Ravi Zacharias Guilty Of Sexual Misconduct! What Do We Do With His Books, Sermons, And Open Forums?

        On December 23, 2020, the RZIM Board deemed their founder Ravi Zacharias as guilty of sexual misconduct:¹

In August 2020, allegations of sexual misconduct were made against our Founder, Ravi Zacharias. Unfortunately, Ravi had died several months before we first learned of these allegations, so we were unable to explore them with him directly. We engaged Miller & Martin PLLC to investigate these allegations, while also giving them wide latitude to go wherever their investigation might lead them...

However, while the investigation remains ongoing and is not expected to be completed until January or February, yesterday we received a brief interim update on the investigation we felt we needed to share...Sadly, the interim investigation update indicates this assessment of Ravi’s behavior to be true—that he did indeed engage in sexual misconduct.

            Quite a few sincere Christians wonder what to do with the many books, sermons, and open forums of Ravi Zacharias? They wonder if they should follow (take seriously) what a deliberately-sinning-servant-of-God wrote and preached or discard his work altogether. Some may even wonder whether they should continue supporting RZIM or not.

            Quite a dilemma indeed!

            Personally, I have listened to and read much of Ravi’s work. I also believe that God used Ravi Zacharias as a very valuable means to my growth in Christ.

            Now that Ravi has been proved as sexually depraved, can I undo that which I have learned about God from Ravi?

            That’s quite impossible.

            Do I now feel guilty for reading and listening to Ravi’s work?

            Ravi preached about God. God’s the source of all Ravi’s work. Ravi was a conduit. The conduit may have been flawed, but the source (God) is pure and perfect.

            Let’s consider this from another vantage point.

            The Bible teaches that all of us, which includes all the great apologists, evangelists, pastors, teachers, etc, are sinners (1 John 1:8-10).

            Everybody is a sinner. If one is sexually immoral the other may be suffering from greed or lusting for wealth etc. If not for that there may be spiritual pride in them, which is also a serious sin. The Bible also teaches that lusting after a man or a woman (who is not the spouse) in one’s heart is also a sin (Matthew 5:28).

            So while Ravi possibly was guilty of sexual immorality, other apologists and evangelists cannot deem themselves as sinless.

            There is not even one person who is righteous, not even one (Romans 3:10)!

            So every apologist, every preacher, every teacher, every evangelist is a sinner before God. If we decide to not learn from a sinful preacher or a teacher or a pastor or an apologist, then we cannot learn from anyone.

            Significantly, let us not forget the fact that it was God who gave Ravi the gifts of preaching, teaching, and writing.

            Ravi was such a celebrated writer and speaker. Somewhere down the line, he sinned against God and probably continued sinning. But God did not take away the gifts from Ravi.

            HE allowed Ravi to serve HIM.

            If God allowed Ravi to serve HIM while he was deliberately sinning, why can’t you and I continue learning from the work of Ravi Zacharias?

            If God found Ravi worthy of these gifts knowing full well that this servant of God would grievously sin against HIM, then we should continue learning from Ravi’s ministry. 

            Does this mean that God’s servants can sin intentionally and get away with it?

            No, a servant of God must not sin intentionally. However, a servant of God cannot be sinless and perfect.

            Every human being is flawed. We know it and God knows it. We constantly strive to resist temptation, but when we sin, we confess and repent and strive earnestly to not sin again.

            Although we resonate with Apostle Paul’s thoughts in Romans 7: 14-25 our life is excellently summarized in Romans 8:13-14 that says, “(for if you live according to the flesh, you will die), but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body you will live. For all who are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God.”

            Unfortunately, Ravi is being clobbered by quite a few Christian leaders. Should we also find fault with Ravi?

            Thank God, Ravi was not a false teacher. HE preached Christ-crucified. However, he sinned grievously.

            But that does not authorize anyone to slander Ravi.

            This is not an occasion to be angry. This is an occasion to feel sad for Ravi, his family, and his ministry. This is an occasion to pray for Ravi’s family and his victims.

            On a side note: I do not for a moment think Ravi is in hell. I am confident he would be in heaven because he would have confessed and repented of his sins and God would have forgiven him. (News snippets about Ravi in the social media during his last days indicate this.)

            To me, Ravi will always be the gifted servant of God – albeit flawed.

            The Bible teaches that all of us are flawed one way or another – from the great Billy Graham to everyone else.

