Talk:Kirtanananda Swami

Biographical information removed from article

It seems that a while ago the following information from the Biography section of the article was removed:

Kirtanananda was born Keith Gordon Ham on September 6, 1937, in Peekskill, New York. The son of a Southern Baptist minister, Ham imbibed his father's missionary spirit and attempted to convert classmates to his family's faith. Despite an acute case of poliomyelitis which he contracted around his 17th birthday, he graduated with honors from Peekskill, New York, high school in 1955. In high school and college he excelled at debate.

Ham received a Bachelor of Arts in History from Maryville College in Maryville, Tennessee on May 20, 1959 and graduated magna cum laude, first in his class of 117. He then received a Woodrow Wilson fellowship to study American history at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where he remained for three years. There he met an undergraduate English major from Mobile, Alabama, who became his lifelong friend and lover, Howard Morton Wheeler (1940-1989). The two resigned from the university on February 3, 1961 and left Chapel Hill after being threatened with an investigation regarding an alleged sex scandal.

Keith and Howard moved to New York City where they lived as hippies. Keith also promoted LSD use and became an LSD guru. For some time he worked as a reviewer of unemployment claims. Keith enrolled at Columbia University (1961-64) where he received a Waddell fellowship to study religious history with Whitney Cross, but he quit academic life when he and Howard travelled to India during October 1965 in search of a guru. Unsuccessful in their quest, they returned to New York after six months.

In June 1966, after returning from India, Keith met the Bengali Gaudiya-Vaishnava guru A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada...

Geneisner (talk) 10:36, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

The stuff is not based on reliable sources or sources are not independend of the subject. All of the material, especially contentious, will be removed if not based on WP:RS and not verifiable WP:V. Find a good source and keep close to the source. That applies to Talk page as well. Wikidas (talk) 12:43, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

The source for the biograhical information is Henry Doktorski's New Vrindaban: The Black Sheep of ISKCON and Jacob Young's 1996 documentary Holy Cow Swami. I have seen the documentary, and really haven't seen many (if any) good refutations of the evidence presented in it. It seems quite legitimate to me, and includes excerpts from actual court records. Henry Doktorski was a follower of Kirtanananda from 1978 until 1994, and I don't think he has an axe to grind either. On the contrary, I think he has been one of the few people willing to talk openly and honestly about the history of New Vrindaban. As for the other material that I see you removed from the article today, especially just about ALL of the material relating to Kirtanananda being tried in court on numerous counts. There's material that can be found online by Google searching "Keith Gordon Ham", like this, regarding the U.S. Court of Appeals. There, at that link, it lists the charges against "Keith Gordon Ham, A/k/a Kirtanananda, A/k/a K. Swami, A/k/akirtanananda Swami Bhaktipada, A/k/a Srilabhaktipada, A/k/a Number One, Defendant-appellant at the United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. - 58 F.3d 78, Argued March 6, 1995.Decided June 20, 1995". The accusations listed on that date were as follows:

1) STEPHEN BRYANT MURDER

2) CHARLES ST. DENNIS MURDER

3) DEVON WHEELER KIDNAPPING

4) MAIL FRAUD: FUNDRAISING

5) MAIL FRAUD: ALLSTATE INSURANCE

This link states that "Appellants Keith Gordon Ham, Steven Fitzpatrick and Terry Sheldon were convicted below for RICO and mail fraud violations." The Holy Cow Swami (1996) documentary by Jacob Young goes into detail on this, and the allegations of "homosexuality, child molestation and abuse, and subordination of women within the community" (as also mentioned in those court records). Jacob Young's documentary also goes into detail about the "Winnebago Incident", and the aftermath and fallout from what happened as a result of that incident. The documentary includes interviews of witnesses and devotees, as well as interviews of Tirtha das in jail (for his involvement in the murders of Stephen Bryant and Charles St. Dennis). According to the documentary, which contains interviews as well as court records, Tirtha das testified against Kirtanananda after the sexual allegations of the "Winnebago Incident" came out. It was after that, according to the documentary, that Kirtanananda agreed to a plea bargain and went to jail on lesser charges compared to the ones that were previously leveled against him. The trial was followed in the local newspapers too, and I'm sure Henry Doktorski has plenty of newspaper clippings from that time as well. After serving time in jail, Kirtanananda was released, but he's supposedly never allowed to return to New Vrindaban. I'm sure that many Hare Krishnas would probably like to pretend that these things never happened, but they did happen, and there is evidence backing it up. You can keep trying to deny and/or cover things up with cheap attempts at censorship, but there is evidence out there. And, just because you don't like the evidence, does not mean that it should not be included in the article. A documentary film, complete with court records, interviews and newspaper clippings is (and should be) a legitimate source (especially if there isn't good evidence that refutes this source). Not only that, but the court records are publicly available too, and they only help confirm the material that is cited in the documentary. So, let's try and tell the truth, please. Geneisner (talk) 09:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I am afraid that the sources do not comply with requirement for a neutral and reliable source. The sources are poor, not published by good publishers and contain misinformation, none of the sources are academic. Maybe there are good sources out there, but theses are not. Thus we have to follow the policy on BLP -- "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." You many be interested in WP:THETRUTH as something that addresses your concerns. For example the changes were dismissed by a higher court, or where they not? I am not even trying to be neutral, it is hard to be neutral about such a criminal as Kirtanananda. But we have to stick with the policy on BLP and use citatioions to actual page/article of the reliable source for this fellow. Wikid^as© 13:23, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

How exactly does the documentary film Holy Cow Swami by Jacob Young (1996) released through WNPB-TV (West Virginia Public Broadcasting) and the WVEBA (West Virginia Educational Broadcasting Authority) not qualify as a reliable source in YOUR opinion? The documentary contains court testimony, interviews, TV appearances and newspaper clippings. In my opinion, it definitely qualifies as a source as good as any that I've seen on this topic. I mean, why would your opinions on what should or should not be in the article qualify as "reliable" under similar scrutiny? Whose opinion is this other than your own (or perhaps some other Hare Krishnas who don't want to see this stuff in print)? I mean, after all, you are the one who previously (and unsuccessfully) tried to nominate this article for deletion (according to the records). Fortunately, you were unsuccessful in that endeavor. Now, perhaps, it seems that you want to remove things from the article because you don't like the source (a documentary that was released through an affiliate of PBS, the Public Broadcasting Service). Well, I would say the evidence in that documentary speaks for itself, and is backed up by the court records that can be found online (at the links previously provided, and elsewhere). As far as whether Kirtanananda was found guilty of all the charges against him or not, that was already discussed in the article (before you removed those parts of the article). So, why remove the allegations from the article if they were brought up in a court of law and can be verified by the court documents (at the links previously provided and elsewhere)? That really doesn't make much sense, unless someone may be trying to censor something. I mean, Wikipedia doesn't require that one must remove allegations brought up in a court of law regarding a person if those claims are backed up by sourced statements (of which the court documents and that documentary film should qualify). For example, Paul Reubens, the actor who plays Pee-wee Herman (who, coincidentally, like Kirtanananda is also from Peekskill, New York) was charged with certain crimes. According to his Wikipedia page, "In March 2004, child pornography charges were dropped." Nevertheless, the charges are still mentioned in the article. Kirtanananda was charged with 5 main items during his trial in 1995 (listed previously), and there is also a mention of "homosexuality, child molestation and abuse, and subordination of women" in the court records at the links previously provided too. According to the documentary, which contains interviews as well as court records, Tirtha das testified against Kirtanananda after the sexual allegations of the "Winnebago Incident" came out. Tirtha das confirms this in his own words in an interview on the film. It was after that, according to the documentary, that Kirtanananda agreed to a plea bargain and went to jail on lesser charges compared to the ones that were previously leveled against him. In 1996, he was sentenced to 20 years in prison, but served about 8 years before being released in 2004. These are things which are documented, and I don't see why they shouldn't be included in the article. Geneisner (talk) 15:55, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

