GM : The foundation stone to Basava Premanand's conspiracy theory entirely rests on the times the assaults actually happened.

In all murder or criminal cases time is the prime evidence. If the alleged murder victims were not in the place where they are alleged to have been murdered or vice versa, the case would not stand. That was what the Kanchi Kamakoti Jayendra Tirtha Swami did by sending by his coterie to the police station to confess they had murdered Shankaraman. Police discovered only afterwards that one of the accused was in jail at the time the crime, a fact which gave clues that swami was the person who got Shankararaman murdered. In connection with the 6 murders in Sai Baba's bed room, , the alleged aides were in the Hospital at the alleged time of the murder in intensive care and died at 9-50 and 9-45 pm as per the inquisition report. Moreover, the Mandal magistrate did not find blood on the pants of N.Radhakrishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan while potassium cyanide bottle, syringes and needles were found in the front of SSB's dining room. Now let us see what GM will conclude as to whether or not time is the prime factor in relation to this or any other criminal case.

My Response: Premanand is trying to speak around the issue by introducing irrelevant subject material.

Regarding Radhakrishna's inquest (describing his clothes) the following was stated, "White shirt with full of blood, shirt cut by the hospital people 2) white terry cotton trousers with white belt on it. Torn on back side of the right knee portion, 3) White banian full of blood. It was cut and opened. 4) White cut drawer with elastic, which has letter "CLUB". There is a label with same letter, 5) Biscuit coloured napkin with border on four sides, with full of blood. All the above mentioned clothes are seized." Regarding Sai Kumar Mahajan's inquest (describing his clothes) the following was stated, "Hospital people have covered the dead body with white cloth. There were no ornaments when observed the clothes of "pothi" removed and preserved by the Hospital authorities was found, 1) White cotton shirt full with blood smears, label on color reads "Mello Fashion". On right side below, shirt is torn. 2) White pyjama, with elastic at waist. Label inside reads "Mezzo" and is with blood stains. 3) White elastic cut drawer with blood stains All these things were seized." Premanand is wrong when he said that blood was not found on the pants of Sai Kumar Mahajan. Blood was found on Sai Kumar Mahajan's pants.

Neither the inquests or the post mortem certificates make any mention to poisoning. Not even one word. Premanand assumed that since potassium cyanide was found on the premise, it was used. There were also explosive components found on the premise that were never used. Premanand is making non-educated guesses.

Premanand wants me to "play-pretend" with him, and imagine I am a forensic expert (that he pretends to be). Just because the inquest failed to specifically say that Radhakrishna's pants had blood on them, does not mean they had no blood on them. What is strange about all this is that Premanand believes the inquest times given for Radhakrisha and Mahajan's deaths, however, believes that these two were not stabbed at the mandir, but at the hospital itself! I will go more in-depth about this under my time-line section

GM : It is Basava Premanand's speculation that N. Radhakrishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan were NOT stabbed at the mandir complex, but were poisoned by Vishnu Bhatt and Anil Patley (the 2 other devotees inside the mandir) with potassium cyanide in buttermilk and were subsequently stabbed at the Super Specialty Hospital and then were immediately cremated in an electric crematorium to dispose of the evidence (despite the fact that N. Radhakrishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan were not cremated immediately or in an electric crematorium)!

First of all N.Radhakrishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan cannot be stabbed by the alleged assailants at 10.30 PM because they were in the super speciality hospital and died there at 9.50 and 9.45 pm. The question is how and why potassium cyanide, syringes and needles were found in the western side of the mandir at the door which leads up to Sai Baba's dining room. When I did not mention anywhere that N. Radhakrishana and Sai Kumar Mahajan were cremated in the electric crematorium, GM wants to confuse people with false information. What I have mentioned in Reference 4 moreover was that this would have been done in secrecy and the bodies sent to the super specialty hospital to be cremated in the electric crematorium, so that they would disappear from the earth. This is supported by the fact that the alarm system was activated only at 10:30 PM and not earlier when the 4 injured aides were taken to the hospital"

"The murder of the 4 alleged assailants also would have been a secret if their bodies were cremated in the electric crematorium. But because they activated the alarm the devotees gathered around the Sai Baba residence. So the police help was sought to get out of the murders by a story explained in the F.I.R to rescue Sai Baba. It is this alarm which forced Sai Baba to rush out of the place of crime so that he would not have been accused of murders."

My Response: At: home.hetnet.nl/~ex-baba/engels/articles/whomurdered.html Premanand said, "As the stab injury of the two Sai Baba aides murdered are not anti-mortem they would have died of Potassium Cyanide poisoning administered by the cook and the other aide i.e., Vishnu Bhatt and Anil Patley. Moreover this would have been done in secrecy and the bodies sent to the Super Specialty Hospital to be cremated in the Electric Crematorium so that they disappear from earth. This is confirmed by the fact that the alarm system was activated only at 10:30 PM and not earlier when the 4 injured aides were taken to the hospital."

If you are confused about what Premanand said about the "electric crematorium", you have every reason to be confused. Premanand just said that he did not say that Radhakrishna or Mahajan were cremated in an "electric crematorium". However, Premanand did say (about Radhakrishna and Mahajan), as mentioned earlier, "Moreover this would have been done in secrecy and the bodies sent to the Super Specialty Hospital to be cremated in the Electric Crematorium so that they disappear from earth." What? None of the bodies "disappeared".

I will address Premanand's time line under the appropriate section on this page.

GM : Basava Premanand takes part of his conspiracy theory from a discourse given by SSB in which SSB talks about N. Radhakrishna offering him buttermilk. Baba took a small sip and let N. Radhakrishna drink the rest (However, this does not account for the alleged poisoning of Sai Kumar Mahajan).

According to SSB this happened at 7:30pm. Does GM believe that the story told by SSB and published by Sri Sathya Sai Publication Society (Vol.1 Page 366 in the book) is false? Did not Radhakrishna go out at 7.30pm and was not Sai Kumar Mahajan with SSB In his bedroom? When Radha Krishna knows that SSB does not drink buttermilk in the evening why did he offer butter milk to SSB? Was he afraid that the cooks had mixed the poison in the buttermilk? Was it to prove that the butter milk did not contain poison that SSB sipped a little?

My Response: Premanand is wrong on all counts. There is no account as to when Radhakrishna left. The only reference to time was 7pm. Sathya Sai Baba explained why Radhakrishna offered him buttermilk. Sathya Sai Baba said nothing about the buttermilk being poisoned. Nor did Sathya Sai Baba say anything about Sai Kumar Mahajan being in his bedroom. As a matter of fact, Sathya Sai Baba said the following (Click Here):

"Both of us took our meals at 7 pm, Radhakrishna was sitting in the ground floor. Swami told him; "Radhakrishna, Let us go upstairs. Don't sit here." "Swami, if I go there, I cannot get sleep at 7 O'clock itself," said Radhakrishna. Swami asked him, "If you cannot sleep, what are you going to do here? You can do upstairs what you intend to do here. I don't ask you to go to sleep. Get up immediately. Come, Come" I insisted repeatedly.

