--- In [email protected], "mjackson74" <mjackson74@...> wrote: > > A comment on the article about the 8,000 flyers in Mexico > > "I too am a former TM sidha. I gave thousands of pounds to the organisation > over many years, but had no more to do with it after I got close to an Indian > working for the organisation at a senior level. He confided in me that the > top people close to Maharishi had asked him to smuggle gold during his trips > from Europe and USA back to India!! When he refused they pressured him and > made him break down, threatening he would have no future in the organisation > if he didn't comply. Thus was back in the 90's when Maharishi was still > alive. No wonder the movement in India is rich!" > > http://www.mangalorean.com/news.php?newstype=broadcast&broadcastid=366529 >
No one brought charges against Maharishi for smuggling gold. Hearsay is not proof. "The burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi) is the obligation to shift the accepted conclusion away from an oppositional opinion to one's own position. The burden of proof is often associated with the Latin maxim semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit, the best translation of which seems to be: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges." He who does not carry the burden of proof carries the benefit of assumption, meaning he needs no evidence to support his claim. Fulfilling the burden of proof effectively captures the benefit of assumption, passing the burden of proof off to another party." Wikipedia: Burden of Proof