            I will use Ravi’s life as an example to understand that even the so-called most gifted preachers, teachers, pastors, and apologists may not be as what they appear to be. While I will always thank and pray to God for all HIS servants – the preachers, teachers, pastors, and apologists, my loyalty and my worship will only be Godward.

            The pot should never call the kettle black!

Endnotes:

¹https://www.rzim.org/page/update-from-rzim-board-allegations-against-ravi-zacharias

Website last accessed on 29^th December 2020. 

Could We Accuse God’s Anointed?

          Pastor Benny Hinn, during a Pastors conference in Lagos, Nigeria on February 10^th 2017, cautioned that God’s anointed should not be criticized.¹ He’s not alone in making such statements. Quite a few servants of God pummel their audience to submission with such threats.

            “Do not touch my anointed ones; do my prophets no harm” (Psalm 105:15 & 1 Chronicles 16:22) is an oft resorted verse by fulltime Christian workers (Pastors, Evangelists etc.). This is to protect them against criticism.

            The Bible narrates instances of people being cursed for accusing God’s anointed. In Numbers 12, Miriam was cursed with leprosy for criticizing Moses. 2 Kings 2: 23-25 shares the narrative of the boys mauled by two bears because they cursed Elisha.

            Many Christian leaders are accused of immorality, false teaching, lack of financial accountability etc. So could we accuse these anointed servants of God who serve in HIS vineyard around the clock?

            Anointing is a prerequisite for God’s workers. However, our innate propensity to sin ensures that accusing God's anointed is indeed a complicated predicament.

            There are two broad categories of God’s servants – the true and the false servants of God. The true servant of God is called and anointed by God to employ his/her gift to serve God’s people in HIS Kingdom. Then there are false workers in God’s Kingdom, “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.” (Matthew 7:15, NIV).

            These false workers need not be anointed by God, since they are not called by God, yet they serve God full time. These false workers undertake God’s work as their permanent vocation for selfish gains.

            If there are false workers in God’s Kingdom, would not our criticism of them be appropriate? Yes and no; this is not as easy as it seems. This is another complicated predicament.

            Consider this complication. How do we absolutely identify a false worker? Confessions and other investigative mechanisms do prove people’s duplicity. However, when confessions are missing and when there are no solid evidences to prove a person’s hypocrisy, we tread dangerously. We do not possess perfect knowledge. So with what certainty or authority do we accuse a servant of God as a false prophet? There is always room for error in our judgment.

            Some Christians argue that God’s workers could be criticized irrespective of Psalm 105:15 & 1 Chronicles 16:22 because these verses do not refer to criticizing God’s servants, “Christians are to hold one another accountable for one another's behavior (1 Jn. 3:17; Gal. 6:2; Tit. 1:9; 1 Tim. 1:3,4; 4:16; II Tim. 4:2; Matt. 18:15-16). … Christians are to be accurate and balanced when giving criticism. When a person or group that claims to be Christian and yet seriously departs from the historical biblical doctrines of orthodox Christianity, one cannot stand idly by in silence. (Matt. 18:15-16). To not speak out would be dishonoring to God and unloving, not only to Christians, but also to the propagators of the error.

            …They point to biblical proof texts such as Psalm 105:15, "Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm" (KJV). But if one looks at the passage, it will reveal that it has nothing to do with questioning the teachings of church leaders.

            In the Old Testament the phrase, "the Lord's anointed", is used to refer to the kings of Israel (I Samuel 12:35; 24:6, 10, 16, 23; II Samuel 1:14, 16; 19:21; Psalms 10:6), and not to prophets. In the context of Psalms 105 the reference is to patriarchs in general (vv. 8-15; ef, I Chronicles 16:15-22).

            Psalms 105:15 has nothing to do with the issue of questioning the teachings of any of God's "anointed". In the context of this passage, the words "touch" and "do harm" have to do with inflicting physical harm upon someone.

            Specifically, in I Sam. 24:6, the phrase "touch not the Lord's anointed" refers to David's refraining from killing King Saul when he had the opportunity. It means in that context, "not to kill".

            The fact is that David did rebuke Saul publicly more than once and called him to account for his actions before God.”²

            You may be inclined to criticize the teaching of the person or the very character of that person. However, there is a word of caution associated with criticizing God’s servants when there are no confessions and/or no solid evidences against the said person.