See how things happen. Death overtakes one, in whatever way you attempt to circumvent it. At last Swami assumed an angry tone and rebuked him, "You misfortune; you stubborn." I pretended as if I was very angry with him. He felt pained. Swami retired upstairs. He reflected for some time. He had been with Swami for 22 years. He knew that whatever I said was for his good. He went to the kitchen and brought a tumbler of buttermilk. He came smilingly. "Swami you have been angry with me. Please drink this buttermilk and calm down." "Radhakrishna, it is not anger, I have said everything for your good," said Swami. Radhakrishna said, "Swami has perhaps some doubts that I may go out somewhere and talk to others." I replied, "If have such doubts, I will keep you with Me? Not at all. There are no doubts. I am saying this for your good." And then I said, "I am not used to drinking buttermilk at night. Why have you brought it for the first time tonight?" He replied; "I felt like giving buttermilk to Swami tonight and hence I brought it." It is good that you got this idea. I shall take it, but, on one condition; I shall take the buttermilk desired by you, but you must give me your word that after going down to place the tumbler in the kitchen, you will return upstairs." He said: "I will certainly return."

I do not take buttermilk at all. I took a little quantity and told him "I have taken buttermilk to please you." He had a pure heart. He asked me, Swami, can I drink the rest of the buttermilk?" l said, "Why throw it away? You may drink it." He drank it there itself. Swami said; "But put back the tumbler and come up." He went down. He had given his word. But he had perhaps the doubt that if he remained downstairs Swami might call him. This kind of stubbornness is one of the traits of young people. They will not listen to the words of elders. If only they listen to their words, no danger will befall them. Apprehending that if he remained downstairs I might call him, he placed the tumbler in the kitchen and went to his sister's house. The messenger of death dogged him at 10 pm. This is how it has happened. Whatever I say is for the good of others."

That is right, no mention to Sai Kumar Mahajan being in SSB's bedroom. No mention to poison being in the buttermilk. No mention to 7:30pm. Where did Premanand get this information? This is another perfect example of Premanand's far-fetched speculations. Premanand stated something as a fact, but failed to provide relevant references.

GM : Despite the fact that Basava Premanand sees SSB as a liar, corrupt, a sexual deviant and participating in illegal operations ranging from outdated weapons to narcotics, Basava Premanand believes SSB's discourse statements and uses them to form his conspiracy theory!

This story was told by SSB to his audience - that the poison was not in the butter milk. I could not find the allegations GM has mentioned in any of the references he has stated, He must prove that SSB's story was false. This story is published by SSB Book Trust in Sanathana Sarathi and Sathya Sai Speaks, as well as on a Sai Internet site. The people around SSB in his mandir have remained silent. If SSB was innocent what was the necessity for the coterie to remain silent?

My Response: At: home.hetnet.nl/~ex-baba/engels/articles/whomurdered.html Premanand said, "The cause for the murder starts with the sexual abuse of the students, the misappropriation of unaccounted funds flowing into the hands of the coterie, the financing of the coterie, changing black money into white and white to black through manipulations, murders of the devotees who see through these unlawful activities, the smuggling of the outdated weapons to the third world countries wherein the politicians profit much more than the cost which was spent by the Defense department and lastly through the smuggling of narcotics." As one can see, Premanand attributes the source to all of these illicit activities to Sathya Sai Baba's alleged sexual abuse of students! This is why I call Premanand's account a "conspiracy theory"

Click Here to view the full transcript to the 1993 Gurupurnima discourse, as published in Sanathana Sarathi. The only place where the word "poison" is mentioned (in the discourse) is in the following sentence: "Instead, if men whose hearts are filled with the poison of envy indulge in all kinds of slander from remote places, it can be described only as demonic conduct and not that of a human being." Consequently, SSB never said anything (and never told a "story") about "the poison was not in the butter milk". Where Premanand got this information is anyone's guess. Considering how Premanand misunderstands my words and twists them into something they are not, Premanand more than likely did the same thing with SSB's discourse. I am not claiming that SSB's words are false. I am claiming that Premanand's words are false. If Premanand attributed all sorts of illicit activities to SSB, and hindering the investigation into the 1993 police shootings, why is Premanand quoting SSB's discourse as if SSB is being truthful and honest? Again, Premanand takes segments he likes and discards segments he doesn't. Premanand is not consistent.

GM : So, if one could adequately refute Basava Premanand's time line, one can adequately refute the foundation upon which his entire conspiracy theory is built.

I invite GM to refute adequately the time line with proof and not with the kind of speculations he has made in this article, without any proof except empty words. Please note that I have not accepted any where that the time of assault was 10.30pm

My Response: This section deals with Premanand's time line. I will discuss the time-line all at once, not in segments. Look below for my comments.

GM : Basava Premanand starts off by trying to establish a time line for the assaults. He quotes the F.I.R. (First Information Report from the Police) and Indian Newspapers to establish a factual basis for when the assaults occurred. Basava Premanand references: Occurrences of offence Day: Sunday, Date 6-6-93, Time 10:30 PM (Vol. 1, FIR Page 336) The Hindu (Vol. 2, Page 12), The Independent (Vol. 2, Page 17), Indian Express (Vol. 2, Page 25), The Statesman (Vol. 2, Page 31), Times of India (Vol. 2, Page 36) of 8.6.1993 have stated that the 4 assailants tried to crash into the residence of Satya Sai Baba at 10:30 PM - 10:45 PM on 6-6-1993."

Entering into SSB's residence does not mean that the assaults happened then. If GM wanted to prove the innocence of SSB, he ought to have first established with proof that all the newspaper clippings are false and that all the records I have produced are false. Why did he not do it when he apparently believes – despite his pro forma denials - that SSB has powers like omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence? Why doesn't he ask SSB to open his mouth and prove all these are statements are false? Does he intend to confuse the followers of SSB by feeding them with meaningless speculations? Did he talk with the newspaper people? At least to Mathrubhumi (whose director, I may add, is also a trustee of the SSB Central Trust? I have NOT fixed the time line of assaults on the 4 aides and the 4 alleged assailants. There is no proof that these 8 were assaulted at 10.30 or 10.45pm. Could GM please tell us the references on which his speculations are based?

My Response: This section deals with Premanand's time line. I will discuss the time-line all at once, not in segments. Look below for my comments.