The difficulty is that with all desire I have to expose him, the "homosexuality, child molestation and abuse, and subordination of women" in the court records lead to the conviction overturned (prejudice). He was not charged on those crimes, but the mention of them was illegal (apperently). Interesting that you bring up sexual allegations of the "Winnebago Incident", what is the secondary source for those? Yes Wikipedia provides an almost undue protection for living people bio, so if there are no secondary sources that discuss and summarise these allegations, we can not put it in, infact the talk page needs to blank as well. The unfortunate reality of plea barganing is that the guy walks innocent of the crime, but in this case he was not even charged in those crimes. Titha's words, your suggestions, as well as other statements in this documentary is just that, primary sources, and unless they are summarised in a secondary source in neutral way, they are not acceptable for BLP. It is a sad reality. By the way just because someone's article (Paul Reubens) does not comply with the policy, it can not be used as an argument. (See: WP:OTHERCRAP). In summary, find a good source (not a primary) that summarises the primary sources and bring it in the article, render close to the source (not verbatime) but without WP:OR or WP:SYN. Do not use WP:PRIMARY unless it is something non-contentious. Primary sources for contentious issues, or issues that can damage others, will not be acceptable for BLPs. Wikid^as© 21:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

For example this one [4] is a good source, if the source that mentions the reasons cited in the judgement that overturned that conviction is found. Wikid^as© 21:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Not only does the documentary film by Jacob Young say these things, but also this article from The Villager, Volume 77, Number 7, by Tien-Shun Lee dated July 18-24, 2007, which says, "ISKCON excommunicated Kirtanananda Swami in 1986 after the guru was charged with child molestation, conspiracy to murder and racketeering. But after serving eight years in federal prison for racketeering, the guru let bygones be bygones and invited ISKCON devotees into his building as paying guests." Right there is a secondary source. In the book [http://www.amazon.com/AFTER-ABSOLUTE-Adventures-Backwoods-Buddha/dp/0595239943 After the Absolute: Real Life Adventures with a Backwoods Buddha] (aka "The Inner Teachings of Richard Rose"[5]) ( 2002 . ISBN 0-595-23994-3. {{cite book}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)) by David Gold, in Chapter 16, on page 243, it says, "I was aware of Keith Ham's long-standing homosexual relationship with Cheryl's husband, Howard Wheeler, and stories of child molestings at the (page 244) commune were not uncommon. It came as no surprise that Ham's twisted mind would choose Wheeler's young son (Devin Wheeler) as the object of his perversion." On page 247, it goes on to say, "We found out later that after Devin was whisked away from the commune that day, he was taken to a Krishna compound in Mexico where he remained until Cheryl Wheeler gave up her efforts to be awarded custody. Then he was brought back to New Vrindaban where he again became Keith Ham's--Swami Kirtanananda's--constant companion." Page 248: "As a footnote to this case, twelve years later when Ham was indicted on federal racketeering charges the indictment also accused Ham of kidnapping Devin Wheeler to prevent the authorities from taking Wheeler into custody and thereby discovering Ham's sexual relations with the boy. During his testimony, Ham admitted receiving a phone call warning him that the authorities were coming to pick up the child, but the United States Attorney who was cross-examining Ham never asked him who had made the call or provided the information." Chapter 17, which starts on page 249, goes into the details regarding Steve Bryant accusing Kirtanananda of being a homosexual, among other things. On page 361, in the Epilogue, it says, "Keith Ham - 'Kirtanananda Swami' - was tried and convicted of racketeering charges stemming from a variety of offenses, including the murder of Steve Bryant, the kidnapping of Devin Wheeler, and the multi-million dollar begging operation he orchestrated from New Vrindaban. His conviction was overturned on appeal, however, and in April 1996, he was re-tried. Mister Rose and I were subpoenaed as witnesses." On page 362, it says, "At Keith Ham's retrial Drescher (Tirtha das) was a witness for the prosecution. His testimony was so precise and devastating that Ham's lawyers threw in the towel, and Ham changed his plea to guilty. Keith Ham is now doing time in a federal pen." These quotes, and others from the book, can also be found by using the "search in this book" function for the exact wording on Google Books. These things are also mentioned and corroborated in Jacob Young's 1996 documentary film Holy Cow Swami. Geneisner (talk) 13:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

We are not interested in Jacob Young's 1996 documentary making it in the article, it is not a reliable source, we are interested in sources that are reliable and secondary, so that they can be included in this rather poorly sourced article. You make it sound like being homosexual is a crime of sorts. However in wikipedia we only include those who announce themselves as homosexuals. So if you find a reliable sources stating that Kirtanananda confirmed that he is homosexual, we can include it in the article. The book by David Gold, 2002, is not a reliable source nor is richardrose.org -- since when personal sites or self-published biographies would make a reliable source for BLP? The Villager, Volume 77, Number 7 would be good except it is a lie, he was never charged with child molestation. Why would you publish lies? If he was not charged with this specific crime why would you publish something like that? I am sure he could be a molestor or not, but that was not the charge was it? It is interesting that I am in the process of doing some research on the conspiracies arround the ISKCON guru issues in mid 1980s, and there is sufficient evidence that he may as well be a victim of conspiracy, thus the charges and publicity is tainted. There is a lot of homophobia around, specifically around this particular community, and we really have to be careful as to complying with Wikipedia standards. Wikid^as© 14:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I still don't see how the documentary film produced through WNPB-TV (West Virginia Public Broadcasting) and the WVEBA (West Virginia Educational Broadcasting Authority) is not a good source when it directly quotes court testimony, numerous interviews, TV appearances as well as newspaper clippings. There's no reason this is not a good source, and the controversy is mentioned and corroborated elsewhere too. This is not about homosexuality, really, it is about the covering up of illegal activity, and the censorship of this material on Wikipedia. I think this is a damn shame, and I think this possible censorship matter should be discussed on a Wikipedia complaint board where other people can weigh in on this issue. Geneisner (talk) 14:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