            If you are inclined to slay the character of a God’s servant, then ensure that you “Try everything in your power to contact the person and have them or a representative explain themselves.”³ Do not blindly trust the media or ride the gossip bandwagon. We would be better off to err on the side of grace/caution. We should do our due diligence before attacking the character of God’s anointed.

            Whatever the case may be, if you are to criticize God’s anointed, do know that “…there is scrutiny and there is malicious intent—two very separate ideals. When you scrutinize someone, please make sure it's with 1) Godly intent about his or her teaching,  and 2) not against the person themselves. I've read many examples—especially on message boards—where a preacher's character is maligned because of something he or she taught or is NOT teaching…That's where people fail to take care when they "touch God's anointed." Their words are simply malicious.

            And, malicious intent against anyone, much less God's anointed, isn't without its consequences.

            We know from 2 Kings 2:23-24 what happened to 42 youth from Bethel who maliciously mocked Elisha, certainly one of God's anointed. "He went up from there to Bethel, and going up on the way, little boys came out of the city and made fun of him and said to him, "Go up, you bald head! Go up, you bald head!" He turned around, saw them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two she-bears came out of the woods and ripped open forty-two of the boys."

             This type of mockery implied malicious intent, perhaps to maim or kill Elisha. At that time, the epithet "baldy" signified contempt in the East and showed severe disrespect for Elisha's message and God's power. God sent the bears as a judgment for their callous unbelief.

            God may not be so blatant these days. But again, there are consequences.

            So what should Christ followers do when they find themselves in disagreement with someone in the ministry? At least these three things:

            Make sure that what you are disagreeing with is something that person actually said. I've seen a lot of people comment on things they don't even investigate and simply assume it's true because they read something somewhere or heard it from someone else.

            Most importantly, check it against Scripture. This is the ultimate test.

            Don't go off half-cocked and rebuke anybody at time in any place—most specifically on the Internet—when you disagree with someone. Try everything in your power to contact the person and have them or a representative explain themselves. Matthew 18:15-16 says, "Now if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, then take with you one or two others, that by the testimony of two or three witnesses every word may be established" (MEV).

            There certainly isn't a lack of public rebuke on the Internet. A great deal of it is mean-spirited and not meant for godly correction, but as it appears, for some people to simply make themselves feel better…Pastor Kenny Luck calls it "spiritual nitpicking."

            It is important—nay, crucial—for Christ followers, as Hux says, "not (to) render a condemning judgment upon anyone (that alone is for God), but to render a discerning judgment upon all teachings. It is important for Christians to test all things by Scripture" as the Bereans did with Paul in Acts 17:11. "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with all eagerness, daily examining the Scriptures, to find out if these things were so" (MEV).”⁴

Endnotes:

¹https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyDaYlEIYM8  (Go to the 1:36:38 mark to listen to this caution)

²http://www.watchman.org/articles/other-religious-topics/accountability-the-way-to-touch-gods-anointed/

³http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/54342-be-careful-when-you-touch-god-s-anointed

⁴Ibid.

Sex Inside and Outside Marriage

A dictionary definition of adultery is, “voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than his or her lawful spouse.” My question is, would anything at all justify adultery in a marriage? Here are some scenarios apparently justifying adultery:

(1) The Old Testament records personalities who dabbled in adultery (Lot, Judah, Tamar, Rahab, David & Bathsheba…). So, can marriages dabble in extra-marital affairs, especially since the Bible apparently endorses it?

(2) If one’s belief is intact in Christ, he is saved and heaven-bound. Does this give him/her the privilege to be adulterous?

(3) God loves to forgive. Can a partner in marriage be adulterous, then repent, gain forgiveness, and be right with God? In this instance, man finds pleasure in tasting variety, and still remains right with God. Is this acceptable?

(4) What if a marriage is heading towards divorce and one partner indulges in sexual intercourse with a friend/acquaintance who he/she intends to marry. Is this a sin?

(5) Sex is an inherent component in a marriage. What if a marriage truly suffers in its sexual expression (sex life in marriage sucks)? Does pain from lack of sex offer the person the moral privilege to satisfy his/her sexual needs with another outside marriage?