GM : Consequently, Basava Premanand establishes 10:30pm – 10:45pm as the time for the assaults. What is ironic is that Basava Premanand uses the F.I.R. as evidence in establishing a time for the assaults. Basava Premanand has openly, and unequivocally, stated that the F.I.R. is not only unreliable but gives a fictitious account by corrupt police officers who tried to cover their tracks. This was confirmed by a C.I.D. investigation that found no less than 13 scathing discrepancies in the F.I.R. and had three police officers arrested. So if Basava Premanand openly decries the integrity of the F.I.R., why does he use it as evidence in establishing a time line? Then, after using the corrupt F.I.R. as evidence, Basava Premanand sites (again Morèno's frequent misspelling of the work 'cites') newspapers articles as more proof regarding the time when the assaults occurred. Not telling us that these very same newspaper articles were simply repeating the contents of the F.I.R.! As a matter of fact, even the Indian Express 9-6-1993 expressed frustration in obtaining the F.I.R. Clearly, the newspapers were simply repeating the contents of the F.I.R. Nevertheless, if the F.I.R. was truly written by corrupt police officers (as Basava Premanand claims) then the F.I.R and the newspaper articles that quoted from it are all unreliable.

I have not established 10:30 PM – 10:45 PM as the time of assaults of N. Radhakrishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan or other four in any of references on which GM's speculations are based, when the inquest report states that they were in the super speciality hospital before 9.50 and 9.45 PM and were dead. How could the assault on them happen at 10.30pm? The time of 10.30 PM – 10.45 PM was when the 4 alleged assailants entered the SSB mandir. I have not quoted the F.I.R to come to this conclusion. GM does not explain when the Police Officers were arrested or why the criminal cases against them were closed, while the findings of the CB-CID were neglected. On 8th the newspapers could not get the copy of F.I.R. (First Information report) This can be verified from the newspaper clippings in the book. The article in Deccan Herald dated 12.6.1993 published in Vol II of my book page 12 proves it. I challenge GM to prove where I have used F.I.R as evidence.

My Response: This section deals with Premanand's time line. I will discuss the time-line all at once, not in segments. Look below for my comments.

GM : Consequently, Basava Premanand has, himself, refuted his own time line.. The time line is completely and utterly untrue and un-provable. Basava Premanand had two options: To either accept the F.I.R. as true, or not. He chose to accept the F.I.R. as untrue. So that now, he accepts it is as being true is hypocritical. He, like Robert Priddy, is taking snippets here and there and then draws erroneous conclusions. This from a rationalist and believer in science!

GM has not at all shown that I have refuted my own time line or that it is in any way false. Except for him and the local police, no one can accept it as true. I have not asked him how many options I have. He would dishonestly put words into my mouth to prove that I have accepted it as being true. In this instance, he does not point out which of the references demonstrate that I have accepted F.I.R as true. On 9.6.1993 Indian Express (Vol II page 55 of my book) informed that several attempts to gain access to the F.I.R filed in the case were also thwarted by the officers and their subordinates. I have not accepted that the F.I.R was true anywhere but there is other information collected in the book which GM has not mentioned. By twisting words GM is confusing SSB's followers, and the issue as a whole.

My Response: References for this time-line section:

home.hetnet.nl/~ex-baba/engels/articles/whomurdered.html - Referenced as: (Ref A)
home.hetnet.nl/~ex-baba/engels/articles/courtrecords.html - Referenced as: (Ref B)
home.hetnet.nl/~ex-baba/engels/articles/writpetition.html - Referenced as: (Ref C)
http://home.hetnet.nl/~ex-baba/engels/articles/excerpts.html - Referenced as: (Ref D)

Let us see what Premanand accepts and what he does not:

#1) Premanand accepts that Radhakrishna and Mahajan died at 9:50pm and 9:45pm respectively, at the Super Specialty Hospital (SSH). Premanand accepts these times of death, which were taken directly from the SSH inquests.

#2) Premanand accepts the comments made in the post mortem certificates for Radhakrishna and Mahajan. Premanand questions the conclusions drawn by these post mortem certificates because the words (translated from Telugu to English) "would appear" are used, and the specific term "ante-mortem" was not written on Radhakrishna's and Mahajan's post mortem certificates (Ref A).

#3) Premanand accepts the honesty of the doctors at the Government Hospital where the post mortems were performed (Ref A: "But there were many who could not be purchased like the Judicial First Class Magistrate, the doctors of the Government Hospital, Penukonda, and many other officers of the investigation team who were truthful to themselves to let us go through the post-mortem records...")

#4) Premanand denies that Radhakrishna and Mahajan were stabbed at the mandir (Ref A).

#5) Premanand accepts that Radhakrishna and Mahajan were poisoned with potassium cyanide and accepts that they were stabbed later at the SSH (Ref A: "As the stab injury of the two Sai Baba aides murdered are not anti-mortem they would have died of Potassium Cyanide poisoning administered by the cook and the other aide i.e., Vishnu Bhatt and Anil Patley...The above records prove that they would have been stabbed later at the hospital, after the alarm was activated.") Premanand is not able to substantiate the claim that Radhakrishna or Mahajan were poisoned. There are no documents that support this contention. Premanand speculates that they were poisoned because potassium cyanide was found on the premise.

#6) Premanand accepts that the four assailants entered the mandir at 10:30pm and that the alarm was sounded at the same time. However, Premanand does not cite any court documents or name any eyewitnesses to support this contention. Rather, he cited newspaper clippings and the F.I.R. (Ref A & C & D: "According to eyewitness accounts soon after the alarm siren started buzzing, the MBA students, numbering around 60, were the first to barge into the Baba's living room. The students reside in a complex opposite the Baba's Mandir. These 60 students reportedly pounced on the four alleged assailants and beat them up indiscriminately--Deccan Chronicle, Hyderabad 26-6-1993...Occurrences of offence Day: Sunday, Date 6-6-93, Time 10:30 PM (Vol. 1, FIR Page 336) The Hindu (Vol. 2, Page 12), The Independent (Vol. 2, Page 17), Indian Express (Vol. 2, Page 25), The Statesman (Vol. 2, Page 31), Times of India (Vol. 2, Page 36) of 8.6.1993 have stated that the 4 assailants tried to crash into the residence of Satya Sai Baba at 10:30 PM - 10:45 PM on 6-6-1993....Mathrubhumi (Vol. 1, Page 70) investigated about the telegram and found that a telegram from Chandraswamy addressed to Satya Sai Baba was handed over to Suresh Santharam Prabhu at about 10:05 PM on 6-6-1993 at his home and his signature got...If the telegram was received at 10:05 PM by Suresh Santharam Prabhu at his home on 6-6-1993 the statement of Gangadjara Reddy that the assailants had tried to barge into the room where Sai Baba was resting in the Prasanthi Mandir allegedly to hand over a telegram at around 9:30 PM is false and the time of 10:30 mentioned by the newspapers is correct as it would take time for the 4 alleged assailants to reach Sai Baba's residence after receiving the telegram at 10:05...Therefore the incident could have happened before 9:00 PM and the alleged 4 assailants could not have stabbed them as they reached Prasanthinilayam, Sai Baba's residence only by about 10:30 PM...This proves that the 4 alleged accused did not stab the 4 aides of Sai Baba in the ground floor nor in the bedroom of Sai Baba and N. Radhakrishna, as they came to the residence of Sai Baba only at 10:30 PM on 6-6-1993...This is confirmed by the fact that the alarm system was activated only at 10:30 PM and not earlier when the 4 injured aides were taken to the hospital.")

