Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 20:34:02 (GMT) From: Michael Dettmers Email: dettmers@ylanix.com To: Last question Subject: Not my last response Message:

Dear Last Question: You ask a very good question. I agree with your assessment that there are two agreements -- a signed contract and a sacred covenant. Let’s deal with the signed contract first. You state that I “seem to respect the financial agreement, even if it is hard for anyone to imagine what now is untold.” With respect to the non-disclosure clause in my contract, I have chosen to interpret its meaning in the narrowest sense possible. This means that I have not hesitated to disclose financial and legal information that I had discussed in open sessions with organizers all over the world. And I would not hesitate to fully breach the non-disclosure clause if I thought the information I disclosed could in any way damage Maharaji. Furthermore, I could give a rat’s ass if Maharaji or any of his agents chose to sue me for breach of the non-disclosure clause. It would love the opportunity to depose Maharaji and his agents under oath and ask them point blank to deny any of the assertions I have made public on the Ex-Premie Forum about Maharaji’s behavior. The reason I chose not to breach the non-disclosure clause is because it might create negative consequences for my consulting business where I am often required to include non-disclosure clauses in my agreements. It is normal for potential and/or actual clients to demand confidentiality, not just for legal and financial matters, but also to protect their proprietary inventions and trade secrets. Now let’s talk about the sacred covenant. You say that I “had to promise from the bottom of (my) heart, that if (I) were allowed to enter that ‘room’, what (I) saw (I) would keep to (my) heart in confidentiality.” I presume that you are referring to the conditions one is asked to abide by if they agree to be x-rated. To make sense of this “agreement” we must first put the process of becoming x-rating in context. As I explained in my earlier post on this subject, the premies who were invited to become x-rated had been in the ashram and, for the most part, were already doing full-time service for Maharaji. These people were trusted by those who were already x-rated and quite often they were known by Maharaji. So before anyone was x-rated, they were already bound by the sacred covenant the existed between Maharaji and his devotees made manifest through the ashram. And who created this sacred covenant? Maharaji of course, during a time when he was unquestionably presenting himself as the lord, despite Élan Vital’s claims to the contrary. That’s what made the covenant sacred. We surrendered our lives to him and he promised to take care of us, not just spiritually but physically as well. X-rating made sense if one subscribed to the lord – devotee belief system and it wasn’t much of a stretch to accept that the lord, as such, must not be subject to the same rules and protocols that applied to his devotees. All bets are off, however, if the covenant is broken. And who broke the covenant? You’re right – Maharaji did when he unceremoniously disbanded the ashrams and threw most its residents out on their asses without even an explanation. That act was a most grievous violation of the “deeper agreement, ‘signed’ at the heart of your soul” to use your words. He has since denied that he ever presented himself as the lord and, in his usual manner, has deflected any and all responsibility for this tragedy onto others. So, if he’s no longer the lord, then there is no longer any reason to exempt him from the standards of civilized society. But no, he wants it both ways. Well fuck him. He is a hypocrite and that is what I have disclosed. Finally, you claim that I have violated my friendship with Maharaji because I “even revealed intimate details a friend in complete trust to (me), told (me).” I guess that depends upon your definition of friendship. At one point in my relationship with Maharaji, I believed it was possible to know him as a friend. I vividly remember a trip we took from Los Angeles to Miami in August 1984. At the time, he did not have a personal jet. The 707 had just been sold and we had not yet secured the Lear 35 so we made the trip together in First Class on Pan Am. At that time, he was in the midst of his marriage difficulties and was in a subdued and somber mood. Well into the flight when we were both a little tipsy, he leaned over to me and said that he hoped that we would always remain friends even if I wasn’t serving him in any capacity. For years, I held onto that possibility even long after we had parted company. I’m sure that is one of the main reasons I didn’t come forward with my revelations any sooner than I did. But well over a decade passed since I left, and I never heard a word from him. Even his brother Raja Ji, whom I like very much, has called me once or twice a year just to say hello. When we were both in Berkeley a couple of years ago we got together for lunch. To me, that is how friends act even if they aren’t close friends. Maharaji, on the other hand, is incapable of friendship. I didn’t fully appreciate it at the time but his expression of friendship in 1984 had all the sincerity and commitment one can expect from an alcoholic. Still I said nothing until I became aware of the Jagdeo situation. His shameful and cowardly behavior in this matter has superceded any delusions of friendship I may have harbored and I decided to come forward with my disclosures. And if you think that the Jagdeo situation isn’t proof enough of his cowardice, let me leave you with another disclosure to mull over this holiday season. I don’t know how many of you are aware that Maharaji has killed a man. In the early 80’s, following a festival at the ashram outside of New Delhi, India, Maharaji and his motorcade were traveling from the ashram to the airport to board the 707 for America. Maharaji was driving the lead car and I was a passenger in the front seat of the car directly behind his. All of a sudden, I saw a man riding a bicycle pull out in front of Maharaji’s car. Seconds later the man went flying several yards into the ditch. He died instantly. Randy Prouty, who was traveling as security in Maharaji’s vehicle, frantically ran to the car I was in and instructed all of us to get out of the car and find a place in the other vehicles that were part of the motorcade. Maharaji and the people in his car quickly transferred to the car I was in, and we all sped to the airport. Sampurnanand stayed behind to deal with the situation which he did by having his houseboy take the rap. In the investigation that ensued, the houseboy stated that he was the driver of the vehicle who hit the unfortunate cyclist. That explanation, plus a hefty cash settlement to the victim’s family, enabled Maharaji to quickly put the incident behind him so that he could get on with the business of bringing peace, love and joy to the rest of humanity. Happy Holidays!!! Michael PS: I am leaving for a week to celebrate the holidays with my family so I don’t promise to look in on the Forum or respond to questions in a timely manner.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 13:54:01 (GMT) From: bill Email: None To: Michael Dettmers Subject: Thanks you and have a happy Holiday MD:)--nt Message:

asdg

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 22:21:27 (GMT) From: such Email: None To: Michael Dettmers Subject: 'the lord, as such',does not judge you,Michael (nt Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 22:20:04 (GMT) From: No statute of limitations Email: telltheauthoritiessomeone To: Michael Dettmers Subject: Not my last response/Maharaji has killed a man!!! Message:

As witnessed and attested to by Michael Dettmers as he says: 'I saw a man riding a bicycle pull out in front of Maharaji’s car. Seconds later the man went flying several yards into the ditch. He died instantly.' He must be brought to trial for this!!! This is a MURDER CASE!!! A man died! This as a result of comming into contact by the vehical that was being controled by Sat Guru Maharaj Ji, {M}! If Michael does not now report this to the appropriate authorities {now} then he is looking at possible legal actions against him as well, but we do hope that within the next week he will let us know that he has reported this and where he did indeed report this. Murder has no statute of limitations, {no time limitation on filling a MURDER CASE!} We should be hearing from Michael befor the end of this year! MURDER! -------- Not to mention all of the other laws that were broken here! Michael----- This is now public, please respond. 12/21/2000

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 21:18:31 (GMT) From: Kelly Email: None To: Michael Dettmers Subject: The missing piece...murder Message:

There it is! The missing piece! Some months ago, before I finally saw through this whole charade, I was with some premie friends and I said ….OK, we know he smokes, drinks and eats meat (this had already shocked them) I expect we’ll find out soon that he’s got a mistress, ( much laughter) but seriously I asked, how would you feel about that? One said, it wouldn’t make a difference, another said it would , so I asked how many mistresses before it would make a difference, six? Hmmm yes, maybe. Well, I said, how many murders would it take? Oh, they said, only one! I think you have just provided the missing piece Here we go Hats off to you Michael, and all the best, Kelly PS “The missing piece” is the title of a new introductory video/audio tape

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 21:49:37 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: Kelly Subject: The missing piece...murder? Message:

The way Michael described what happened I would not refer to it as murder. It does not sound like Rawat intentionally killed the man, and it doesn't even sound like the accident might not have been the fault of the cyclist. What is clear is Rawat covered it up with the help of his PAMs. It is clear Rawat did not have the guts to take responsibility for his actions, and did find it okay to let Sampuranands houseboy take the heat. It certainly was a hit and run, and it certainly was illegal ( at least by US standards ) but I do not think that is murder. It does say a ton about Rawat's character and the lengths people around him will go to protect him.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 23:02:34 (GMT) From: Tom Email: None To: Susan Subject: Missing piece...murder? Let the Courts decide! Message:

My take on it. This most certainly rises to the level of being required by law I think to being investigated on the charge of Murder as per the law, even in India. If he is cleared he is cleared if not then he is not, they will do the fair thing hopefully don't you think?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 22:09:44 (GMT) From: Kelly Email: None To: Susan Subject: Of course it's not murder..but Message:

Dear Susan, I was just about to post a postscipt to say that murder was a bit too strong a word, I was just using it for dramatic effect. But , he killed someone with his car, accident? ..whose fault? maybe we'll never know, but, the disgraceful way he abdicated all responsibility and let someone else take the rap...I believe that, and I'm sickened. What next? I wonder. And will I be shocked? I don't think anything will shock me now. The man's capable of anything. Love to you Kelly

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 23:38:37 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: Kelly Subject: thanks Kelly Message:

I think we have to be careful to be accurate in what we say here. Any time we exagerate a point it will be sieized upon by the cult as 'proof' that we are the 'angry' mob they portray us as. In this case, it probably is better not to label it as murder, unless in India this is a standard for murder, because the cult will see it as justification of the 'need' for the coverup. One can imagine some of the excuses they made for the need for the coverup. No doubt Prem Rawat is not a beloved figure in India. Perhaps they felt the law and the publicity might be harsh. Sat Pal too might have delighted in his bro's troubles. But, it looks like the coverup was decided upon hastily, and that begs the question whether coverup wrongdoing is simply a reflex response for Rawat and company.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 22:30:33 (GMT) From: Tom Email: None To: Kelly Subject: Of course it's not murder..but Message:

I think a Court needs to determine if this is Murder or not as we indeed do not know, but we do know enough as to the event that an investigation into this is mandated by law in India for the charge of Murder, this is not in doubt. I hope you do not mind my thinking on this.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 22:38:46 (GMT) From: Tom Email: None To: Tom Subject: not murder..but??? If it may be Murder!!! (nt) Message:

Looks like someone did not want this known. {M} This may be Murder, countries have legal systems so as to determine things like this, it may be Murder! This is a Murder that may very well have been committed!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 22:02:31 (GMT) From: Marianne Email: None To: Susan Subject: Vehicular manslaughter Message:

The description of this event sounds like what might be called vehicular manslaughter in California. This guy isn't the Lord of the Universe. And he sure isn't a person any of us should be emulating. He's just one sorry excuse for a human being. Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 17:55:39 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Marianne Subject: Why do you think that, Marianne? Message:

Mike's story is of an accident, as far as I can tell. All the criminality (not to mention immorality) happened afterwards. How do you get a manslaughter out of that?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 21:49:20 (GMT) From: Joe Email: None To: Jim Subject: Vehicular Manslaughter Message:

In California at least, you can be criminally prosecuted for vehicular manslaughter, but usually it has to be because there was some fault of the driver, like speeding, etc. Who knows what the situation is in India. A famous case in the area near where I live, was that of a woman who was getting some tapes to play in the cassette system in her car, took her eyes off the road, and hit two people riding bicycles and killed them. She was criminally prosecuted and convicted for, I think, something called 'involuntary vehicular manslaughter,' but the judge didn't give her jail time, although he could have. Who knows what happened to the houseboy, but I think what Marianne was saying was that perhaps Maharaji could have been prosecuted for vehicular manslaughter, and may or may not have been convicted. But the real point his he likely committed a criminal act by leaving the scene of an injury accident obstructing justice by allowing a false accident report to be filed, fleeing the country unlawfully, and also hiding from the family of the victim the fact that he was driving, and hence could be the subject of a civil lawsuit. Not to mention the immoral and dishonest nature of all this. I'm sure the houseboy had no assets and so the family didn't pursue a civil case, especially after Maharaji threw some money at them. But had they known the rich Lord of the Universe was driving, that might have been a different story.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 18:42:10 (GMT) From: suchabanana Email: None To: Jim and everyone Subject: Right, depends whose fault it was. more WITNESSES Message:

Jim: 1) Question of vehicular manslaughter - whose fault was the accident? m. or bicylist? unavoidable, or m. speeding? Any attempt to avoid accident, swerve, brake, etc.? India is very loose and chaotic, in practice: r.e. highways, cars, pedestrians, infrastructure, etc. Witnesses: were there contradicting witnesses at the scene, besides m.'s yes-men? m.'s flight implies culpability of some kind, as well as personal responsibility for and involvement in the accident. 2) Flight from the scene of a fatal car accident: if true, and m. was the driver, then this would be a criminal felony in most industrialized nations, punishable by prison time. There is a need for corroboration by just one more witness, besides MD. [Indian law derived from British codes] 3) switching drivers and cars, installing the houseboy as the scapegoat, and coercing/persuading him to testify as the driver involves perjury, and concerted complicity thereof [conspiracy is not a word I'm found of]. 4) Date, time of day, exact location, name of road, car description/i.d., names of personnel present? 5) DLM/EVI s.o.p.: hush money [to victim's family] - to prevent publicity or p.r. nightmare. OTHER WITNESSES OR PERSONS WITH INFORMATION ABOUT THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, PLEASE COME FORTH! THANK YOU. Peace,

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Dec 23, 2000 at 06:00:35 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk To: suchabanana Subject: More important - had he been drinking? Message:

This was, according to MD, a period when the Lard was hitting the bottle daily. After a live festival performance, I'd be surprised if he hadn't had a wee something for the nerves. Michael..?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Dec 23, 2000 at 06:41:09 (GMT) From: such Email: None To: Nigel Subject: a VERY good question, Nigel (nt Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 10:02:04 (GMT) From: Indira Ghandi Email: Was that a car backfiring? To: Marianne Subject: Vehicular manslaughter Message:

Would you like to come to India and try it on. You are such a big dreamer. On one day alone whilst driving through rural India I personally witnessed at least 10 deaths through road accidents. You keep forgetting. India is India I might also point out that you in particular Marianne(LLb) are getting dangerously close to libel.Keep going......