Does the Bible define adultery or sexual immorality? The answer is a very certain yes. To begin with, God says that sex should only be within the precincts of marriage (Genesis 2: 18-25; Leviticus 18; 1 Corinthians 7: 2-4).  God also states adultery is a sin (Exodus 20: 14; Hebrews 13: 4). Therefore, any sexual innuendos outside the marriage, in thought (Matthew 5: 28) or in deed is adultery and a sin against God and the spouse.

The Bible as a narrative records various historical instances, so it records the sexual frailties of Lot, Judah, Tamar, Rahab, David & Bathsheba. These are mentioned as a historical narrative and not to endorse adultery. These instances serve to teach that sex outside marriage is a sin against a holy God. While interpreting the Bible, one must always employ the hermeneutical principle to interpret the implicit passages by their explicitly stated, similar-themed counterparts. Therefore, Exodus 20: 14, Leviticus 18; 1 Corinthians 7: 2-4, and Hebrews 13: 4, should interpret all narratives of adultery in the Bible.

If one’s belief is intact in Christ, he/she should flee from sexual immorality (1 Corinthians 6: 18). But, humans are fallible, for we are weak and prone to sin. Still, it is normative that a believer in Christ will not sin intentionally, for such an act will betray his faith in Christ. But, if a Christian intentionally sins to satisfy his hedonism through adultery, he is in grave danger (cf. Romans 8: 5a & Galatians 5: 21b).

The Bible unequivocally states that God’s grace doesn’t offer a believer the liberty to sin (Romans 6 ff). One cannot bank upon libertarianism or God’s forgiveness to sin intentionally. In fact, God’s grace should captivate and motivate a believer to love and obey God always.

A marriage heading towards divorce also isn’t a license to adultery. Primarily, divorce isn’t an option for a believer. Of course, we do have the exceptions of marital infidelity (Matthew 5: 32) and unbelief (1 Corinthians 7: 12-17) that offers a believer a valid option of divorce. But God’s relationship with Israel vividly portrayed in the personages of Hosea and Gomer implies to me personally that divorce even in proven cases of marital infidelity is to be approached with grace than law. One should work to repair the broken marriage than find an easy way out of the marriage. Exploring this on another tangent, we can infer that finding an easy way out of the marriage could be an indication that the partner was never in the marriage to begin with.

Finally, unsatisfactory sex within a marriage is not a valid reason to engage in adultery. Marriage is not a means to douse one’s burning sexual appetite and fetishes. Marriage is beyond sex. It is a conglomeration (heterogeneous combination) of two individuals to believe, love, care, and nourish each other through favorable and unfavorable circumstances. Sex is a secondary aspect in a marriage. A marriage can indeed survive, by the grace of God, even without satisfactory sex.  

In my blog about premarital sex, there are reasons against premarital sex for the sake of those who do not believe in Christ. Those reasonings were not from the Bible. Still, those reasons would deem adultery as a non-viable option for all and sundry. 

In today’s postmodern world, people rely upon themselves for decisions on morality. A partner in marriage can decide that he needs a change and thus engage in adultery. That person may think that he is not bound to his spouse or any other objective moral authority (God, parents, children etc.). But this person will hypocritically subject himself to a moral framework at his place of work. He cannot take off from work as and when he desires. He would be allowed a certain number of days off from work. Further absence from work would result in termination of employment or loss of salary or a severe reprimand. In other words, this person who is postmodern in his morality within his marriage will not or cannot subscribe to the very same post-modernity at his workplace. Isn’t this sheer hypocrisy? He who refuses objective authority in his marriage hypocritically subjects himself to an objective moral authority at his workplace. He will not be a postmodern at his workplace for the fear of losing his job. Whereas Godlessness in his life that entails fearlessness in his marriage motivates him into adultery. Such a person may fool himself thinking he would not lose anything by virtue of adultery. But he loses his mind, and along with it his morality, integrity, consistency, but most significantly, the pleasure of being with God and enjoying HIM.

Ravi Zacharias offers a perfect analogy for the postmodern mindset. When a friend told him that Wexner Center for the Performing Arts¹ is a postmodern building that was designed with no particular design in mind, Ravi quipped that the foundation of this building would certainly be purposeful. Of course, the architect would have designed this building with pillars without purpose and stairways going nowhere. But this architect would have built this postmodern building with a purposeful foundation meant to hold the building together.