As one can see, many contradictions are already evident. Here are the problems with Premanand's time line and how it fails, on all counts, as being genuine or verifiable:

Premanand contends that Radhakrishna was poisoned by drinking buttermilk. This does not explain how Mahajan was supposedly poisoned (Radhakrishna drank all the buttermilk, according to SSB's Gurupurnima discourse). Premanand can cite no documents, inquests or post mortem certificates that agree with his speculations that Radhakrishna and Mahajan were poisoned. Premanand speculated they were poisoned. Despite Premanand accepting the SSH inquest's time for Radhakrishna and Mahajan's deaths, Premanand contends that these two were stabbed at the SSH! The obvious conclusion (if Premanand is right), is that the SSH covered-up the real cause of death (for Radhakrisha and Mahajan) and falsified the inquest information. This would mean that the time of 9:50pm and 9:45pm would have been written by doctors who falsified the inquest information. Consequently, these times would not be reliable.

The inquests also imply that SSB's two other aides, Vishnu Bhatt and Anil Patley, were receiving treatment at the same time as Radhakrishna and Mahajan (Ref B: "...and the persons who were injured and undergoing treatment Mr. Anil Patley and Vishnu Bhat opened the door...and the two persons who are at present are getting the treatment - Anil Patley and Vishnu Bhat have opened the door...") This means that all four aides were at the SSH around 9:45pm. How Vishnu Bhatt and Anil Patley were stabbed is not explained by Premanand. According to Premanand, Vishnu Bhatt and Anil Patley poisoned the buttermilk that Radhakrishna drank and SSB sipped (Ref A: "As the stab injury of the two Sai Baba aides murdered are not anti-mortem they would have died of Potassium Cyanide poisoning administered by the cook and the other aide i.e., Vishnu Bhatt and Anil Patley.") Premanand does not tell us why Bhatt and Patley were in the hospital. Since they had not been stabbed (according to Premanand) and were not poisoned (they did the poisoning), what were they receiving treatment for? Why were they trying to poison SSB, Radhakrishna and Mahajan? Of course, Premanand cannot answer any of these questions without speculating and making blind guesses. There exist no documents that support Premanand's conspiracy theory.

Regarding the time of the assault, on the 4 assailants, Premanand made the following case:

1. The Time of the Assault

b. Occurrences of offence Day: Sunday, Date 6-6-93, Time 10:30 PM (Vol. 1, FIR Page 336) The Hindu (Vol. 2, Page 12), The Independent (Vol. 2, Page 17), Indian Express (Vol. 2, Page 25), The Statesman (Vol. 2, Page 31), Times of India (Vol. 2, Page 36) of 8.6.1993 have stated that the 4 assailants tried to crash into the residence of Satya Sai Baba at 10:30 PM - 10:45 PM on 6-6-1993.

Deccan Herald of 8-6-93 (Vol. 2, Page 9), published the interview with Gangadhara Reddy, Circle Inspector, Puttaparthi, who said that the assailants had tried to barge into the room where Sai Baba was resting in the Prasanthi Mandir to hand over a telegram at around 9:30 PM.

Mathrubhumi (Vol. 1, Page 70) investigated about the telegram and found that a telegram from Chandraswamy addressed to Satya Sai Baba was handed over to Suresh Santharam Prabhu at about 10:05 PM on 6-6-1993 at his home and his signature got.

This proves that Sai Baba had authorised Suresh Santharam Prabhu to receive telegrams, registered letters etc., and till that night he was in the good books of Sai Baba.

As per Justice Balakrishna Erady's statement, the 4 alleged accused were deputed to watch the residence of Sai Baba that night (Vol. 1, Page 116 & Vol. 2, Page 215)

If the telegram was received at l0:05 PM by Suresh Santharam Prabhu at his home on 6-6-1993 the statement of (Gangadjara Reddy that the assailants had tried to barge into the room where Sai Baba was resting in the Prasanthi Mandir allegedly to hand over a telegram at around 9:30 PM is false and the time of 10:30 mentioned by the newspapers is correct as it would take time for the 4 alleged assailants to reach Sai Baba's residence after receiving the telegram at 10:05.

Premanand's time line is based on a falsified F.I.R. and newspaper clippings that relied on the F.I.R. for their information. Premanand cannot substantiate his time line with named witnesses or factual documents. Despite this fact, Premanand has the audacity to say that his time-line is correct and reliable!

Earlier (on page one) Premanand denied using newspaper clippings as evidence, and said, "The newspaper items were submitted not as a proof but just to show how agitated the people were because of the destruction of the evidence by the police and the silence by SSB and the followers who were present at the time of the murders." Considering Premanand's "Time of the Assault" argument, it is clear he has no other factual basis for his time-line, other than what was claimed in newspaper clippings, in particular Mathrubhumi, Vol. 1, Page 70. (which is discussed more in-depth, further down the page).

Consequently, as I said before (and will say once again), Premanand's time line for the assaults (against the four assailants) and the alarm are completely and utterly untrue and un-provable. Premanand dismissed the F.I.R. as being unreliable, yet affirmed the time given in the F.I.R. (which was subsequently duplicated in newspapers, and used by them to form their own time-lines), for the time of the alleged assaults. Although Premanand's time line is unsubstaniated and based on newspaper clippings, he expects others to blindly believe him.

One may also notice how the Deccan Chronicle got the following information completely wrong: "According to eyewitness accounts soon after the alarm siren started buzzing, the MBA students, numbering around 60, were the first to barge into the Baba's living room. The students reside in a complex opposite the Baba's Mandir. These 60 students reportedly pounced on the four alleged assailants and beat them up indiscriminately". Unfortunately, this is the same disinformation that Premanand based his conspiracy theory on. All MBA students live in the hostel (which is about 1 km away from the Ashram) - this is mandatory. Old students (students who have passed out) live in the Ashram in buildings close to the Mandir. But then, these are not all MBA students. Although the Deccan Chronicle mentioned that 60 MBA students were involved in the attack on the assailants, there are no 60 MBA students. MBA is a 2 year course and there are about 30 students in each class - that would sum upto 60. However, at the time when the attack took place, the students of 1st yr MBA were in Bangalore (which is about 200 km away) doing their mandatory project work. In all the confusion, how were people able to identify and count the MBA students? Someone lied to the Deccan Chronicle and the Deccan Chronicle obviously did not care to investigate these fabricated claims.

GM : Let us look further into Basava Premanand's conspiracy theory. Because the inquests on both N. Radhakrishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan state that, initially, they were both alive (although unconscious) at 9:45pm – 9:50pm. at the Super Specialty Hospital (and died shortly thereafter, confirming SSB's time of 10pm for N. Radhakrishna), Basava Premanand believes that since the F.I.R. and the newspapers gave a time of 10:30pm – 10:45pm, that the stabbing occurred earlier at the Super Specialty Hospital.

