The Criminal Trial Of Prakashanand Saraswati Delayed — What A Surprise!!

File under: Gurubusting, Gurus Doin' Time, Hands Where They Don't Belong and The Siddhi of PR

[Ed.note: Our Austin correspondent and former member of the tainted temple in Texas where little girls allegedly got groped and diddled, comes through with another fine report on the ongoing legal saga of the God-faking Kreepalu protegé, Swami Prakashanand, known fauxfectionately to us as Swami Prakashaka BOOM!]

By a Former Barsana Dham Ashram Resident

October 6th, 2009 — As Eric Cartman on “South Park” might say: “Well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well” — if he heard that the trial has been delayed in the case of The State of Texas vs. Prakashanand Saraswati on 20 counts of indecency with a child. Originally set to start on November 2, 2009, the trial was reset today to commence on January 11, 2010, as reported by the Austin American-Statesman.

Truth be told, many who know Prakashanand are not surprised. We expected the trial would be delayed all along.

I’m mean, after all, if you were an 80-year-old man who has had hundreds of people licking your heels and kissing another body part for the past several decades, would you be looking forward to standing trial for crimes you knew you were 100 percent guilty of committing?

Before you answer, consider the fact that you most likely would have squirreled away a significant amount of cash in places law-abiding citizens would never think to look in a country half a world away. I know that I would much rather live off-the-map in some remote village in India for the rest of my days on earth than in the Texas State prison system (where, if I were a “guru,” the other inmates might not treat me with the respect to which I’ve become accustomed).

A great deal of legal paper filing occurred over the past couple of weeks preceding today’s notice of the trial delay as stated in the Statesman. Here’s a little more insight:

• Prakashanand’s high-priced lawyers motioned for, and were granted, discovery evidence in the form of the testimonies of the two female witnesses in the case. This, presumably, is the first time his legal counsel has had a clear view of the victims’ side of the case. I can only imagine the laundry bill after that shoe dropped.


• Next Prakashanand’s lawyers requested to subpoena another person whom they claim “is material to the pending criminal prosecution” and without whom they claim “the Defendant in this pending criminal prosecution will in all reasonable likelihood be denied his rights of compulsory process.” Meanwhile, the lawyers had not yet seen this particular person’s personal report to the Hays County Sherriff’s office. Once they did read that report I can only imagine it was another “spit-hit-the-fan” moment.


• Finally, yesterday the Hays County Public Access Website reported that the District Attorney for the case filed an application for 14 (yes, that’s fourteen! subpoenas). The motion cited eight people from the Barsana Dham ashram, located southwest of Austin, including four members of the five-member JKP-Barsana Dham management team.

The only member of the management team not on the subpoena request list is Prakashanand himself. After all, he doesn’t need to be subpoenaed. He’s the Defendant. He’ll be there on January 11th, 2010, to have his day in court and prove to the world that he is innocent of child molestation. Right? I mean he will, won’t he? (I kind of like the reporter’s commentary: “If the trial does get underway then …”)

Perhaps Prakashanand will even perform a few divine miracles for those of us in the courtroom to prove once and for all that he really is a God-realized Saint. Lord knows, he hasn’t performed any miracles yet surrounding his arrest and the nearly year-and-a-half drawn out legal battle!