If it was a good source, you would not need to support it by other sources. And you found good sources that do comply with the policy, I am in support of adding the information to the artcile, just comply with WP:CITE, WP:V, WP:BLP and there is no issue. Obligation is on the editor who adds the material to the article to comply with the guidelines. I am sure all illegal activity should be mentioned, provided person is guilty of it and there are sources that comply with BLP guide. Wikid^as© 14:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I really don't think the documentary needs to be supported by other sources (remember, it was you who said that it did, even though there are other sources that corroborate the material in the documentary). I think the documentary can stand on its own as a sufficient source, because it directly quotes court testimony, numerous interviews, TV appearances as well as newspaper clippings. It was produced through WNPB-TV (West Virginia Public Broadcasting) and the WVEBA (West Virginia Educational Broadcasting Authority). Have you even seen the [http://www.amazon.com/Holy-Cow-Swami-Kirtinananda-Bhaktipada/dp/B000A7Y18U documentary]? If not, you should watch it. Geneisner (talk) 15:13, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Do you have a transcript of it? How do you supposed the claims can be considered verifiable. And if you say it is supported by sources, why not use those sources and articles, provided they are not failing WP:V. It is not exactly about who produced it, it's about keeping it verified and avoiding citing primary sources. I am not against any sources that comply with policies added to the article, so what are we talking about? Do you want to avoid such policies? If no, add the material based on the sources that can be verified and that comply with [[WP:BLP] requirements. Wikid^as© 16:47, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

It is supported by the court testimony as shown in the documentary, and as indicated in the court testimony too. I do not have a transcript of the entire documentary, but I have seen the documentary and can get access to a copy of the documentary. There are direct quotes from Kirtanananda Swami and many others in that documentary, as well as direct quotes from court testimony. Since when are direct quotes not permitted as citations in Wikipedia articles about people (living or dead)? Are direct quotes from Kirtanananda, as seen in the documentary, not permitted? Are words that are filmed coming out of his mouth not permitted on Wikipedia? You'll probably have problems with any direct quotes from the documentary. Do you want me to get a bunch of quotes directly from the documentary too and cite those? Because, I can do that. For example, there are court transcripts shown in the film where Kirtanananda admits to his homosexual past after being asked, "Back in the 1950s and early 60s, were you homosexual?" Kirtanananda replies, "Yes." Then there's the part in the documentary that shows the mother of a boy who claimed to have been molested by a teacher or someone at the gurukula school appearing on Larry King Live, the popular TV show, and she (Susan Hebel) said that she went to Kirtanananda about the abuses and was told, "You're just a stupid woman... this doesn't go on in my school, and I don't want to hear about it." (Quote from Susan Hebel's appearance on Larry King Live as shown in the documentary). She also says, "My son was molested from the time he was seven until the time he was nine and a half, and it was completely swept under the rug..." In another clip, Ravindra Svarupa Dasa sums up Kirtanananda's attitude and indifference towards the claims of abuse by saying, "So when they were bringing this up to Kirtanananda Bhaktipada about the children being molested in the gurukula, he said to some of the parents, 'you're all having illicit sex, what's the difference? Sex is sex.' I've talked to two different people who were there on that occasion. So, that's his attitude. You can imagine, if it was going on, the people who were doing it must've felt fairly protected." There are court records from the court case that was decided in 1996 with mention of the allegations of "homosexuality, child molestation and abuse, and subordination of women within the community" (U.S. Court of Appeals, and here), and I'm going to try to find transcripts of the court records in the earlier case too. Then there's the part you removed from the article that said, "On September 10, 2000, the ISKCON Child Protection Office concluded a 17-month investigation and determined that Kirtanananda had molested two boys. He was prohibited from visiting any ISKCON properties for five years and offered conditions for reinstatement within ISKCON." "(Quote from Official Decision on the Case of Kirtanananda Das, ISKCON Central Office of Child Protection September 10, 2000.)" Of course, that was from ISKCON, and you probably don't consider them to be a "reliable source", do you? Are they? However, the court records should be considered a reliable source. Geneisner (talk) 17:57, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Maybe better if you look for sources that one can verify and I will look for sources too and see if any of them are verifiable and good sources. In the meantime feel free adding material that is verifiable to the article. Court sources are a good source, however is primary source, obviously if it was cited by a reliable source we should accept it. So let's doo some seaching, also there are some charges as Henry mentioned about his arrest in Pakistan. He he, I think you mistaken me for someone who does not want to add something to the article, I just want to have some quality control on the verified policy, making sure we are not engaged in WP:OR. So what source are you adding first? (BTW the documentary you cite fails WP:V)Wikid^as© 18:31, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

For the record, as relating to these issues, here are some of the major quotes from Kirtanananda Swami and others that can be seen on Jacob Young's documentary film Holy Cow Swami (1996, WNPB-TV), as well as an overall appraisal of the documentary itself:

Part 1 - The documentary starts out with an introduction and a view of Prabhupada's Palace of Gold. The main characters are shown, including Kirtanananda, his attorney, Alan Dershowitz (who later helped defend O. J. Simpson), as well as the prosecuting attorney William Kolibash.

Kirtanananda says, "My name is Kirtanananda Swami Bhaktipada. Today, I have an electronic monitoring device (to) make sure I don't go anywhere, because of my convictions and racketeering trial." A little later, while discussing some of the poor living conditions of many in his community, Kirtanananda says, "Food, clothing, shelter, these things are not very important. Some people call it poverty, some people call it inhuman. We like it."

A history of New Vrindaban and the Hare Krishna movement follows. Many old images and film clips are shown.

Kirtanananda discusses the reasons for the power and importance of the guru by saying, "The guru is accepted as the representative of God. If he's not, he's not guru." He then basically discusses the importance of himself as guru.

Of the early years, Kirtanananda says, "I first met Hayagriva, Howard Wheeler, when I was a student at the University of North Carolina. We were living in an apartment on Mott Street. We were young hippies, so to speak. Mott Street is just two streets from Bowery, and one day he was walking on Houston Street, toward Bowery, and as he crossed Bowery he saw this Indian Holy Man who said, 'I've just opened a storefront just around the corner on Second Avenue here, and I'm holding classes... would you please come.'" "We listened to Prabhupada, what he had to say, and it was very powerful. Here, obviously, was a real guru." "Swami had his apartment just in the back of the storefront, on the second floor, and I asked him if I could stay in the temple, the storefront, overnight. In that way, I became the first so-called devotee, as it were." "This was 1966."

Early clips of the Hare Krishna movement are shown, including old pictures of Kirtanananda with Prabhupada in New York City. The focus then shifts to the early history of New Vrindaban, a farming community started by Kirtanananda and Hayagriva in the hills of West Virginia. Clips and images of the early years are shown, as well as stories of early hardships and eventual successes. The death of Prabhupada is discussed, and Ravindra Svarupa Dasa talks about the succession crisis that ensues, and about the GBC attempting to reign in the deviating Initiating Gurus. Svarupa goes on to discuss Kirtanananda's "Interfaith era" at New Vrindaban, and how this, among other things, basically led to Kirtanananda's expulsion (and his community's expulsion) from ISKCON in 1987.

Ravindra Svarupa Dasa says, "As time went on he (Kirtanananda) began deviating more and more from the basic practices of Krishna Consciousness... more and more Kirtanananda was taking the theology and practices of the group not only in a Christian direction, but in a Millenarian style of Christianity. He began to put on the robes of a Franciscan, he began to adopt Christian liturgical practices, bring in organs, well none of these things are practices and philosophy of Krishna Consciousness."

Kirtanananda says, "I did a little... market research. I had some devotees question people on the street and show them pictures, 'What does this remind you of?' The dhoti, the Indian dress, and most people would say something like, 'a kook. A cult.' Practically no one said a devotee of God. I asked people what kind of dress would remind you of spiritual life?... And almost invariably they said some kind of robe like Jesus wore, or like the monks wear."