I have not confirmed time of 10 PM for Radha Krishna as he was already dead in super speciality hospital at 9.50 PM. GM has not published any reference about SSB's time of 10 PM for N. Radhakrishna. Therefore how they could be stabbed in SSB's mandir at 10.30 PM by the alleged assailants?

My Response: It is amusing that Premanand said that I did not publish a reference for the time given for Radhakrishna's death by SSB. This information came from the very same Gurupunima discourse that Premanand got the buttermilk reference from! Obviously, Premanand can't even remember the details to the articles he cites. In the Gurupunima discourse, SSB said (about Radhakrishna), "The messenger of death dogged him at 10 pm."

GM : The implications, of course, would mean that all the doctors and numerous others that were involved, all contributed to a cover-up, making the inquests information (and times) unreliable. Putting this troubling fact aside, Basava Premanand states that because the Post Mortem reports do not specifically state the injuries were "ante-mortem", that MUST mean that the injuries were "post-mortem"! This, despite the fact that both inquests from the Super Specialty Hospital said that both deaths were due to the stabbings. When the post mortem reports on the 4 alleged assailants very clearly states that they died of shock and haemorrhage due to fire arm injuries about 12 to 36 hours prior to autopsy and all injuries are ante-mortem only, why in the case of N.Radhakrishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan was it stated the deceased would appear to have died of shock and hemorrhage as the result of multiple injuries? The doctor did not specifically state that the injuries were ante-mortem because he suspected that the injuries were post mortem.

I have not mentioned anywhere in the references that, because the post mortem reports do not specifically state that the injuries were ante-mortem, it must mean that the injuries were ante-mortem. "The opinion in the post-mortem reports of the two aides of Sai Baba states vaguely (Vol I page 347,349) that the 4 deceased would appear to have died to shock & hemorrhage on a result of multiple injuries. This proves that the two aides died not of stab injuries. It is not the inquest report but the post-mortem and forensic report which explains how they died. The mandal magistrate was not there at the place of occurrence as a witness to state that both the deaths were due to stabbing.

My Response: First of all, the post mortem certificates were translated from Telugu into English. There may be other translations to the words "would appear". Since Premanand does not know Telugu (he never claimed he did), Premanand is basing his conjecture on the English version that he thinks are literal and infallible translations. The English version to the post mortem certificate, for Radhakrishna, stated, "Opinion: The deceased would appear to died to shock and hammarahage on a result of multiple injuries." The English version to the post mortem certificate, for Mahajan, stated, "Opinion: The deceased would appear to have died of shock due to Multiple injuries." Both post mortem certificates specifically list what these "multiple injuries" were, i.e. stab wounds! The inquests state, "Mr. Anil Patley and Vishnu Bhat opened the door, the accused rushed towards the Swamiji's bed room (pothi) Sai Kumar Mahajan and other three while preventing them to enter, these three accused over powered these four people and stabbed them indiscriminately with daggers resulting in the death of "pothi" due to the injuries mentioned in Col. VII from 1 to 6...Then the accused over powered these four and stabbed them indiscriminately with the daggers resulting in the injuries which are mentioned in Col. VIII 1 to 15. Due to which he died." These certificates do not say Radhakrishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan did not die due to stab injuries. So when Premanand said, "This proves that the two aides died not of stab injuries", he is being completely disingenuous. If there was any proof that they did not die from stab injuries, why did these certificates fail to mention this crucial fact?

Premanand said, "As the stab injury of the two Sai Baba aides murdered are not anti-mortem they would have died of Potassium Cyanide poisoning administered by the cook and the other aide i.e., Vishnu Bhatt and Anil Patley...The post-mortem report of N. Radhakrishna (Vo1, Page 347) and Sai Kumar Mahajan (Vol. 1, Page 349) do not state that the stab injuries were anti-mortem while in the case of deaths of the four alleged assailants the doctors clearly state that the injuries are anti-mortem and they died of shock & hemorrhage due to fire arm injuries." Where is the proof that they were poisoned? There is no proof. This is simply Premanand's conspiracy mentality working overtime again. It is apparent that since both Radhakrishna and Mahajan were initially alive, and both had inquests done at the Super Specialty Hospital, their paperwork would be different than someone who was brought in dead. Again, why didn't Premanand ask the examiners for clarification? Why didn't he get sworn affidavits? All of this proves that Premanand did not talk to the examiners. He is speculating on the English versions to Telugu documents.

GM : Basava Premanand knows that the person who did the Post Mortem was Dr. C. P. Venkatanarayan. Why didn't he contact him or call him as a material witness for expert testimony? If Basava Premanand is correct, then why is Dr. C. P. Venkatanarayan not supporting him? Instead of getting any sort of evidence from Dr. C. P. Venkatanarayan, Basava Premanand is playing the role of a forensic expert, in which he has no known education. It is also important to point out that Dr. C. P. Venkatanarayan did the post mortem on both N. Radhakrishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan, while two other examiners did the post mortems on the four assailants. This might explain why the specific reference to the injuries being "ante-mortem" was not specifically stated. Basava Premanand never asked Dr. C. P. Venkatanarayan for clarification that was only one question away. Why?

I know very well the Doctors who conducted post mortem. Without inquiring with the Doctor concerned GM is questioning me why I did not call him as a material witness for expert testimony? My writ petition was for a CBI enquiry. The higher courts are not the places to bring witnesses. (How thoroughly ill-informed GM so often is!) This is done in the lower courts after the police file charge sheet. I am wondering how GM came to the conclusion that the doctors did not support me. I did not play the role of a forensic expert. (GM seems to play that role?) Again, we have members who are forensic experts: the CCMB and Dr.P.M. Bhargava the founder Director of CCMB (Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology) are our life members.

My Response: Premanand said, "I know very well the Doctors who conducted post mortem." However, two responses down (after this one) one will see how Premanand is not familiar with the examiners who conducted the post mortems. If Premanand knew the doctors "very well", why did he fail to question them regarding statements made on the certificates? Why didn't he obtain written statements from them?

Premanand said, "Without inquiring with the Doctor concerned GM is questioning me why I did not call him as a material witness for expert testimony? My writ petition was for a CBI enquiry. The higher courts are not the places to bring witnesses." Every time Premanand says this, I can't help but to chuckle. The entire purpose of the Writ Petition was to provide evidence that would warrant a CBI investigation due to the police acting unlawfully, failing to execute jurisdiction or being negligent in their public duty. Instead of obtaining an affidavit from the post mortem examiners, which would be relevant to the 1993 police shootings, Premanand instead chose to cite Tal Brooke's book, Lord Of The Air (which is irrelevant to the 1993 police shootings). In his writ petition, Premanand cited many problems with the FIR, but failed to include an affidavit from even one post mortem examiner that would all but have guranteed a CBI inquiry! Especially when (according to Premanand) Radhakrishna and Mahajan's deaths were not the result of being stabbed, but due to being poisoned! Premanand could have submitted affidavits, if witnesses were not allowed. It is also amusing that Premanand said I am "thoroughly ill-informed" about matters pertaining to Indian law. Premanand should not be one to cast stones, considering his own failures, in Indian courts of law, against SSB. Once he wins a case against SSB, he can speak from a position of knowing. He has not won a case yet, which shows whom is "throughly ill-informed" about Indian law.