This is the hypocrisy inherent in postmodernism. A postmodern mind may think that life is capricious and so can be lived without any purpose. But that purposelessness is the very purpose, exhibited hedonistically and inconsistently, in that postmodern life – an utter insanity. A postmodern man would reject an objective moral authority when he prefers to indulge in adultery, but he would subscribe to an objective moral authority elsewhere (workplace). Wexner center was closed for three years and $15 million dollars worth repairs were performed to counter its basic design flaws. Similarly, a postmodern mindset, unless transformed by the Lord Jesus Christ, would inevitably be riddled with moral inconsistencies and disasters.

A few days ago, much acclaimed basketball superstar, LeBron James married his longtime sweetheart, Savannah Brinson. The couple had two sons even before they were married; a result of their live-in relationship before their marriage. Live-in relationships are a prevalent practice today. If two unmarried people live together and have children, would they be categorized as adulterers or those indulging in premarital sex? Practicing Christians would consider a live-in relationship a sin or an aberration. A live-in relationship is a loose arrangement without a binding covenant (before God) that holds the relationship together through thick and thin. Adultery comes into the picture when marriage is solemnized, but when the couple has children before marriage, I would term it as premarital sex, thus unacceptable.

To conclude, sex is only permitted within the confines of a marriage. But marriage is not meant for sex alone. Adultery is unjustifiable. May God protect us. Amen.

P.S: If a person has kept his marriage bed pure (in thought & deed), but is accused of adultery, how should he respond? He surely can come out with all his guns blazing, but in the most peaceful and with God’s wisdom. In other words, the evil in the accusation should be despised and overcome by the power of God. Patience should be adopted with a view that the marriage be reconstructed through justice served by God at HIS time and according to HIS pleasure and purpose. Amen.

References:

¹ http://www.house-design-coffee.com/postmodern-architecture.html 

Realizing Dignity in False Accusation

           Dignity is measured by the extent of one’s ambitious possessions. In the previous blog, I stated that medical conditions seemingly rob one’s dignity; however his position as a child of the living God, seated in Christ with God in the heavenly realms enables him to realize his intrinsic dignity. He does not lose his dignity, even though Satan navigates him into the depths of suffering under the guise of lost dignity. Our tangible ambitious possessions are health, wealth, profession, education, and the likes; one can narrate several instances of abundance or absence of tangibles in varied intensities that entails a gain or loss of dignity.

False accusation is Satan’s assault on man’s character. Satan’s assault displays evil in varied degrees. This blog focuses on false accusations, for many are falsely accused and even imprisoned for uncommitted crimes.¹

False accusation is a common malady in school, home and work. A child can be falsely accused for reasons such as lack of effort in poor grades (though the child put in good effort) or theft (a co-student falsely accuses the child of stealing) or indiscipline (a child unjustly punished for another’s mischief). When punishment is rendered to a sinless offender, his/her character is assaulted and dignity abandons them. This is evil.

A specific instance of false accusation is when character is the primary ambition for some. One cannot blame a Christian for possessing and cultivating this ideal, for the Holy Bible shapes the character of a disciple towards being faultless and blameless.

If a Christian’s ambition is to live a holy life, then he will endeavor to be an honest worker. Imagine an honest Christian working in an organization for 20 years with an impeccable record. A reliable source levels a false allegation based on dubious circumstantial evidence claiming he stole a large sum of money. The fact is he did not steal. His superiors mandate him to plead guilty and submit a letter of apology for which they will forgive him. On the contrary, if he continues to maintain his innocence, he has to submit his resignation and leave the organization. He chooses the latter option for he is sinless within that context.

He is sinless and his integrity intact in God’s presence, but some doubt him for they refuse to believe in his innocence. When society doubts, it slanders. This affects the person concerned rather irreparably. Hence, his dignity plunges south and suffers immeasurably. This is a great evil.

            Put yourself in the brutally heartbreaking shoes of Mr. Niranjan Kumar Mandal. Recently Mr. Mandal appealed to the Supreme Court of India pleading for the restoration of his lost dignity. He was acquitted of rape after spending four terrible years in prison. Even though he is innocent, the society continues to reject him and his family after his acquittal. He said, "After the acquittal, I had great hope of getting back to the mainstream. But I gradually found that there was nothing to be happy about...Neighbours looked with suspicion and never allowed their children to mix with my children." ² This is an incredible burden to carry.

