Hi everyone. In a few days I'll be back to posting regularly. In the meantimes here's a series of emails from PD's lawyer, with the usual empty threats to sue. Seems they are determined to shut down any criticism. Good for a laugh at how dense his counsel is, and how she has now drawn much more attention to the very criticism they were trying to silence.
So without any further ado, here's Lawyer Barbie, giving PD's side of the story. Then me, then her again, then me again.
------------------------
--- On Fri, 8/29/08, Panache Desai <webmaster@panachedesai.com> wrote:
From: Panache Desai <webmaster@panachedesai.com>
Subject: Re: Panache Desai
Date: Friday, August 29, 2008, 11:52 AM
Dear Sir/ Madam,
Shanda Lear posted her experience of coming to see my client Panache Desai in 2005 and it was exactly that, her experience. Panache is not a guru and has never claimed to be he is just a man who has a gift to share. Yes his name is Panache and is actually French in origin. Panache was never trained by anyone named Marlise and has never claimed to be. I find the whole thing defamatory and not at all based in-fact. He is not Native American and has never claimed to be a Shaman. I find her post and the way that you handled the whole thing to be unloving and completely not in alignment with the Native American tradition. I would like it removed from your website and in the event that it is not I will be forced to take the appropriate legal action. Shanda Lear was offered a full refund and to have Panache associated with your site is truly sad in light of all of the good work he does to help the many thousands of people who come to see him.
Yours Sincerely,
Barbie Baylis
Attorney At Law
http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=176.0 ----------------
My answer:
Dear sir or madam,
There is nothing even remotely "defamatory" in the thread you refer to. A former client of yours asked for information and told about her own experience. We offered what little we were able to find out and referred her to someone more knowledgable.
Your demand that we remove her posts amounts to a very silly attempt at intimidation in order to prevent anyone seeing criticism. We receive empty threats to sue about once a month, and know very well that they will come to nothing. Criticism is not "defamatory."
Also, obviously there was something to her criticism since she received a refund.
If you wish, I can repost the email you've sent below, so anyone reading the thread will have the benefit of hearing both sides about this Frenchman posing as a Hindu guru.
And obviously you don't know a thing about Native traditionS (plural) outside of New Age cliches. You come off as very condescending and bordering on racist when you presume to lecture Native people about Native traditions.
The most obvious sign you know nothing about us or our ways is that you would assume Natives are one big generic people or culture, instead of hundreds just in the US alone.
Tell you what: We know better than to lecture people about Hinduism. Time for you to learn to do the same about Native people.
----------------------------
Lawyer Barbie
--- On Sun, 8/31/08, Panache Desai <webmaster@panachedesai.com> wrote:
From: Panache Desai <webmaster@panachedesai.com>
Subject: Re: Panache Desai
Date: Sunday, August 31, 2008, 1:54 PM
Dear Sir or Madam,
Thank you for your prompt response.
In law, defamation (also called calumny, libel, slander, and vilification) is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image.
This was clearly an attempt to portray Panache in a negative light and therefore under law is grounds for defamation.
Even if it were criticism as you call it then under the legal definition it would fall under destructive criticism and would still present us with an avenue for legal restitution as in law it amounts defamation.
Destructive criticism is intended to harm someone, derogate and destroy someone’s creation, prestige, reputation and self-esteem on whatever level it might be. This may be done intentionally or out of sheer ignorance and foolishness. Hence the word destructive is used. In practical life destructive criticism may be disguised as constructive to be more painful while harming. Valid examination of intention of critic is when asked to prove, to help or to be somewhat useful at all. Often destructive criticism comes from persons who are envious, cruel and those who judges in fields which are not their own.
I am sorry for any offending you and would never assume to lecture Native people about Native traditions.
I wanted to give you an opportunity to resolve this issue.
However I am left with no choice but to pursue an appropriate course of legal action.
Yours Sincerely,
Barbie Baylis
Attorney At Law
http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=176.0 --------------------
My answer:
Oh brother.
For an attorney, you sure don't seem to know the most basic law.
And you also don't even seem to be paying attention to much of what was in my prior email, or on the thread at NAFPS.
To start with, no one at NAFPS made ANY statement about your Frenchman claiming to be a Hindu healer. The statements were made by someone who briefly visited our site, and is no longer a member of our board.
I suggest you take up your case with them instead of making yourself look even more foolish and ignorant than you already have.
While I appreciate your apology on one matter, it has [not] prevented you from making another grave error.
I am NOT the person who made the post, nor the person who received a refund from Panache Desai.
I suggest you take up your alleged case of "defamation" with that person, and that person alone, before you wind up before a judge who asks you why you are wasting the court's time suing the wrong person.
Your emails will be posted on the thread in question. Readers of the thread will thus have the opportunity to hear Panache Desai's side, as well as to see how inattentive his counsel is of the most basic facts.