There are others like Dr.M.W.Pandit, who is also a life member, and who proved in the court against Swami Premananda of Trichinopoly that our method was far superior to the methods in use in England. (But GM thinks his guesses are superior to their findings, presumably?). GM has claimed that Swami Premananda was innocent in the rape and murder case. This case was also a PIL (Public Interest Litigation) case and argued by the PUCL (People's Union for Civil Liberties) advocate and went up to the Supreme Court and proved that GM's assumptions were false. I will discuss this in another article as to how SSB and his followers were scared because it could happen to SSB also. So also case against Kanchi Kamakoti Swamis. He has engaged SSB's advocates. Without asking me or the doctor who did the post mortem, GM fails to consider the fact that I had met all the three doctors. My letters dated 7.1.1994 in vol I page 81 state that I have met them in a meeting whose terms remain confidential.

My Response: No where, on my site, do I claim that Swami Premananda is "innocent in the rape and murder case". What I said was, "Many people believe that Swami Premananda was framed and even the police officers, at the jail where he is at, believe he is not guilty. He was even allowed to leave the prison, to visit his ashram, for several weeks." Leave it upto to Premanand to misrepresent and distort my words. See the pattern? Click Here to view the legal issues surrounding the case against Swami Premananda. Alleged sexual abuse victims recanted their testimonies and claimed that the police tortured them into giving fake testimonies against Swami Premananda. A world-reknown DNA specialist, Dr. Wilson J. Wall, said, "...Someone is trying to set-up Swami Premananda. The DNA case is a fabrication from start to finish. This deception throws a terrible shadow over validity of DNA fingerprinting if now there are scientists who are prepared to misuse it to find the innocent guilty." The case, regarding Swami Premananda, is hardly as simple as Premanand would like for others to believe. However, this discussion is not about Swami Premananda. It is about Premanand and his deception, dishonesty and deceit.

GM wrongly assumes that the 4 post mortems on the alleged assailants were done by other doctors, and that Dr.C.P.Venkatanarayan did the Post-Mortem on Radha Krishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan. (This event, by the way, might explain why the specific reference to the injuries being ante-mortem was not specifically stated). Here also, he did not enquire with the Doctor nor did he consult the forensic experts. If he had consulted, they would have explained that they were not sure that the words "would appear" are used in the report. After the viscera are sent to the forensic department, tests are done. The final report is filed in the Court. In this case the forensic test report was not produced anywhere and was suppressed.

My Response: At: home.hetnet.nl/~ex-baba/engels/articles/courtrecords.html, the post mortem certificates are replicated. Premanand just said, "GM wrongly assumes that the 4 post mortems on the alleged assailants were done by other doctors, and that Dr. C.P. Venkatanarayan did the Post-Mortem on Radha Krishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan." However, if one goes to the link just provided, one will see that Dr. C.P. Venkatanarayan only signed the post mortem certificates for both Radhakrishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan. This is a verifiable fact. E. K. Suresh Kumar and Suresh Santharam Prabhu's post mortem certificates were signed by Dr. C.V. Prasad. K. Sai Ram's post mortem certificate was signed by Dr. G. Sumathi. And Jagannatham's post mortem certificate was signed by Dr. Y. Sumathi. So how did I "wrongly assume that the 4 post mortems on the alleged assailants were done by other doctors, and that Dr. C.P. Venkatanarayan did the Post-Mortem on Radha Krishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan"? I guess Premanand is unaware of the contents to these post mortem certificates, that he replicated in his book, and to which he made repeated references. So, if Dr. C.P. Venkatanarayan was not the examiner who did the post mortems for Radhakrishna and Mahajan, Premanand should supply us with the correct name and cite the appropriate references.

Instead of pointing fingers at me and asking me why I didn't consult with the doctors or contact forensic experts, why didn't Premanand consult with the doctors and contact forensic experts? After all, he is the one trying to make his case against Sathya Sai Baba. All Premanand needed to do was contact Dr. C.P. Venkatanarayan and ask him why he wrote "would appear" (and clarify if that was the correct English translation) and left out the words "ante-mortem". If Premanand was so thorough, why didn't he get answers that were one question away? Another valid reason why the post mortem certificates may have been worded differently is because Radhakrishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan were not dead when they arrived at the Super Specialty Hospital. They died later. The Super Specialty Hospital also wrote inquests on them. So Radhakrishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan already had a paper trail for a cause of death. The other four assailants were brought in dead and did not have inquests done at the Super Specialty Hospital. Also, why didn't the post mortem tests find any evidence of poisoning from potassium cyanide (Premanand claimed they were poisoned)?

GM : To futher his time-line conspiracy theory, Basava Premanand raises the issue of the telegram. The police said the four assailants, under the pretext of delivering a telegram, confronted the devotees in the mandir at 9:30 PM. Basava Premanand states that the ashram withheld the telegram as evidence. Then, later, Basava Premanand states that Mathrubhumi, another Indian Newspaper (Vol. 1, Page 70), investigated and found that the telegram was sent by Chandraswami and was handed over to Suresh Santharam Prabhu (one of the four assailants) at 10:05 PM on June 6th, 1993 and his signature was received.

The police have nowhere stated that the four alleged assailants confronted the devotees in the Mandir at 9:30 pm. This report on the investigation on the telegram was published in Mathrubhumi after checking with the records of the Telecommunications department of Puttaparthi. Justice Balakrishna Erady a trustee of the SSB central Trust is a Director of Mathrubhumi. More than this, this newspaper's owners are strong SSB devotees. This report on the telegram was published along with an article by Justice Balakrishna Erady about what happened on 6.6.1993. If the telegram news was false, it is all too likely that Justice Erady, being a director would have taken action against the reporter of Mathrubhumi and the person who has accepted SSB as god incarnate.

My Response: In the writ petition, Premanand said, "K. Sai Ram tried to enter Prashanti Nilayam around 10-30 p.m. to deliver what was purported to be a telegram to the Sai Baba from another godmanChandraswamy. It is on record of the post office that a telegram was delivered to Suresh Shantaram Prabhu addressed to Sai Baba." Premanand not only contradicts himself by saying that the the paper was a "telegram" (and earlier said "purported to be a telegram", Premanand does not divulge that he got this information from an Indian Newspaper (Mathrubhumi, Vol. 1, Page 70). On the same writ petition, Premanand said, "Next day early newspapers proved it was true...6. Hiding from the public the telegram alleged to have been received from Chandraswami". Consequently, no one has ever seen this alleged "telegram". Premanand just said that the telegram was being hidden from the public! The only person who allegedly got the facts, about the telegram, was a newspaper reporter from the Mathrubhumi, whom Premanand failed to get a sworn affidavit from. Premanand just said, "This report on the investigation on the telegram was published in Mathrubhumi after checking with the records of the Telecommunications department of Puttaparthi." If this information was true, then where is the documentation from the "telecommunications department" that substantiates this claim? Again, Premanand is blindly believing and citing a newspaper clipping.

