhakti Tirtha swami only likes to meet with other members of the violent pedophile
guru's sabha. So this has been going on all along, they only support each other,
i.e. those who are members of the pedophile pooja process.]
* I was later told that they met at the 'Institute House,' about 200 yards
from the temple but off of Gita-nagari property. I'm more concerned about him
than just about anybody. Also there's Bhakti Vidya Purna Swami at the Mayapur
Gurukula. We've read his report from the CPO and (estimating from memory) there
were around 60 boys there who were raped by other boys. The CPO was amazed that
he knew about it but that he didn't seem to think there was anything wrong with
this. BVPS is still leading there.
[PADA: Right, child molesters and/or their cover-ups are welcome in the holy
* The situation that we've been experiencing is that the leaders say they're
fully in support of the CPO; but when someone they like does something bad, it's
not OK to pursue it. Either there can be no investigation, or whatever, but there
will be nothing substantial done about it. Those who call for child protection
to actually be enforced against the leaders or their friends are labeled as aparadhis,
threatened, and driven away. This situation has been an incredible strain on my
life for the past several months.
[PADA: Well the "strain" is: that you expect good behavior from the
leaders of a pedophile worshipping cult that bans, beats and kills people who
oppose their child buggery pooja process. For people who worship child buggery,
anyone who objects is "an aparadhi" as the GBC/ Sridhara/ Narayana/
Tripurari crew have said all along, and they STILL say we are aparadhis because
of our objecting to their policy that child buggers are (were or could have been)
God's guru successors. In other words, the exponents of child buggery pooja see
anyone who objects as -- a threat.]
* Last summer Dhira Govinda prabhu, the former CPO director, wrote an excellent
article on these issues: http://www.vnn.org/world/WD0407/WD28-8672.html I've also
been documenting my feelings, mostly related to this issue, at: http://oppositerule.blogspot.com/
[PADA: You are exposing them and that is good, that is indeed the only way
to corral in the GBC/ Sridhara/ Narayana/ Tripurari child buggery pooja process.]
Yours in Srila Prabhupada's service,
He did not do them, but there was no actual consequence. The rest of the rectification
included a five-year restriction prohibiting leadership activities, prohibiting
close associating with girls, etc. He also did not follow these restrictions either.
He was also supposed to show the CPO decision to the authorities at every temple
he visited, and either he didn't do that, or no one cared. Actually it was obvious
that he flaunted his contempt for the Child Protection Office ("CPO")
decision, and he was none the less given top honors everywhere he went. This was
while he was officially banned from all Iskcon-related activities as a stipulated
penalty for failing to apologize to the girl he had sex with (when she was 13,
and he was 40). On May 29, 2005, at Gita-nagari, he was given a seat equal with
six sannyasis for the Sunday class.
For his visit to Gita-nagari, two GBC members got approval from the CPO to
officially lift the restrictions so that he could lead kirtan for BT Swami's departure.
The CPO authorized it, but the local authorities allowed him to lead kirtan for
a few months (not just during the day of his departure) and to give classes. Leslie
and I were stressed to see a child molester given these honors, and felt that
it undermined the goal of child protection in Iskcon, but we could say nothing
because of the official sanction. Then the decision on Vakresvara's appeal was
decided, and the appeal panel found that he was guilty but decided that he'd already
served enough punishment. (Recently the appeal panel reconvened, partially in
response to my complaints, said that they didn't know he'd failed to follow his
rectification plan, and extended his.
and my response :
Dear Pandu das Prabhu and all, Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories
to His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada!!! Prabhu, thank you for writing as you have
about the efforts you and your dear wife made (and are certainly still making)
on behalf of Srila Prabhupada and the children. As you have clearly experienced,
the environment that promotes this maddness has not been recitified. So what was
begun by the pure Vaishnava to provide freedom from the material energy for any
soul turning to Krsna has been diminished by sins inflicted on children and others.
I do not know what to say! Several years ago i visited a temple in the North
West for the sunday feast. The temple president lectured that it is the "duty
of the disciple to carry out the order of the spiritual master, even if the spiritual
master asks the disciple to kill him." I was stunned ! And there stood 3
"bramacaries" with thug- like charactaristics who looked ready and willing
to do anything for this temple president. Later, when i expressed my concern about
this situation, i was asked, "Why didn't you speak up?" Why, indeed.
Just this year when visiting another temple i spoke casually with the TP/GBC and
asked how he liked his service. He answered, "Well, i hear about everyone's
sex life!" Once again, shock!
Until and unless Srila Prabhupada and his pure teachings are placed 100% at
the center of ISKCON, removing the various personality cults begun even before
Srila Prabhupada's physical departure, what is the hope? SO, because we are each
completely accountable for our actions and responsible for our Krsna consciousness
or lack thereof (as in my case), what is there to do? Everything we will ever
need to become Krsna conscious is available in Bhagavad-gita As It Is, Srimad-
Bhagavatam, Caitanya-caritamrtra and in every other spoken word of the Lord's
dearest and most confidential A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.
I realize that i may not be welcomed on this group as a result of these writings.
If that is the case, i just want to thank all of you for your homeschooling advise
and encouragement and wish you all the very best in your endeavors!
Hare Krsna ! your fallen servant, xxx d.d.