THREE CREDULOUS MISINFORMERS OF THE SAI ORG.
Three close devotees of Sathya Sai Baba among his prominent 'special guest VIPs' (S. Piculell, T. Meyer and Jack Hawley), have openly claimed to know that SSB is innocent of the sexual charges, a conviction frequently also held by other close followers and office-bearers. This claim is transparently self-defeating, however, because none of them have been able to monitor SSB's activities in more than a few dozen interviews lasting an hour or so, plus the rather limited periods that Baba is seen in public during darshans, festivals and such like. Their observation of SSB’s activities cannot cover more than a tiny fraction of the time at his disposal, which also applies to everyone else without any exception.
Therefore, they cannot presume to 'know' much at all about what Baba may do in private interviews or during the nights etc.; all they could truthfully say is that they believe this or that, more or less strongly, and that their belief in Baba’s purity is fundamentally and overwhelmingly based on subjective faith. Besides, no one can 'know' that SSB is omniscient or an avatar, for such direct knowledge requires knowing everything oneself… which the persons involved do not, and that is at least quite certain! I have experienced all such people long enough to realise that they have rid themselves of their individual judgement, always trying to do what they are told to do and say what they are told to say… according to each their perceptions of SSB’s will. Therefore their claims have no validity whatever in deciding this matter.
If they were to be capable of applying Baba's own advice and 'see only good in everyone', then surely they should not assume that those who tell of being molested are liars or deluded and deranged persons? Rather they should be treated with civility and sympathy and given a hearing, at least. But SSB held, in his Xmas 2000 discourse, that they did lie about this for money. "Speak no ill of others", says SSB, and proceeds to do so himself and lie brazenly about them receiving money for their courageously speaking out! This sweeping accusation by him is particularly unsavoury disunity between word and act. It is patently incredible that 20 persons in different parts of the world should be found, convinced and paid by someone to make such charges on oath, especially as all would realise the trouble and criticism they would have to face in so doing. David Bailey collected and published at least seven highly convincing e-mails he received alleging serious molestations. It was well-known in Prashanthi Nilayam that he did not have the means to pay what such a demanding smear campaign would doubtless have cost, even if he'd had a credible motive for so doing. He was a remarkable favourite of SSB, and knew he would lose all the apparent boons, blessings, benefits and ashram privileges that such closeness is believed by all devotees to give.
All this increases the likelihood that SSB is lying about his accusers. Such deceitful behaviour by him is in fact reported quite widely in literature by devotees, not least by some who experienced it from SSB‘s in very early days, such as by Vijayamma, Varadu, M. Krishna and others who were once very close to him.