GM : Despite no telegram ever being submitted into evidence, Basava Premanand is more than willing to accept a newspaper article in place of the actual evidence! No one has seen the telegram. However, Mathrubhumi claims they investigated and found the evidence. Once again, why didn't Basava Premanand use the person, who uncovered this evidence, as a material witness? Once again, Basava Premanand discards the material witness in place of a newspaper clipping!

It is not my work to submit evidence of the telegram and it is impossible for me to produce the telegram as it was received by Suresh Santharam Prabhu who was murdered the same night. It is for the law enforcement department to collect evidence and produce them in the lower court and file a charge sheet.

My Response: At: http://home.hetnet.nl/~ex-baba/engels/articles/writpetition.html Premanand tried citing the telegram as evidence. Premanand said, "13. (i)...(4) K. Sai Ram tried to enter Prashanti Nilayam around 10-30 p.m. to deliver what was purported to be a telegram to the Sai Baba from another godmanChandraswamy. It is on record of the post office that a telegram was delivered to Suresh Shantaram Prabhu addressed to Sai Baba...ii). Though 16 weeks have lapsed since the episode, the police are yet to record the statement of Sai Baba under 161 Cr. P.C. According to press version a telegram was dispatched by Chandraswami to Sai Baba and the assailants entered the premises that night with the telegram. The statements of neither of the Godmen have been recorded." Now, however, Premanand is saying that it was not his work "to submit evidence of the telegram". If it wasn't his work, whose work was it and why did Premanand try citing the telegram as evidence in the first place? After all, Premanand was the one trying to formulate a legal basis that would warrant a CBI investigation. Premanand just admitted he did not try. His only attempt was to cite a newspaper clipping! Premanand could have submitted documentation from the "telecommunications department" or an affidavit from the Mathrubhumi reporter to make a stronger case, but failed to do so. It is of little wonder that his writ petition was dismissed.

GM : The rest of Basava Premanand's conspiracy theory is based on this time line that has been shown to be un-provable, untenable and unreliable. Also, Basava Premanand's conspiracy is riddled with contradictions. One example (out of many) is when Basava Premanand cites the four post mortem documents as genuine and legitimate evidence, yet contraindicates their findings by claiming that the police brutally beat and tied up the four assailants prior to shooting them. However, the four post mortem documents do not mention any injuries separate from firearm injuries. None. This would adequately refute Basava Premanand's statements that the four assailants were brutally beaten by the police officers.

GM has not proved with any records that my time theories based on this time line that has been shown to be unprovable, intenable and unreliable. Nor that my theory about conspiracy is riddled with contradictions. Is GM not confused in vilifying me? I have never contradicted the findings of the 4 post-motem reports.

My Response: Premanand claimed that Radhakrishna and Sai Kumar Mahajan were poisoned with potassium cyanide. The inquests and the post mortem certificates do not support this contention. Also, Premanand contended that either the four assailants or SSB's 2 aides were bound with ropes. The inquests and the post mortem certificates make no mention of abraded skin due to being bound. Consequently, these speculations, from Premanand, are not supported (but contradicted) by the inquests and post mortem certificates. Regarding the time-line, I have discussed this earlier.

GM : I fully agree with the CID investigation that the police tampered with and destroyed evidence and lied about it. Despite Basava Premanand agreeing to the findings of the CID, Basava Premanand also says the CID is corrupt as well! Such being the case, the truth will never be truly known to Basava Premanand who sees corruption in anything related to SSB. Sadly, in such a scenario, conspiracy theories multiply quickly and spread like wildfire. Basava Premanand, a critical skeptic of SSB since 1968, could not resist the temptation of indulging and furthering his own specious conspiracy theory in a book. A conspiracy theory not even supported by other critics and skeptics of SSB. A conspiracy theory that accuses "the A.P. state government, the central government, central excise and customs department, the law enforcement department, state CB- CID, C.B.I, CVC and all Courts" of covering up and conspiring for SSB (who happens to be a fake, fraud and a lousy magician with no paranormal powers). So there you have it: Basava Premanand's trial of SSB by newspaper clippings and assumptions.

It is sane that Morèno agrees with the C.I.D investigations which revealed that the police tampered with and destroyed evidence and lied about it. I have also not mentioned anywhere that CID is corrupt as well. It is true that I see corruption in SSB and as I am not staying with SSB I cannot agree to the statement by GM that I see corruption in anything related to SSB. I have not indulged in any temptation of furthering a specious conspiracy theory in a book. I am wondering if GM has any proof to prove that I am not supported by other critics and skeptics of SSB. Again, GM falsely says that I accuse the AP Government, the central government, Central Excise and Customs department, the law enforcement department, state CB-CID, CBI, CVC and all courts of covering up and conspiring for SSB. I contend that he is a fake, fraud and a lousy magician with no paranormal powers. What I expressed in the reference 4 is as follows: "The AP State government, the Central Government, the Central Excise and Customs Department, the State CB-CID, CBI. CVC. Courts - all know what is happening in Sai Baba's Empire. This I have expressed because investigations departments like CB-CID, CBI, and CVC have already collected details but, due to political influence, they cannot take any action. Removing the words "all know what is happening in Sai Baba's empire' GM has stealthily added "of covering up and conspiring for SSB". (The assertions in brackets are his).

My Response: At home.hetnet.nl/~ex-baba/engels/articles/whomurdered.html Premanand said, "The A.P. state government, the central government, central excise and customs department, the law enforcement department, state CB- CID, C.B.I, CVC, Courts- all know what is happening in Sai Baba's Empire." Now if all these agencies and departments know what is happening, and are refusing to act, what does this say about them? Does this mean they are honest, not corrupt and are not conspiring with SSB? If all these agencies and departments know about SSB, and are, at the same time, refusing to act and speak out, this clearly insinuates that they are either biased, corrupt or conspiring with SSB. What other inference is there to make? Premanand did not separate the CBI with the other agencies and departments. He lumped them all together.

GM's conclusion was: "so there you have it - Basava Premanand's trial of SSB by newspaper clippings and assumptions."

Here, GM would ignore all the records I have published in the book "Murders in Sai Baba's Bed Room". He does so as to protect SSB by his false assumptions and speculations without going through the writ petition and the questions in Vol II Page 363 to 403. Is he afraid to look at a single question in these pages?

