[Reader-list] 'Report based on SIT findings'

[Jhuma Sen]

Dhananjay's report makes no mention of the serious claim he made in his
original article: that the SIT "found no truth" in the Kausar Banu incident.
I am a bit curious about that part.
That incident was actually narrated to the Nanavati Commission by two
different witnesses in December 2003.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/355975.cms The specified
gujarat violence incidents that he had rubbished in the original article are
extremely well documented including the aforementioned one.

I am curious to know why hasn't he elaborated anything in this explanation
of his, about his initial original claim that such (well documented cases)
of kausar bhanu and others were actually fictitious? He certainly claimed to
have his authority in the SIT Report although I am a bit surprised at the
report finding its way to him when the proceedings are still on.

Regards

Jhuma

On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Aditya Raj Kaul <kauladityaraj at gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear Rakeshji and Anupamji,
>
> I'm also no authority on legal cases. Dhananjay as far as I know has been
> covering Supreme Court since last so many years and has a very good track
> record. He won't do a story and stand by it; just like that. There needs to
> be a solid proof for it and he cannot make the entire report public for
> obvious reasons. The SC might just hold this has an act against it.
> Dhananjay did his part has a journalist brilliantly. You may agree or
> disagree his report; that is your take. For me, I as well support his
> report.
>
> There are hundreds of 'allegations' made by so called activist Teesta and
> her chamchas against many politicians. What proof does she have? Apart from
> the hired and brainwashed witnesses. Even Teesta hasn'r provided any solid
> proof for this SIT report to be wrong or framed or anything false. She has
> just uttered some ramblings in a rejoinder issued to press; which doesn't
> say her part too boldly.
>
> The report will be out soon hopefully and I hope your doubts would be
> claered.
>
> thanks
>
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 5:47 PM, anupam chakravartty <c.anupam at gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > since when above mentioned author is an authority over the supreme court?
> > is
> > he speaking for R.K Raghavan. since when and how? where's the report??
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 4/19/09, Aditya Raj Kaul <kauladityaraj at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dhananjay Mahapatra has explained it all here; particularly for some
> > > friends
> > > here who were already celebrating for scoring points over TOI..Hope the
> > > wine
> > > glasses friends. One cannot just so easily rubbish the truth..
> > >
> > > I didn't comment on the report of lies by CJP for this very reason the
> > day
> > > before.
> > >
> > > The lies of Teesta Setalvad have been exposed..Quite unfortunate what
> she
> > > did maybe just for publicity or a few crisp notes. Lets hope some
> action
> > is
> > > taken against her. 'coz we know how many more so called mirror image
> > copies
> > > of Teesta would come up to scream against Judiciary and our great
> > country.
> > > So easily they can be fooled. It is for everyone to see.
> > >
> > > thanks
> > >
> > > On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 4:22 PM, anupam chakravartty <
> c.anupam at gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > The report is yet to come out in Public. the idea of highlighting
> some
> > of
> > > > the contents from the report while not looking at the report as
> whole,
> > so
> > > > that it can be contexualised is a mistake often made by several media
> > > > houses. I think we are falling for that same trap. Let the report be
> > made
> > > > public.
> > > >
> > > > On 4/19/09, Rakesh Iyer <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Dear all
> > > > >
> > > > > Going ahead by such reports, I probably believe Mr. R.K.Raghavan
> > > himself
> > > > > should come out with the report in public, or the SC should declare
> > an
> > > > > order
> > > > > to make it public. That can be helpful in deciding whether (at
> least
> > on
> > > > my
> > > > > side) whether the report actually says it or not.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > >
> > > > > Rakesh
> > > > > _________________________________________
> > > > > reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> > > > > Critiques & Collaborations
> > > > > To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> > > > > subscribe in the subject header.
> > > > > To unsubscribe:
> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> > > > > List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> > > > _________________________________________
> > > > reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> > > > Critiques & Collaborations
> > > > To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> > > > subscribe in the subject header.
> > > > To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> > > > List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Aditya Raj Kaul
> > >
> > > Freelance Correspondent, The Times of India
> > > Cell -  +91-9873297834
> > >
> > > Blog: http://activistsdiary.blogspot.com/
> > > _________________________________________
> > > reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> > > Critiques & Collaborations
> > > To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> > > subscribe in the subject header.
> > > To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> > > List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> > _________________________________________
> > reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> > Critiques & Collaborations
> > To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> > subscribe in the subject header.
> > To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> > List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Aditya Raj Kaul
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>




-- 
Research and Advocacy Officer
Lawyers Collective
Women's Rights Initiative
63/2 Masjid Road
Jangpura
New Delhi - 110014
Phone No.91-11 46866666,24373904,24372923
Fax-91-11-24373993
http://www.lawyerscollective.org/