Legal charges are listed as being filed against the Swami and his group relating to allegations of conspiracy to murder, among other things. Kirtanananda says, "I was accused of arson, and acquitted. Now again, we're accused of so many things."

Part 2 - The screen says, "March 11, 1991 - The Swami's Racketeering trial begins."

Kirtanananda says, "I was not charged with sexual molestation, or anything, yet the first two days of testimony were all about sexual molestation."

George Exoo says, "Witness number seven, the young Chaitanya. Chaitanya had reported in the trial... that he had been abused over time by the Swami, that he had a sexual involvement over time with the Swami."

The screen then shows a court transcript from the trial, which says the following:

"Questioning of [NAME REDACTED] by the prosecution:

Q: What is your name?

A: [NAME REDACTED].

Q: Mr. [REDACTED], do you know the defendant Swami?

A: Yes, I do.

Q: Did you act as defendant Swami's personal servant?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: At what time period where you Swami's servant?

A: From winter of 1985 to early 1987.

Q: In about 1986 did the defendant Swami sexually molest you?

A: Yes, he did.

Q: Did these molestations include oral sex?

A: Yes, they did.

Q: How old were you at the time?

A: Seventeen."

George Exoo says, "The Swami would make regular trips down to the gurukula and select a boy for special favors, shall we say. With the understanding being sexual. In the time that I was there, Bhaktipada always had a personal servant... There were several of them... They were about 18 years old and blond."

Thomas McGurrin, a former devotee, says, "With his boys, his servants, there would be public displays of affection that, to anyone who wasn't completely blinded by the devotion that they had for the Swami... it was so obvious that the man was being..." (word inaudible to my ears).

The screen then says:

"Swami Questioned by the Defense:

Q: There have been allegations that you sexually molested, actually had oral sex with one young man. Do you recollect these allegations?

S: Yes.

Q: Are these allegations true?

S: No.

Q: Back in the 1950s and early 60s, were you homosexual?

S: Yes.

Q: Was Howard Wheeler your companion at that time?

S: Yes.

Q: Once you became a Hare Krishna did you continue any homosexual practices?

S: No.

Q: Did you continue any sexual practices?

S: No.

Q: Have you been celibate since that time?

S: Yes."

More allegations of impropriety are discussed in relation to the New Vrindaban community. Then, there's the part that shows the mother of a boy who claimed to have been molested by a teacher or someone at the gurukula school appearing on Larry King Live, the popular TV show, and she (Susan Hebel) said that she went to Kirtanananda about the abuses and was told, "You're just a stupid woman... this doesn't go on in my school, and I don't want to hear about it." (Quote from Susan Hebel's appearance on Larry King Live as shown in the documentary). She also says, "My son was molested from the time he was seven until the time he was nine and a half, and it was completely swept under the rug..."

Kirtanananda says, "There were a number of rumors of child abuse in the school, which I tired to check out... I asked the boy, and he denied it. He denied it!" Kirtanananda continues, "The teacher, whose name was Sri Galima, he was charged, but the government dropped the case." Kirtanananda also says, "I never saw any child abuse. The committee did not find any child abuse. No adult was ever convicted of molesting a child in our school, or anywhere else in our community."

William A. Kolibash, the prosecuting attorney, says, "When Mr. Bryant (Steve Bryant) came out with some of his publications, one of those allegations was the allegation of sexual molestation... So, something had to be done with Mr. Bryant, so under our theory, the prosecution, the motive for Bryant's murder was to silence him, to stop this information flow about the sexual molestation that was going on, and about the Swami actively involved in that molestation. So, it was an established motive for the Bryant murder."

A local news clip shows scenes from the trial, a quote from Steve Bryant's mother (Helga Bryant), and describes Kirtanananda as a "Baptist minister's son." Pictures of the accused "trigger man", Thomas Drescher (Tirtha das), are also shown.

Kirtanananda says, "I can honestly say, I do not know who killed Steve Bryant. There were a number of people who had motives. Sulocana (Bryant) was a rather strange person... he did not have love, really. Nor did he understand the higher principles of Krishna Consciousness, which have to do with cooperation..."

Excerpts and interviews with Steve Bryant's parents follow. Quotes from some of Bryant's writings appear on the screen, including one which says, "... the Swami has been caught numerous times erotically embracing a young boy known as Dharmaraja..." and "... the Swami has followers who will kill for him, which is why few victims will testify against him..."

Tirtha das says, "The final authority to kill Sulocana (Bryant) could only come from one person. For my own satisfaction, I had to hear Kirtanananda himself say the words. I asked him if he felt it best for Sulocana to be killed, and his direct response was, 'Yes, that would be best.'"

Bryant's father then explains how Tirtha das shot his son through the window of his van out in California.

Tirtha das says, "I was given a rather gruesome task to perform. Had I not been given authorization personally from Kirtanananda, I would not have been in California to eliminate Sulocana (Bryant)."

Kirtanananda says, "I can honestly say, I do not know who killed Steve Bryant."

A taped phone conversation between Randall Gorby and Tirtha das is played. In it, Tirtha das can be heard talking about getting money from Kirtanananda. The taped phone conversation was made by the West Virginia State Police with Gorby's permission. Gorby's house exploded due to a gas leak soon after. Also, Gorby was later found dead in his truck, which authorities say was suicide.

The fraudulent fundraising charges are then discussed. Millions of dollars are said to have been collected through questionable means. Dennis Gorrick (Dharmatma) is mentioned, and the prosecutor, William Kolibash says, "He was sentenced to several years in jail."

The murder of Charles St. Denis is then discussed. Tirtha das talks about this in some detail, and Kirtanananda discusses this as well.

Tirtha das says that he asked Kirtanananda, "Did you authorize us (Tirtha and Dan Reid 'Daruka') to kill him (Charles St. Denis)? Do you wish for me to be involved as an active participant? He (Kirtanananda) got up, and walked toward a window. He... said... 'because of his offenses, he has to die.'"

Kirtanananda says, "How could I encourage or condone the killing of a human being? This is preposterous."

Part 3 - Tirtha das goes into more detail about the killing of Charles St. Denis in part three, and claims that Kirtanananda asked him, "Did you dispose of the body properly?", to which he claims to have responded, "No one is ever going to find that guy."

A number of improperly disposed of bodies are found at New Vrindaban, and local news clips from that time are shown.

Kirtanananda says, "What difference does it matter what you do to a dead body? A dead body, as far as we're concerned is another piece of earth... we put them in the ground and forget about them. We don't see any reason to mark them."

Tirtha das says, "St. Denis was telling people that Kirtanananda was having sexual relations with some of the Mexican workers. He was saying, 'Kirtanananda is fooling around with the Mexican boys', saying, 'He used to be homosexual, he's up to his old tricks again.' It was because there was truth to his allegations that he had to be silenced."

Kirtanananda says, "Whom the Lord wants to kill, no one can save, and whom the Lord wants to save, no one can kill."

Kirtanananda says, "When I first came to New Vrindaban in 1966, I came with Howard Wheeler. We, together, founded the community."