My Response: The "Murders in Sai Baba's Bed Room" book is out of print (according to Robert Priddy) and Premanand allegedly lost money publishing it. Premanand's writ petition is published on Anti-Sai Sites and I have discussed it on Page One to this rebuttal series. After Premanand's writ petition was dismissed, he said, "Along with my Writ petition I had submitted 186 pages of Newspaper clippings as annexure." So why is Premanand affixing one hundred eighty six pages of newspaper clippings if he did not believe these newspaper clippings argued in his favor?

I am not "afraid" to look at any of the questions that Premanand asks. Everyone is entitled to ask questions, probe and investigate. However, Premanand is not only asking questions, he is shamelessly speculating about the answers, trying to pass his speculations off as the truth. That is where I draw the line and where I disagree with him.

GM : Better not inform Basava Premanand that he got his story wrong because Hari Sampath, at http://home.hetnet.nl/~ex-baba/engels/articles/murders.html, on ExBaba.com, revealed the "real" story about what "really" happened on June 6th, 1993! Hari Sampath claims that no post mortem examinations were done (contrary to the fact that they were) because if the post mortems were actually done (hello, they were done), they would have, "easily revealed the cause of death was NOT BULLET INJURIES" (wrong again Hari Sampath, the post mortems ruled the cause of death from bullet injuries)! Hari Sampath knows exactly what SSB said and did because unnamed villagers, who knew "everything that happened", told him so! Furthermore, the crowds fell upon the four assailants and clubbed them to death with sticks and knives! Something not supported by either the photographic evidence or the post mortem examinations! The police "pumped bullets" into the corpses of the four assailants (that were killed by the crowds) and "hushed" everything up! Does any of this sound the least bit reliable or honest? Just a bunch of sciolistic accounts told by a b unch of frenzied and vindictive Anti-SSB activists who care very little for accuracy and honesty.

I cannot talk for others as I do not have any records on which GM bases his conclusions except the articles in Vol II page 352 to 360 in which I have commented on page 355, that what I wrote in 1978 is now confirmed by Sai Baba's Intelligence and Security. Now, whoever Mr. Gèrald GM may be, other key critics of SSB and his organisation have boldly come out. Not GM, who has concealed his email address, phone number and postal address and has used aliases like 'Joe', 'Vishvarupa' and other bogus names and e-mail addresses. I got his article "Basava Premanand: Deception" from Murali Krishna Yachendra at Nellore where I had gone to meet the Superintendent of Police, Nellore and District Collector of Nellore District to find how far my complaints have been investigated. I already gave a copy of GM's article to them and promised my reply to his vilifying article.

My Response: If Premanand had actually visited my site (it is apparent he has not), he would have seen that I provide my contact link on just about every single page on my site! If my "contact" link is not listed on the side menu, it is listed at the bottom of the page in bold blue text that says "contact me". Premanand should have known this considering he copied "about a thousand" pages to my site. On my contact page, if one clicks the "Email Policy", there is an image that gives my full email address. This proves that Premanand did not read or view my site. Furthermore, Premanand is getting inaccurate information from his Anti-Sai colleauges. "Joe" is not an alias, but is a real name that I am known by. "Vishvarupa" is also not an alias, but the domain name to my other site. Why didn't Premanand research these claims for himself? Why didn't he contact me? Apparently, Premanand is relying on others to do the footwork for him and is repeating untruths like a trained parrot. This rudimentary lack of basic research proves that Premanand blindly believes what he is told and ignorantly perpetuates misinformation about me and my site.

Why doesn't Premanand tell us "how far" his complaints have gone with the Superintendent of Police in Nellore? Premanand does not divulge what progress, if any, has been made against Murali Krishna. Obviously, nothing has been done.

I note he has claimed: "I am in no way associated with the Sai Organisation, nor do I belong to any Sai group center. I alone decided to make these pages with no external prompting or guidance. All the material on these pages is the sole and original opinion of me, Gèrald GM." This is what every Pro SSB website mentions as devotees know very well know that SSB does not get involved in legal battles. I had to copy many of GM's articles on his website at http://www.saisathyasai.com/, which has come to about thousand pages from 2000 to 2005 June and I find that he has vilified me in many articles. I shall go through them and answer them to prove that his speculations are not based on truth and I shall send copies of my comments to the Cyber Crime Department through the law enforcement department.

My Response: Where are the references that Premanand has to back up his claim that "this is what every Pro SSB website mentions as devotees know very well know SSB does not get involved in legal battles". It is true that many sites provide a disclaimer about not being associated with the official Sathya Sai Organization Home Page (which is done as a common courtesy to prevent people into thinking they are visiting the "official" site). However, I have yet to see any Pro-SSB site that claims they personally are not associated with the Sai Org, nor do they go to any Sai Group or Sai Center. Since Premanand just said that my disclaimer is "what every Pro SSB website mentions", he should substantiate this claim with the proper references.

Another example of Premanand's blatant untruths, and poor research, is highlighted when he said, "I had to copy many of GM's articles on his website at http://www.saisathyasai.com/, which has come to about thousand pages from 2000 to 2005 June and I find that he has vilified me in many articles." As I stated previously, my site is composed of around 260 pages (excluding Google and forum caches and screencaptures which I did not write). Furthermore, my site, exposing Anti-Sai Activists, was started in Early October 2004 (not 2000) on my Vishvarupa domain. I moved my Anti-Sai section, to my new domain at saisathyasai.com, on May 31st 2005. Premanand is off by four years. If Premanand cannot get even the most basic information right, about my site, what does this say about his information regarding Sathya Sai Baba?

I have already filed a complaint against Murali Krishna to the law enforcement department and to the District Collector, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh to take legal action against him under cyber crimes. A copy of GM's article along with reply also is sent to them for action.

My Response: Premanand already said, several times, that he filed a complaint against Murali Krishna. As a matter of fact, just earlier, Premanand said, "I had gone to meet the Superintendent of Police, Nellore and District Collector of Nellore District to find how far my complaints have been investigated." However, for some mysterious reason, Premanand is mute on the status of his complaints. Why? Since Premanand is not forthcoming with the information regarding his complaint, it is to be concluded that nothing has been done (because Premanand would surely have been bragging about it if something had been done), because Murali Krishna did not do anything wrong. Until I see documented evidence to the contrary, Premanand is simply engaging in his well known (and now fully documented) propagandizing.

It is apparent the Premanand does not know what constitutes "cyber crime". According to the Canadian Foreign Affairs, "Cyber crime consists of specific crimes dealing with computers and networks (such as hacking) and the facilitation of traditional crime through the use of computers (child pornography, hate crimes, telemarketing /Internet fraud). In addition to cyber crime, there is also 'computer-supported crime' which covers the use of computers by criminals for communication and document or data storage."

Premanand has no clue that State Officials, in Andrah Pradesh, do not regulate the internet (something he would have known if he had really talked to them in the first place). I am fully prepared defend my viewpoints, and freedom of speech, by sending my responses to the same authorities that Premanand claimed he sent his to. As one can see, Premanand is not going to go unchallenged, without a fight.

1993 Police Shootings Rebuttal: Click Here To Go To: PAGE ONE