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 19:45:15 (GMT) From: Joy Email: None To: Indira Ghandi Subject: Vehicular manslaughter Message:

So are you saying, Indira, that life in India is cheap and this doesn't matter? Would it matter more to you if he had accidentally mown down a Hollywood movie star on the PCH? This man was as alive as you or I or Tom Cruise and the fact that he was an Indian peasant makes no difference at all. How can you trivialize this with such a comment? If that is an example of the compassionate attitude practicing Knowledge can give you, boy, I'm sure glad I got OUT OF IT!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 22:00:37 (GMT) From: Indira Ghandi Email: None To: Joy Subject: Vehicular manslaughter Message:

Nothing to do with K. I'm talking about India. You have to live there as I did for several years to understand the fucked up cheap place it really is.Just ask my son.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 21:55:10 (GMT) From: Union Carbide Email: None To: Joy Subject: The value of Indian life... Message:

As you may recall, about 15 years ago there was a little accident in our chemical plant in Bhopal, India, that was not our fault. We just don't know who did it. Anyhow, unfortunately, about 2000 people were killed, and those litigious asshole lawyers sued us. AND, they tried to bring the case in the USA, which we fought tooth and nail, let me tell you. This is because a life in a US court case could be hundreds of thousands of dollars, on average, but in India it's worth about $29.95.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 22:07:29 (GMT) From: Indira Ghandi Email: None To: Union Carbide Subject: The value of Indian life... Message:

My point. I didn't at any stage say I ageed with it. You might be interested to know that an Aussie law firm looked at suing UC. The same company that successfully combined with Ralph Nader to sue and defeat Aussie multi national BHP over OKTedi (NG)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 22:14:04 (GMT) From: Union Carbide Email: None To: Indira Ghandi Subject: The value of Indian life... Message:

Wrongful death, smongful death....fortunately, those money-grubbing Indians had to bring their case in Indian courts, so the whole 2000 deaths cost us less than our CEO made for what he did last Tuesday. Is this a great world, or what?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 15:42:12 (GMT) From: Kelly Email: None To: Indira Ghandi Subject: excuse me Indira Ghandi,I thought you were dead.nt Message:

spooky

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 16:44:08 (GMT) From: Indira Ghandi Email: Tamils? What Tamils?? To: Kelly Subject: excuse me Indira Ghandi,I thought you were dead.nt Message:

We Indian politicians are always with you. Brahmin re-incarnation privelige. (Why are you pointing that thing at me?)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 22:45:20 (GMT) From: suchabanana Email: None To: Marianne Subject: Criminal:leaving scene of accident,and perjury (nt Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 22:10:36 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: Marianne Subject: thanks Marianne well said (nt) Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 20:59:05 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: all Subject: don't ask Randy about this Message:

he won't 'remember'. And, does anyone think people who are capable of covering this up are NOT capable of covering for Jagdeo because of how it reflects on their Lord?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 22:05:08 (GMT) From: JTF Email: None To: Susan Subject: It's called selective memory loss Message:

...to the best of his recollection...as if something like that or the report about Jagdeo could ever be forgotten. Want to take a lie detector test, Randy?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 18:45:02 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: Last question Subject: Who the fuck are you... Message:

...and why do you want to know? And while you're at it, use one alias or I'll lobby the FA to have you kicked off. Haven't you got a cult website to go to? Anth the La la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 17:36:42 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: Last question Subject: whoever you are you are disgusting me Message:

So Michael is immoral for telling the truth about a LOrd who procures women who believe he is Lord of the Unirse to have sex and then dumps them. He is immoral for letting people know the truth about the supposed Lords drug and alchohol use. He is immoral for letting us know the same guy whose perfect feet we kissed drove drunk with his four children in the car. He is immoral for shattering the carefully crafted illusions all those who are x rated agree to perpetuate. He is immoral for letting us know about how Rawat reminds those who are x rated on a daily basis that there are throngs of premies waiting to take their places. ( I would guess Rawat is about to find that threat is a bit empty....I bet there aren't as many people ready to get screwed over by becoming PAMS as there used to be ) . There are some confidences that the only moral thing to do is BREAK. This is without a doubt an example. Michael is doing what very few PAMs have ever been willing to do, tell the truth even though it subjects him to attack both from Rawat's camp for beinga traitor and from the x camp because at one time he was a collaborator. Whover you are LAST QUESTION, I would imagine you are patting on the back the PAMs that are 'forgetting' about Jagdeo to aid their master, just as you castigate Michael for telling the truth, and setting free many people in the cult. You disgust me LAST QUESTIOU. Are you really as corrupt a soul; as you appear to be?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index