Kirtanananda then discusses the charges relating to the alleged kidnapping of Howard Wheeler's son (aka "Dharmaraj"). The documentary explains that the child was supposedly at New Vrindaban, in the care of Kirtanananda, when the child's mother showed up in Moundsville, West Virginia, attempting to get custody of the child. The child was then sent to his father in Mexico, and the mother didn't get to see him. The prosecutor, William Kolibash, claims this was a possible attempt to cover up the sexual molestation of the Wheeler child.

Kirtanananda says, "He was like a son to me. As far as anything improper, this question, of course, was put to him in the court. And he denied, very vehemently, that there ever was anything improper."

The accusations of Insurance Fraud and Racketeering are then discussed. The total control of the community by Kirtanananda Swami is also discussed.

According to the documentary, "The verdict: The Swami is found guilty by a jury of conspiracy in the murder of Chuck St. Denis, the jury hangs and a mistrial is declared on the charge of conspiracy to murder Steve Bryant, the Swami is found guilty in the kidnapping of Devin Wheeler, found guilty of fraudulent fundraising and insurance fraud, and also found guilty of three counts of racketeering. The Swami is sentenced to 30 years in federal prison."

A news report from the time shows this and lists some of the charges. Kirtanananda is shown with reporters, who say that he is under house arrest, and that "he came up with the $250,000 bond and is being given a limited form of freedom."

Kirtanananda says, "Our appeal is being handled by Alan Dershowitz."

Alan Dershowitz, who later famously helped defend O. J. Simpson, is shown discussing and denouncing each of the charges in detail.

Alan Dershowitz says, "If any prosecutor dared to say the things that this prosecutor said about this religion in the context of another quote 'more mainstream' religion, he'd be fired." "When I first heard about this case and read the transcript, it was clear to me that this prosecution, even if the facts were identical, could not and would not have been brought against a mainstream religion." "The risk of religious bigotry having pervaded this case was just too great, so my interest in the case was primarily as a First Amendment lawyer, as a civil libertarian, as someone who cares deeply about preservations of religious freedom."

Alan Dershowitz also says, "The homosexuality part of the case really is a witchcraft trial of modern times." "Devon (Wheeler) denied that he was ever homosexually molested."

Nathan Dershowitz, Alan's brother, who is also a lawyer, says, "One witness was a very strange witness, who said he saw Devon tickled, and even saw him tickled in the crotch area. That is converted into homosexuality."

Alan Dershowitz says, "The evidence was underwhelming. If every American father and mother who has tickled his child, or her child, is to be charged with sexual molesting we would have real serious problems in this society."

Nathan Dershowitz says, "That's the kind of thing that came in. The rest of it was introduced, I think, just to prejudice the jury."

Kirtanananda says, "To be persecuted for one's beliefs is not a bad thing. That puts us in very good company. Afterall, Socrates was made to drink the hemlock cup, reportedly on a charge of child molestation."

According to the documentary, nearly a year later, the court case is overturned and the federal prosecutor, William Kolibash, is fired by the Department of Justice on the same day. The next day, Kolibash holds his final press conference as a U.S. Attorney and says, "The day ended and I'm driving home in a rain storm, late last night, and I hear this thump, thump, thump, and I have a flat tire." The documentary then says, "It was later determined that flat tire was the result of a bullet hole."

On the screen, it says, "The appeal result from the U.S. Court of Appeals: Swami challenged the admission of evidence of child molestation and homosexual conduct under federal rules of evidence 403. Rule 403 provides that admissible evidence may be excluded if its value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. The judges accept that the implications of child molestation and homosexuality unfairly prejudiced the defendant. Because they concluded that the court abused its discretion in admitting this evidence, they set aside the convictions on all counts and returned the case to court for a new trial."

Kirtanananda is shown leaving house arrest and saying, "I'm a free man. I'm out. I guess I'll go to New Vrindaban first."

The words on the screen say, "New Vrindaban - August 17, 1993"

Images of Kirtanananda back at New Vrindaban are shown. He is shown taking his dog with him almost everywhere he goes, even in the temple.

The court will retry Kirtanananda on 5 charges (1) STEPHEN BRYANT MURDER, 2) CHARLES ST. DENNIS MURDER, 3) DEVON WHEELER KIDNAPPING, 4) MAIL FRAUD: FUNDRAISING, 5) MAIL FRAUD: ALLSTATE INSURANCE 1, 2 ).

Kirtanananda is shown at "Silent Mountain". Silent Mountain was his rustic retreat in the West Virginia hills, a place he went in order to get away from things for a while. The documentary indicates that he is still involved in the management of New Vrindaban in some ways at this point, but then goes on to say that this soon changes after the "Winnebago Incident".

"The Winnebago Incident" is discussed.

Kirtanananda says, "Well, I did go to the world congress on religion."

The documentary indicates it was held in Chicago, 1993, and a picture of the winnebago vehicle is shown. The documentary says, "A devotee named Steve Travor accompanied the Swami to Chicago."

Kirtanananda says, "I think he went along to help drive."

The documentary continues, "In Chicago, Swami sent Steve to the airport to pick up a Malaysian boy who was flying in from one of the Swami's overseas temples."

Tirtha das says, "They were returning, I believe from Chicago, in a travel trailer, a winnebago, and the driver, somehow the curtain opened in the rear where the Swami was, and he was in bed with this young Malaysian boy."

Damodar das (Allen White), listed as a senior devotee, says, "Steve Travor just went to a couple of the community members and said something to them, and then they said something to other people, and that's what brought about this meeting with Bhaktipada and some of the community leaders. About eight of the senior members of the community approached him and asked him if he was experiencing any spiritual difficulties. At that time, he said that, indeed, he acted at times in such a way not befitting his position as guru."

Garga Rsi das (David Waterman), listed as a senior devotee, says, "About six or seven of the leaders of the community, myself included, did talk to Bhaktipada. He came to us and said, 'I'm having problems. I feel like a general who's been wounded in the battlefield.'"

Tirtha das says, "The authorities at the community, the community elders confronted the Swami with it, and he admitted it. He admitted he had been doing homosexual activities. So many different people had seen something or had noticed something. He was molesting the children in our community. It was a recurring theme that, it dogged him for years."

Damodar das says, "He himself admitted that he was not actually fit to be the spiritual leader of the community anymore. The overwhelming majority of the devotees here no longer accepted him as the spiritual figurehead."

Garga Rsi das says, "At that point we saw that Bhaktipada, in our minds, didn't really want to admit things, and perhaps he was in this denial that he didn't really want to get out of, and because of that the leaders lost the faith they had in Bhaktipada. That was definitely a turning point, and from that things have evolved to the point where Bhaktipada was asked to leave the community. Many of the devout followers who stuck with him all that time were either asked to leave or naturally left."

The documentary says, "One year later, the government offered the Swami a plea bargain. If he would accept a 5 to 7 year sentence, they would stop their efforts to seize the assets of New Vrindaban community. Swami refused. Tom Drescher (Tirtha das) was outraged."

Tirtha das says, "The best course of action was for him to admit some guilt and take the plea bargain offered. That also would've relieved the community from its legal burden, and he chose not to do that. So, once again, it underscores the fact he didn't care about the community. He was only interested in his own self-aggrandizement."

A picture of a newspaper is shown saying, "New Vrindaban Pleads No Contest In Fraud Case", and the documentary says, "they paid a $100,000 fine, and the community is subject to additional fines up to 21 million dollars."

The screen then says, "Swami's Second Racketeering Trial Begins April 16, 1996."

The documentary indicated that five years after the first trial, the Swami is back on trial for the same charges in the same court room, and then says, "But in this trial there is a crucial difference. Tom Drescher (Tirtha das) agreed to testify against the Swami. Prior to this, all he said was (quote from an older news clip), 'I never murdered anybody.'"

Tirtha das goes on to say, "The Swami's belligerent attitude to the devotees, he forced the situation, and I had to respond in kind. I was left with no choice." "In the trial, they were not prepared for my involvement. At the conclusion of my testimony, the Swami was literally crushed."

The documentary says, "Since he agreed to testify against the Swami, Tom Drescher (Tirtha das) has survived two attempts on his life."

Tirtha das says, "I was risking my life, and I still am in terms of my situation, by stepping forward as I have, and that's my lot."

A picture of the front page of The Charleston Gazette is shown that says, "Swami Enters Guilty Plea".

The documentary says, "After the testimony of Tom Drescher (Tirtha das), the Swami's attorneys stopped the trial by offering a plea bargain. The Swami pleaded guilty to the first count of racketeering, which included charges of the two murders, fraudulent fundraising, and insurance fraud. But still, he maintained until the end that he never authorized the killing of a human being. He returned to Silent Mountain to await sentence. He faces up to 20 years in prison." These things can be confirmed by the court records 1, 2.

The rest, as they say, is history.

All of the above quotes are from Jacob Young's documentary film Holy Cow Swami (1996, WNPB-TV). Those quotes are in there, and you can watch Kirtinananda, and others, speak these words on film for yourself. If anyone wants to check these quotes out to make sure that they are indeed correct, be sure to watch the [http://www.amazon.com/Holy-Cow-Swami-Kirtinananda-Bhaktipada/dp/B000A7Y18U documentary].

Geneisner (talk) 19:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

References

Moving Article

Suggest to move to Keith Gordon Ham, since this person is not really a practicing Vaisnava, and is really not in a position to use the name. He is not using this name lately, so if you do not object I suggest moving it asap, Keith Ham is the name used in the court records, so could be the right name too. Wikid^as© 13:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I maintain the article should not be moved. Keith Ham legally changed his name to Kirtanananda Swami sometime in the early 1970s. Whether he is a Vaishnava or not should have no bearing on this. Henry Doktorski (talk) 15:18, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Henry, if Kirtanananda Swami is his legal name, then we should use his legal name. If that is uncertain at this point and/or can't be determined, well, it doesn't matter to me if the article is named Keith Ham or Keith Gordon Ham or Kirtanananda or Kirtanananda Swami or Kirtanananda Swami Bhaktipada or Bhaktipada, as long as his other names are also mentioned in the article along with his former status as an ISKCON guru (and the story of his rise and fall, his legal troubles, and his expulsion from the New Vrindaban community that he co-founded). Geneisner (talk) 16:10, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm aware of some swamis changing the passport names in Iskcon and other maths. I am not sure it is an argument. Henry, is it Kritanananda Svami in the passport? Wikid^as© 21:07, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I moved it to Kirtanananda Svami, if you feel it is not right, you can move it back. Wikid^as© 21:34, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

In 1970s they also used to spell Svami as Swamy (at least one Iskcon sannyasi has this in the passport). So we need to know what is the spelling I guess to be exact. Wikid^as© 21:38, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Changing the name "Swami" to "Svami" in regards to this article is complete speculation and should be reversed immediately. I have seen hundreds of documents with Kirtanananda Swami's name, and not one uses the spelling "Svami." I am opposed to whimsical changing of articles by persons who may be well-meaning but have poor fund of knowledge and appear to know nothing of the subject at hand.

You ask "is it Kritanananda Svami in the passport?" (Wikidas, your spelling is horrible. How can you be trusted in changing the name of this article?) I have in my possession documents from the New Vrindaban Archives relating to the time when Kirtanananda Swami was detained in Pakistan during September 1982 because he was accused by Pakistani customs officials of attempting to smuggle 10 gold coins out of the country. The documents, including the document filled out by the Pakistani customs inspector Syed Sikander Ali, refer to the accused as "Kirtanananda Swami" and not "Keith Ham." Can we not safely assume that the customs inspector used the name he read on the passport?

Kirtanananda Swami also told me personally that he had is name legally changed to Kirtanananda Swami. I have also have in my possession several newspaper articles which refer to this name change.

I have in my personal library two dozen different books written by Kirtanananda Swami, and the author's name is credited as "Kirtanananda Swami Bhaktipada" in most of them, in books published as early as 1984 and as recently as 2004. In the late 1980s he began using the shortened "Swami Bhaktipada" on the covers of his books, but the title page always included the complete "His Divine Grace Kirtanananda Swami Bhaktipada."

In addition, all biographical segments in this article which were deleted and which appeared in Hayagriva Swami's book "Hare Krishna Explosion" and the Journal of the New Vrindaban Community "Brijabasi Spirit" should be returned back into the article. Both are reliable published source materials published by the New Vrindaban Community. One cannot ignore these sources in an article about Kirtanananda Swami any more than one can ignore books written by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada or books published by the BBT in the Wikipedia article "A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada."

Regarding names on passports, I highly doubt that the word "Prabhupada" appears on Bhaktivedanta Swami's passport. Why is no one up in arms trying to change the name of that page to "A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami?" It seems to me that Wikidas must have a personal agenda here. Why is he attempting to delete half of the Kirtanananda Swami article? Frankly I am getting tired of his meddling in this article.

Henry Doktorski (talk) 14:40, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Henry Doktorski (talk) 14:41, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Henry Doktorski (talk) 14:41, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Henry Doktorski (talk) 14:44, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I do not think that signing your name three times makes it better. It is you who brought up the passport name in the argument. The article sources needs to comply with WP:V. You can NOT avoid following the policies, if you want to add something, just find sources and watch out for WP:COI. Wikid^as© 14:46, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I added additional signatures because after posting the note I edited it several times. I thought I was supposed to sign each time after editing.

Regarding the deleted sections referenced by the documentary "Holy Cow! Swami" directed by Gordon Jacob, I believe these sections should be returned to the article because this video was originally broadcast as a Public Television documentary by the West Virginia Educational Broadcasting Authority in 1996. Only later was it reproduced as a commercial video disc. Does not Wikipedia recognize the scholarship needed in order to produce a documentary on public television? Are public television documentaries legitimate sources or not?

And sections related to Kirtanananda Swami as homosexual should be replaced, because this is the reason he was asked to leave the New Vrindaban Community after the Winnebago Incident of September 1993, after which he lost most of his followers and was forced to retire to Silent Mountain. This is also documented in "Holy Cow! Swami."

And why was the section about his move to India deleted? This was referenced by the "Brijabasi Spirit," the Online Journal of the New Vrindaban Community? If articles about ISKCON contain references from "ISKCON Communications Journal," why should not an article about the founder of New Vrindaban contain references from the Journal of the New Vrindaban Community?

I am not an expert Wikipedia editor. But if my arguments are sound, I request another editor please make these changes.

Henry Doktorski (talk) 13:10, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

The documentary and if it is an acceptable source is being discussed on WP:RSN board now, it is not WP:V. The other one, Brijabasi Spirit, is absolutely a self published source, such poor sources are only acceptable in some cases if published by the subject, not by someone else. See sources section of WP:BLP. Thanks Henry. Wikid^as© 17:30, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

How is the documentary not an acceptable source? Simply because it is not instantly available on the Internet does not mean it is not verifiable. The documentary is available for purchase from Amazon [http://www.amazon.com/Holy-Cow-Swami-Kirtinananda-Bhaktipada/dp/B000A7Y18U] and other sources as well and may be available in libraries as well. Self-published books have limitations, but they are not categorically prohibited. older ≠ wiser 18:06, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree with older ≠ wiser, the documentary seems quite acceptable as a source to use in this article. If others feel similarly, please help us discuss this issue here on the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Geneisner (talk) 19:30, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I probably will be the least sympatic person towards him, thus censorship claims are quite rediculous. However lets us first read what Wikipedia requires us to do about it in all three cases:

Court Records inclusion:

Wikipedia policy: Do not use public records that include personal details—.. trial transcripts and other court records or public documents, unless a reliable secondary source has published the material. (Suggestion -- find reliables sources that can be confirmed to have mentioned the documents.)

Self published books or a personal dairy:

Wikipedia policy: Never use self-published sources—including but not limited to books, zines, websites, blogs, or tweets—as sources of material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject.

Inclusion of the tv documentary:

Wikipedia policy: Remove immediately any contentious material about a living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced; that is a conjectural interpretation of a source (see No original research); that relies on self-published sources, unless written by the subject of the BLP (see below); or that relies on sources that fail in some other way to comply with Verifiability. See other arguments on the RS board.

I suggest you actually read the policy and no, sorry if I or other editors can not see reviews, overviews or transcripts of the documentary, it can not be accepted to the level required for the BLP, if contentious material is under question. I do not mind using it for the material I or other editor did not content. I have tagged it in August 09, and removed it April 10, there is no way you can justify inclusion unless reviews or other secondary sources discuss this documentary that "relies on self-published sources" and "relies on sources that fail in some other way to comply with Verifiability", if you seen the documentary you will know that sources in it do not comply with the standard of the Wikipedia for BLPs.

It is with regret I must note that you refuse to consider good sources I have already added to the article and in the talk page itself. I also request people who worked or personally involved with the KS not to be involved as it contradicts WP:COI. Wikid^as© 21:30, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

It would help if you actually quoted from existing policy instead of just making stuff up. Here are the actual policies:

Self-published sources WP:SPS. I'm actually not sure what you're considering as a SPS. Henry's book is self-published at present and so cannot be used as a source. However the Brijibasi Spirit was an official publication of the New Vrndaban community. It is thus not an unbiased source, but it can be considered to accurately represent positions of the the community and its leadership. You might have to work harder to find an archive of the publication, but it is nonetheless a published source.

Primary sources WP:PRIMARY (including court records and transcripts):

Primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source can be used only to make descriptive statements that can be verified by any educated person without specialist knowledge. For example, an article about a novel may cite passages to describe the plot, but any interpretation needs a secondary source. Do not make analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about material found in a primary source. Do not base articles entirely on primary sources. Do not add unsourced material from your personal experience, as that would make Wikipedia a primary source of that material.

WP:BLP has some special provisions on the usage of primary sources. Here is the complete content of the section:

Exercise caution in using primary sources. Do not use public records that include personal details—such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses—or trial transcripts and other court records or public documents, unless a reliable secondary source has published the material. Where primary-source material was first published by a reliable secondary source, it may be acceptable to turn to open records to augment the secondary source, subject to the no original research policy.

Please note: it does not categorically forbid the use of court records.

TV documentary There is no such policy that supports your interpretation. The documentary is a published source. It is available for anyone to verify. It was broadcast. Just because it is not available on the Internet for you to instantly verify does not mean it is unverifiable.

I suggest that you go back and re-read the policies that you so evidently do not understand. older ≠ wiser 22:10, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Which part of the "Never use self-published sources—including but not limited to books, zines, websites, blogs, or tweets—as sources of material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject." you do not understand? How can you call something official something that was an official publication, never was reviewed or cited as such. I am afraid you should have a brain fix: It is very very clear: The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. so I want to see evidence but only if someone adds it. I do not care otherwise. Please add what you think you have evidence for and what complies. I suggest fo each section you want to add, you must provide an extended explanation on the talk page. I also am adding disputed tag. Wikid^as© 03:02, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

What are you calling a SPS? Brijabasi Spirit is not. The TV documentary is not. Court records are not. I agree that Henry's book is self-published. So what is it that you are talking about? older ≠ wiser 03:06, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Look, I made myself clear. The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. WP:V so I want to see evidence but only if someone adds it. I can not make myself more clear;-) and I refuse to repeat myself, because I followed the policy. Who stops any of the editors adding material that follows the WP:BLP policy? Do I? Wikid^as© 03:17, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

No, you are conveniently overlooking the next sentence in WP:V: All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation. The source should be cited clearly and precisely, with page numbers where appropriate, and must clearly support the material as presented in the article. I'll grant that Brijabasi Spirit is not an unbiased source, in that it was an official publication of the community. But, as WP:V indicates, All self-published sources, whether experts or not, are considered reliable as sources on themselves, especially in articles about themselves, subject to certain criteria, though no article should be based primarily on such sources. And WP:V does not require that content be immediately accessible for verification: The principle of verifiability implies nothing about ease of access to sources. The requirement is that it is fully attributed such that it can be verified. For someone who ostensibly refuses to repeat yourself, you certainly have repeated yourself quite a lot. older ≠ wiser 03:27, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Discussion on the BLP board

I have started the discussion here and tagged the article disputed until consensus is reached. Please comment if you wish folks, including Henry himself. I would appreciate if expert in BLPs made comments in order to get the consensus that actually reflects the guideline and the policy. Editors who want to add material to the article are welcomed and are strongly suggested to list the sources there as well to get a comprehesive view from the experts. I hope you can cooperate and follow on based on the consensus. I have also removed some claim that does not seem to based on facts, we shold be honest and know that many svamis do that -- Sivarama Swami, Radhanath Swami, etc on the number of their books, but you really need to have some evidence for such notes or the claims before adding material. Again the burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. WP:V (in this case it is Henry) and I will be delighted if such sources are found, I will treat it as non-contentious issue. Wikid^as© 03:57, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

It seems that you failed to prove your point (here), and it seems that Jacob Young's documentary film "Holy Cow Swami" (1996) can be used as a legitimate source in this article based on the evidence presented. Geneisner (talk) 13:05, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

No objection to adding any material provided it meets with the criteria of reliable source of WP:BLP. The policy for removal of the material is as follows: Remove immediately any contentious material about a living person that is unsourced or poorly sourced; that is a conjectural interpretation of a source (see No original research); that relies on self-published sources, unless written by the subject of the BLP; or that relies on sources that fail in some other way to comply with Verifiability. (emphasis if mine) Wikid^as© 11:53, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

He's dead now, so maybe the real story can be told in the article. Geneisner (talk) 11:18, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree. I believe the article should be revisited. It's now many years since he died. TalonX (talk) 02:38, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

NYT story

Here's the NYT story. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/25/us/swami-bhaktipada-ex-hare-krishna-leader-dies-at-74.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Nbauman (talk) 04:35, 25 October 2011‎ (UTC).

Quotes from that New York Times article entitled Swami Bhaktipada, Ex-Hare Krishna Leader, Dies at 74 by Margalit Fox dated October 24, 2011, include this one: "Swami Bhaktipada, a former leader of the American Hare Krishna movement who built a sprawling golden paradise for his followers in the hills of Appalachia but who later pleaded guilty to federal racketeering charges that included conspiracy to commit the murders-for-hire of two devotees, died on Monday in a hospital near Mumbai, India. He was 74." "The cause was kidney failure, his brother, Gerald Ham, said. Mr. Bhaktipada, who was released from prison in 2004 after serving eight years of a 12-year sentence, moved to India in 2008." Then there's some information about his background: "The son of a Baptist preacher, Mr. Bhaktipada was one of the first Hare Krishna disciples in the United States. He founded, in 1968, what became the largest Hare Krishna community in the country and presided over it until 1994, despite having been excommunicated by the movement's governing body." "The community he built, New Vrindaban, is nestled in the hills near Moundsville, W.Va." The article says some things about his religious upbringing: "Mr. Bhaktipada, also known as Kirtananda Swami, was born Keith Gordon Ham on Sept. 6, 1937, in Peekskill, N.Y., the youngest of five children of the Rev. Francis Gordon Ham and the former Marjorie Clark." "The elder Mr. Ham was a Baptist minister steeped in old-line tradition, Gerald Ham said... We were all indoctrinated and baptized and so forth. Keith, too." The article goes on to mention that "Keith Ham earned a bachelor's degree in history from Maryville College in Maryville, Tenn., in 1959, graduating first in his class of 118", and that "he received a prestigious Woodrow Wilson fellowship for graduate study". It then says that while he was pursuing a doctorate in American religious history at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in the early 1960s, "the university asked him to leave after a love affair he had with a male student came to light. He settled in New York, where he did graduate work in history at Columbia." So, there's a direct quote from his brother in the New York Times regarding material that was previously removed from this article. Also, this: "Keith Ham became an experimenter and a seeker, dabbling in LSD and above all looking for a spiritual haven." It then says how he met Swami Prabhupada "in 1966", and "joined the Hare Krishnas and was initiated as a swami in 1967." It then mentions that "he secured the property for New Vrindaban", and that "work began there in 1968". Regarding New Vrindaban, it says, "initial costs exceeded half a million dollars. The money was raised largely by Mr. Bhaktipada's followers, who sold caps and bumper stickers adorned with counterfeit team logos and cartoon characters, including Snoopy, at shopping malls and sporting events. Sales of these products would ultimately generate more than $10 million for the community, according to court documents." Regarding the population of New Vrindaban at this time, the article says the following: "New Vrindaban opened in 1979, and by the 1980s the community had more than 500 members." Then there's a direct quote from fellow Wikipedian Henry Doktorski, and that part goes as follows: "I think most of the residents found him extremely charismatic, like a loving father," said Henry Doktorski, who was a member from 1978 to 1994 and who is writing a book about New Vrindaban. "That's how I saw him, at least until I left. At that point I became convinced that he was not actually what he was claiming to be." It's nice to see Henry in print, and hopefully he will write a book on the history of New Vrindaban. "In the mid-'80s, former members began to accuse Mr. Bhaktipada of running New Vrindaban as a cult of personality. The Hare Krishnas' governing body excommunicated him in 1987 and New Vrindaban itself the next year. But, proclaiming the community independent of the larger movement, he refused to step down." So, the article does a pretty good job of stating how Ham broke away from the official movement and started his own thing at the point. The article mentions: "by the mid-1980s, New Vrindaban had become the target of local, state and federal investigations that concerned, among other things, the sexual abuse of children by staff members at its school and the murders of two devotees." The article mentions the documentary film that has been discussed previously on this page: "He was the subject of a book, “Monkey on a Stick: Murder, Madness and the Hare Krishnas” (1988), by John Hubner and Lindsey Gruson, a former reporter for The New York Times, and a documentary film, “Holy Cow Swami” (1996), by Jacob Young." Then there are the legal matters: "In May 1990, a federal grand jury indicted Mr. Bhaktipada on six counts of mail fraud, including using the mail to send followers the counterfeit souvenirs they were to sell, and five counts of racketeering. The most serious racketeering charges centered on the murders of the two devotees: Charles St. Denis, killed in 1983, and Steve Bryant, killed in 1986." Then there's the specifics on the accusations: "According to court records, Mr. St. Denis was believed to have raped the wife of a New Vrindaban member and to have been killed in retribution. Mr. Bryant, the most vocal critic among the community's ex-members, had publicly accused Mr. Bhaktipada of condoning the molestation of New Vrindaban's schoolchildren and of having had sex with under-age boys." "A New Vrindaban member, Thomas Drescher, was convicted of murdering Mr. St. Denis. (Another member, Daniel Reid, pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter in exchange for testimony against Mr. Drescher.) In a separate trial, Mr. Drescher was convicted of murdering Mr. Bryant." "The indictment against Mr. Bhaktipada charged that he had engaged his followers to commit the murders. At trial, prosecutors argued that he had considered both of the murdered men threats to his multimillion-dollar empire." Then there's some information about the court cases: "In 1991, Mr. Bhaktipada was convicted on all six counts of mail fraud and three of the five counts of racketeering. He was sentenced to 30 years in prison. In 1993, an appeals court vacated his convictions and ordered a new trial on the grounds that testimony about child molestation, Mr. Bhaktipada's homosexuality and his mistreatment of the community's women had been prejudicial. In 1996, three days into his second trial, Mr. Bhaktipada accepted a plea bargain under which he pleaded guilty to one count of racketeering — which included mail fraud and conspiracy to commit both murders — while simultaneously denying his involvement in the murders. He was sentenced to 20 years, later reduced to 12. After his release, Mr. Bhaktipada lived in Manhattan at the headquarters of his splinter group, the Interfaith League of Devotees, before moving to India." As for the aftermath of the community in the hills of West Virginia: "New Vrindaban was accepted back into the Hare Krishna movement in 1998. Today the community endures, though with fewer than 250 members." Geneisner (talk) 11:18, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Lengthy article, lengthy discussions: all unnecessary

Dear Geneiser, why are you bent upon exposing a particular "Swami" on Wikipedia? The lengthy article is unhelpful as those who may know about K Swami need not read it on Wikipedia. And ISKCON does not lose its standing just because of the falldown (if any) of one person. I admit I do not know about personal details and activities of K Swami, but Wikipedia is not the place. So Ive deleted some sections. -Polytope4d (talk) 15:01, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

If you think it's too lengthy, shorten it. But your current edit comes across as a censor of the ill activities of Kirtanananda Swami, which are a large part of his 'story' and is a well referenced section of the article. Chopper Dave (talk) 21:16, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Chopper Dave. The way the article currently comes across could be perceived as misleading. TalonX (talk) 02:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)