Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-23270House OversightFinancial Record

Hare Krishna leader Kirtanananda Swami implicated in multiple murders and copyright fraud

The passage provides detailed allegations linking a religious cult leader to two murders and a large-scale copyright infringement scheme, offering specific names, dates, and financial figures. While t Kirtanananda Swami (Keith Gordon Ham) ran the New Vrentaban Hare Krishna community in West Virginia. Community generated $10‑12 million from selling counterfeit copyrighted images. Swami allegedly ad

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #017295
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage provides detailed allegations linking a religious cult leader to two murders and a large-scale copyright infringement scheme, offering specific names, dates, and financial figures. While t Kirtanananda Swami (Keith Gordon Ham) ran the New Vrentaban Hare Krishna community in West Virginia. Community generated $10‑12 million from selling counterfeit copyrighted images. Swami allegedly ad

Tags

organized-crimecopyright-violationcopyright-infringementmurderfinancial-flowviolent-crimereligious-communitycultlegal-exposurehouse-oversight

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
4.2.12 WC: 191694 Hare Krishna Murder The most bizarre murder case I ever litigated involved a Hare Krishna leader in West Virginia, who was charged with a wide assortment of crimes, ranging from murder—to copyright infringement! My clients real name was Keith Gordon Ham, but he called himself Kirtanananda Swami, or just Swami, when he founded a Hare Krishna community in West Virginia, which he called New Vrindaban. He became the absolute ruler of this cultish community, whose members testified that he exercised total control over all aspects of community life. Vrindaban became a magnet for people who wanted to lose their identity beneath the saffron robes and changed names, including several members with criminal records and violent backgrounds. The community expanded to 3,000 acres with 500 “devotees” and profits from solicitations that reached $10-12 million. Much of this money was allegedly obtained by selling counterfeit copywrited images of sports teams and popular cartoon characters. Hence the copyright charge. The events that precipitated the murder prosecution were described by the court as follows: The. ..incident involved the murder of devotee and community member Charles St. Denis on June 10, 1983. When community member Daniel Reid learned that St. Denis had raped Reid's wife, Reid decided to kill St. Denis. Before attempting to murder St. Denis, Reid consulted Swami. Swami instructed Reid that the killing was acceptable under Krishna scriptures, but that such action violated secular laws and that Reid might be caught and punished. Swami then directed Reid to talk to Thomas A. Drescher, a fellow devotee. When Reid approached Drescher and told him what Swami had said, Drescher testified he felt duty bound to help Reid kill St. Denis. The two then enticed St. Denis to Reid's house one night, shot and stabbed him several times, and then buried him in a pre-dug grave before he was dead. [Another] incident likewise involved the murder of a devotee. In 1985, Steven Bryant, a former New Vrindaban devotee, began publishing statements accusing Swami of engaging in homosexual activity and permitting sexual molestation of children in the community. Around April of 1986, members of the Krishna community in Los Angeles notified Drescher that Bryant was in Los Angeles. Drescher received $2,500 from the New Vrindaban community, authorized by Swami, and flew to Los Angeles. He located Bryant and shot him twice in the head. Swami and several of his lieutenants were convicted and sentenced to long terms of imprisonment. I was asked to appeal Swami’s conviction. I read the transcript of the trial and found it to be filled with prejudicial evidence that was irrelevant to whether Swami was responsible for the crimes of his followers. I took this case not because I approved of anything about Swami, but because I believe that if the most reviled defendants are not afforded a fair trial, there is grave risk to all defendants. Greta Van Susteren, then a lawyer now a TV commentator, was retained by one of the lutenants. 208

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.