Still suggest that these questions needs to be pondered on:-
1. What made the court accept Criminal Case against him in India and proceed against him?
2. What made him seek bail from Criminal Court there?
3. What made the Criminal Court issue a warrant against him?
4. Only a Court can decide if he allowed to leave from there while on a bail.
5. Is the private city where he is employed suppressing any facts in his favour?
6. What is Wrighton's role in "acquiring" land from Villagers in Lavasa who owned the property for decades?
7. What was Wrighton's role in atrocities and human rights violations on many villagers, which many prominent Civil Activists are protesting about?
8. The Times of India newspaper, which is the biggest in India and which reports positive news about Lavasa owns equity in Lavasa through a venture "Times Treaties" which barters advertisement spaces to equity. Is Wrighton gaining because of this leverage of the company.
9. With Wrighton in command why was the Indian company facing so much negative publicity?
10. Most importantly according to some estimates his present employer Lavasa has just about 200 residents, who are primarily Lavasa employees apart from a few thousand workers involved in Construction. Lavasa as a city although has hundreds of houses but nil occupancy levels. Hence he has not managed a community for long.
11. According to a latest tweets from a senior Social Activist only 2 of of the 20 villages have been built in Lavasa. So why is he leaving now?
12. When he applied to the Indian Company he would have told them that he is "fed up with Mayors and Councillors" in this country. So what is forcing him to seek a job back here.
13. Will Streator accept a City Manager who is running away from law?
14. Why is he accepting a position in Streator from where he was almost removed. Is he not being accepted in any other city?
15. What is his thoughts on Home Rule in Streator?
16. Has the Council spoken to atleast 10 independent sources from his past employers, about Wrighton, which should include representatives from Citizens Forum, Businesses and Local Community?
17. What may be the "personal reasons" he is moving to Streator?
Some additional information-
Would we ask Mr. Wrighton, if he was directed to appear in the Court on 18th July 2014 by a Warrant dated 21st June 2014. He had appeared in person before the court on 25th July 2014 and was granted bail on a surety of INR 7500. Would you also ask Mr. Wrighton, if he is out on bail from this court? Also check with him if the Appellants have challenged his bail since they fear that he will flee the country without facing the Criminal charges brought on him.
myWebTimes reported "An Indian court agreed: the tweets are bogus." - The fact is No Court has ever made such statement.
myWebTimes reported "The court issued an interim order in December restricting circulation of defamatory statements from the operator of that Twitter handle against Lavasa Corporation Limited, which employs Wrighton as its city manager, according to The Times of India" - This order was disposed off by the Higher Court . Please read the High Court judgement on the links below
bombayhighcourt.nic.in/casequery_action.php?auth=bV9oYz0wMSZtX3NyPVImbV9zaWRlZmxnPUMmbV9maWxfbm89MDEwMDMwMDAyMTIwMTQmbV9za2V5PUFPJm1fbm89MjEmbV95cj0yMDE0bombayhighcourt.nic.in/generatenewauth.php?auth=cGF0aD0uL2RhdGEvY2l2aWwvMjAxNC8mZm5hbWU9QU8yNzAxNDA5MDExNC5wZGYmc21mbGFnPU4=1.In the point (i) of the order although the Court states that defamatory statements should be avoided, it has NEVER said that defamatory statements were made. Hence the case was DISPOSED OFF.
2.In the point (ii)of the order the Court Directs that the 9A Application where the Appellants/ Petitioner have questioned the jurisdiction of the case itself, should be expedited. No jurisdiction would mean no case against the appellant.
3.By the point (iii), the Court has substituted this order with the order on 9th January 2014 have overruled the December 2013 order of the Lower Court.
4.In the Order, in the Point 2 and 3., the High Court has disposed off the petition
In the entire Times of India article, did you ever see that they contacted the Appellants to hear the other side of story. Was that not required, before printing. The reason for Times of India contacting the appellants is given in Point No.8 given above
In the same interview Scot said - "We shut down his business, and he was seeking revenge," Wrighton said. "It happens everywhere." - Did you check with Mr. Wrighton, if he had he had the authority and rights to take law into his hands. Did he do so arbitrarily and he overstepped his position by a huge margin, thinking that he is a law unto himself and is now facing the music? You would ofcourse know that "shutting down of a cafe" will not be such a huge case with ramifications that are now spread across the world. Simple Shutting down of business is a Civil Issue but it is the way he went around doing it made it Criminal thus a Criminal Case against him. The case that the Appellants has filed in the court states that on the clear instruction of Wrighton, bouncers who were carrying weapons, including guns threatened innocent employees of the cafe, manhandled them and threatened with dire consequences. This is just tip of the ice-berg about Wrighton. Since multiple cases are in the courts more d**ning things will come out in course of time.
Since the issue is subjudice more information with documentation are not allowed to be circulated.
Time to decide.