Mr. James Bain’s situation was even worse. In 2012, CNN reported, “James Bain is the longest-serving prisoner to be exonerated by DNA evidence, spending 35 years behind bars for a crime he didn't commit. He was convicted in 1974, at age 19, of kidnapping and raping a 9-year-old boy in Lake Wales, Florida.” ¹ This is a great evil.

            In the assault of man’s character, there is an accused and an accuser. The accuser generally holds a higher moral position, and the accused is relegated to a lower position.

The person who has been raped (victim & accuser) will be offered a higher moral ground. The rape would rob this person of dignity, but the outpouring of sympathetic support from the society would, to a measure, enable the person to realize his/her intrinsic dignity. However, the accused, in this case, will lose his dignity in the eyes of the society if he is a proven sinner. This is straightforward.

On the contrary, in Mr. Bain and Mr. Mandal’s context, we see a case of two damaged dignities –the brutally raped and the falsely accused. Both these precious people are innocent within this particular context. This is a great evil.

The horrendousness of evil intensifies when we examine the situation from the perspective of the one who leveled the false accusation. False accusations are intentional and unintentional. Intentional false accusation could be due to inherent corruption that deserves punishment.

The unintentional false accusation could be a result of a mental illness. This unintentional false accuser inflicts a colossal damage without realizing that he/she is being a cause of a horrendous evil. This is indeed a sad and a horrendous situation.

Researchers attribute this false accusation to “confabulation.” ³ Confabulation is considered ‘honest lying,’ for the person has no real intent to deceive. “At its simplest, people who confabulate provide information, or act based on information, that is obviously false. These people are genuinely unaware that the information is wrong,” states an article (emphasis mine).⁴

On the one hand, we pity the individual suffering from a mental illness. But on the other hand, this individual inflicts damage even without realizing it. What a horrendous evil!

Looking at the big picture we see the following situations:

1.      In the case of a false accusation, the “accused” loses his dignity in the eyes of the world for an uncommitted sin – this is a great evil.

2.      In the case of a mentally ill person making false accusations, both the “accuser” and the “accused” lose their dignity in the eyes of the world – this is horrendous evil.

What should we do to deal with false accusations?

Please view the two videos of James Bain ^{1 & 5}. His words are powerful, so I have captured much of his thoughts.

A Christian in the receiving end of a false accusation should know that this is a divine providence, not a random occurrence. Being sinless with reference to the accusation leveled, is mandatory. (Being sinful with reference to the accusation makes the accusation genuine, not false.) We may not know the reason behind our integration into this horrendous evil, but take heart that God has allowed this, so HE will deliver us at HIS time. Acceptance of the situation without anger and not rebelling against God is a healthy approach to endurance. Rebelling against God is always unfruitful.

Joseph was imprisoned because he was falsely accused by Potiphar’s wife (Genesis 39). Prior to this incident, he was persecuted by his brothers. So adversity was Joseph’s middle name. But in due time (2+ years), God delivered Joseph from his suffering and elevated him. Because God delivered Joseph, we can be assured that HE will deliver HIS people at HIS time. As Joseph trusted God during his imprisonment, may we also trust in HIM and be patient for HIS deliverance.

Outside of Jesus Christ one cannot recover and realize his dignity. But we need not think that only those who believe in Christ will realize their intrinsic dignity, for the Almighty God’s common grace sustains all men (Cf. Romans 2:14-15; Hebrews 1:2-3; Matthew 5:45). The Bible clearly states that God is kind to both the ungrateful and the wicked (Luke 6:35, NIV). I submit that this common grace of God will sustain the one who still does not believe in Christ, but whose dignity is seemingly irreparably damaged in the eyes of the world.

Mr. James Bain's Video:

¹http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/21/more-than-2000-wrongfully-convicted-people-exonerated-in-23-years-researchers-say/

⁵http://floridainnocence.org/content/?page_id=1697#video_testimony

References:

¹http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/21/more-than-2000-wrongfully-convicted-people-exonerated-in-23-years-researchers-say/

²http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-03-11/india/37622494_1_diagnostic-centre-mayapuri-jail-term

³http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confabulation

⁴http://www.alzcompend.info/?p=293

⁵http://floridainnocence.org/content/?page_id=1697#video_testimony

For more information on Mr. Mandal: http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/18/a-conversation-with-former-tihar-inmate-niranjan-kumar-mandal/.

False Accusation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation