Time for more details about Anu Solanki, the young woman who freaked out thousands of us, when we feared the worst had happened to her, while she was actually absconding with a platonic friend. She’s getting off lucky…for now:
Cook County authorities will not bring criminal charges against Anu Solanki, the Des Plaines-area woman who disappeared from Cook County forest preserve property last week, officials said Monday…
“Between us and the sheriff’s [office], we’ve agreed there aren’t appropriate criminal charges in the case,” said First Assistant State’s Attorney Robery Milan. [Sun Times]
She did not file a false police report. That is why she is off the hook.
In case you forgot the particulars, Anu Solanki disappeared after leaving work to immerse a statue of Ganapati in a river with a very powerful current. They found her car running, with no sign of her. This inspired a frantic search for her, which included divers:
The four-day search for Solanki involved several police departments. Chief Richard Waszak of the Cook County Forest Preserves said they had a minimum of 40 people working around the clock during the investigation.
The cost of the search was estimated conservatively at $250,000, Waszak said. [WBBM]
The possibility of suing Solanki to reclaim wasted money is still on the table; we’ll try to keep you posted. Now that the actual news is out of the way, let’s hear about the other person in her marriage: Dignesh, her humiliated husband.
A man whose wife seemingly vanished near a suburban Chicago river only to be found days later with another man across the country said he noticed romantic text messages he didn’t send on his wife’s cell phone two days after they were married a little more than a year ago.
But the man, Dignesh Solanki, said he believed his wife, 24-year-old Anu Solanki, would be faithful to him.
“I gave her a chance because she promised me she would be 100 percent faithful,” Solanki told the Chicago Sun-Times. “I completely trusted her. I would never have run away with another girl. I would have tried to work it out.”…[AP]
Note, he’s not vindictive (I think some of us would indulge our lesser impulses if we were in his place, “i.e. hell yeah, press charges!”)
Solanki’s husband, Dignesh Solanki, said Monday he was satisfied with the decision not to pursue charges against his wife.
“That’s fine,” Solanki said. “She just left. This is not a crime.” [Sun Times]
Anu Solanki maintains that it was never her intent to deceive people, and one article described her as being “embarrassed” by what she ended up causing.
Anu Solanki told authorities she never meant for people to think she’d drowned and simply wanted a clean break from her husband. She said she was not a victim of abuse, but regretted the marriage. She also apologized. [WTOP]
How is leaving a car running “a clean break”? And even if you regret your marriage and don’t care about worrying the spouse you turned in to a chump, why would you put your family through this nightmare? Look how nice they are:
Saturday, Solanki’s older brother Dhiren Patel wouldn’t say if his sister explained why she decided to leave without telling her husband or family.
Patel thanked authorities for working round the clock to try to find his sister when it wasn’t clear what had happened and he said he’ll be working now to try and lift his sister from the troubled place that caused her to cause so much heartache. [WBBM]
Dignesh Solanki said he spoke to members of Anu’s family, who “did say what happened was wrong.”[Sun Times]
Well, at least her family isn’t blindly defending her actions. What about Karan Jani, the platonic friend who rescued Anu Solanki from her marriage (and Illinois)?
Police say Jani and Solanki had met about a year earlier and had been corresponding on the phone and Internet ever since. But Solanki’s husband didn’t know of his wife’s contact with Jani.
Solanki’s husband spoke out on Monday, saying he was worried sick when his wife disappeared one week ago. Now, he only wants to ask her “why?”
“If she really wants to be with that guy why did she come into my life?” Solanki said…
Dignesh Solanki says he’s happy his wife is safe, but bitter over the pain she caused by fleeing with another man, Karan Jani, to California. [WBBM]
I can’t imagine how bitter, after everything he’d been through to marry her. He was commuting to Virginia, to “court” her on a grocery store clerk’s salary. Her family initially didn’t approve of him, but once Anu’s mother relented, their wedding was scheduled for May.
Their eight months of married life were not entirely blissful, he said: There was typical domestic tension over finances and housekeeping.
Still, Dignesh Solanki said he was in love. They traveled to Las Vegas, the Wisconsin Dells and the Indiana Dunes together this year. “I took her so many places, and we had a real good time,” he said. Solanki said he does not know what will happen to their marriage, but “I have to go on with my own life.”
“If she had to run away, she could have told me she needed a break from me,” he added. “The cops have spent all this time and money. I don’t know why she did this.” [SunTimes]
Dignesh Solanki told the Sun-Times he expects Jani to face God’s punishment.
“She was talking to him before, even six months before we got married,” Solanki said. “So I don’t know why she used me and for what purpose.” [WBBM]
As for what the future holds…
Solanki has not spoken with his wife since she returned to Chicago late Friday to meet with police, he said, adding that he has not decided whether he will file for divorce. [SunTimes]
it was irresponsible and pathetic how is anyone justifying it?
by saying ‘no one was hurt’ it is a form of justification, secondly, its my belief that such a conclusion wouldn’t have been reached had the genders been reversed and the events were exactly the same.
But she didn’t commit a crime hell even the lawmakers couldn’t find any law she may have broken so far.
Wasting 250K of gov’t resources is pretty damn close, she got off on a loophole..by not filing the police report. but think about what would have happened if a woman had gone missing legitamitely while resources were redirected towards this nonsense? Since you’re on the subject of perspective.
I’ve known quite a few male jerks in my life unfortunately however that is all they are, jerks.
alright, I guess I should thank you for not shifting the sphere conviently into physical violence.
OK DQ doesn’t count in my books
then that makes you the Jane of All Trades but one (JOATBO)
HMF, was all this a serious question, or were you being hyperbolic? Because I can’t see how this is a) a serious issue of concern, nor is it b) well-reasoned.
I don’t want to get into it; I just don’t see what this (female separatists? wtf?) has to do — AT ALL — with Anu Solanki.
There’s a difference between believing that more men are likely to physically abuse partners than women are, and believing that all men are abusive.
151 · HMF said
I suspect the reason for the double standard is that the reverse scenario doesn’t speak to any history of systemic oppression. in other words, if a man leaves no one wonders if he was beaten by his wife anymore than if a white fails to land a job does he wonder if he was discriminated against. (i mean, both scenarios are possible, but unlikely). men weren’t prevented from voting, denied their property rights, considered property themselves (at least by virtue of being male), are not usually raped, discriminated against b/c of their gender, or victims of sexual harassment.
148 • HMF said
Yes, but sorry, you lose. The human psyche is far too complex for your “if a, then b” reduction. Are you seriously asking “Why don’t women just become radical feminazis when they are abused?” Seriously? I mean…seriously? This is the world, my friend, not math class. There are so many variables at work which you could not begin to fathom.
151 • HMF said
Did you say belief? Please cite some studies proving this is truly what you believe.
151 · HMF said
White woman or black woman? Caste affiliation?
I eat maneaters for breakfast and then I pick my teeth with wife-beaters.
HMF, was all this a serious question, or were you being hyperbolic?
It was somewhat hyperbolic, as I cast it as a thought experiment. I brought it up to illustrate the silliness of bringing in physical violence statistics to somehow justify her actions as not “being harmful” And what do you mean its not well-reasoned?
I suspect the reason for the double standard is that the reverse scenario doesn’t speak to any history of systemic oppression.
I said ceteris paribus. ie, in either case no evidence of physical abuse. the systemic oppression you speak of didn’t creep its way into the heart of male-female relationships. in either case, a person has vested emotions in the other, thats a high cost, irrespective if the other person makes 80 cents to your dollar. A woman in a relationship setting could wield great power over men, hell wars were fought over some of these gals.
male/female differences are more salient, and not as socially defined as racial ones. Dont try and draw racial parallels, they simply dont hold.
“Why don’t women just become radical feminazis when they are abused?”
no, try reading. you call them radical because they are a minority, but my question is why are they a minority? are you going with manjus “they’re a minority because they are extremee” answer? or do you have anything else to offer.
Please cite some studies proving this is truly what you believe.
this isn’t even bad humor.
if a man leaves no one wonders if he was beaten by his wife anymore
again a misrepresentation. glad to see some things stay the same in 08. the question wasn’t about physical violence. it was about whether anyone would reach a conclusion that “she wasn’t hurt, it’s all good, so lets keep perspective” and of course this would never be said, as people would come down on a guy saying, “how could you be so irresponsible, letting your wife think you died, drowned, were murdered, etc…” and the subtle implication there is, a woman’s sense of emotional vulnerability is higher, and a man’s sense of responsiblity to his partner, is higher.. two things that I (and the poster of #74) disagree with: in fact she said it right here:
“I will go further and say that, not holding a 24-year-old woman, who has not been shown to have any mental incapacity, to normal adult standards of behavior, is actually to treat her as being inferior to a man in similar circumstances, and reinforce the old, disproved idea that women are not capable of behaving in a rational or responsible manner.“
Why is it then whenever a woman acts with confidence, makes decisions and shows resolve she’s often joked about as “the man of the house” This has nothing to do with systematic oppression of women in the work place, or voting rights.
How could they do this to her. Maybe its she was framed.
157 · HMF said
C. I don’t understand the stupid question.
Kidnapper’s name is Kumari Fulbright. What, is she desi or an ISKCON member? Couldn’t tell from the photo.
Her real name is Pardesi Gori. She also uses aliases like Miss Marples, $2000.00, and so on.
as well as PG and Tara Watabe.
Pardesi Gori means beautiful, golden foreigner, isn’t it? This Fulbright woman looks of somewhat golden complexion, but beautiful she is not. Although gori means golden girl, “beauty” is implied in it’s usual context.
Seriously Topcat, is Kumari Fulbright desi?
Gori is somebody whose insides have been the recipient of a righteous ripping by a rampant bull.
164 · $2000.00 said
No. she is not desi
That’s “gore”. Any relation to aghora sadhana, would you know?
Oddly enough, in Bhojpuri dialect, somebody whose insides have been the recipient of a righteous ripping by a rampant bull is “godee”.
Small world, ain’t it?
167 · $2000.00 said
Anu Solanki and rampant bull with Bhojpuri dialect to an aghori sadhu? Never before in the history of SM has there been a thread encompassing such diversity, must say comparing a decietful wife to a rampant bull and a cannibal is genius
There’s a difference between believing that more men are likely to physically abuse partners than women are, and believing that all men are abusive.
I’m saying even given the former, my thought experiment would apply.
Look at it this way, blacks make up the majority of the NBA. but the NBA makes up a statistically insignificant component of the population overall. So GIVEN that you know someone is in the NBA, chances are they are black, but given that someone is black, you can’t automatically conclude they are in the NBA, just because the majority of NBA is black. Get it?
It’s all Digi’s lack of skill in the bedroom
Seriously, for how much weight is put on this particular ‘skill’ there should be government subsidies for formalized instruction in this area.
Stop the subsidies for HMF’s thought experiments on gender relations.
Shanti.
Stop the subsidies for HMF’s thought experiments on gender relations.
That’s easy. Just provide a logical argument to disprove them.
Looks like HMF chugged down more than he should have.
scratch that.. redirect those gov’t subsidies to teaching some of the readers here how to craft a sound joke.
Conservatives would say that the National Endowment for the Arts already accomplishes this.
don’t go there. that’s a pygmy wolf joke from way back.
that’s assuming that they were actually having marital relations. How much fornicating do you think they were doing prior to the marriage, to whet the appetite properly for the marital variety?
I wasn’t the first to bring up the topic, but now that someone else has, Desidawg’s point could have also been a factor. But if they had pre-maritial “relations” that should have been worked out before the wedding. If not, then you never know what you are going to be stuck with, for either gender. I knew of one case… ah well, no need to share. But that marriage was arranged and the arrangers did not inform the bride to be or her family that their son…….
177 · $2000.00 said
you should come to a meet-up sometime. that’s the only situation in which your repeated handle-switching won’t work.
don’t go there. that’s a pygmy wolf joke from way back
alright, that’s much better, see? you took a premise I set up and extended it (without contradicting the original premise). furthermore you used callbacks
maybe in between all the substance abuse, white fang did have a little sunthin-sunthin.
just when i was trying to keep it light and topical. I suppose if I said that i spent far more on truffles than canned mushrooms during college, you would infer that I was addicted to fungus.
cmon man, keep it real. you threw, I threw back.
“pygmie wolf joke” is topical? you mean that wasn’t a reference to our earlier exchange? Was I just being the hate-mongering villian again unable to discern the ‘gentle chide’ by the ever peaceful and angelic murali?
you established that the kingdom of pygmy wolves is a dour and humorless place, correct? I was qualifying the chugging line as bad humor/snark. It could have been far more creative and it didn’t specify what the specific juice was. We do emit a variety of liquids from our nether regions.
you established that the kingdom of pygmy wolves is a dour and humorless place, correct?
A premise you took exception to, calling it “aspersions on the fam”, any subsequent acceptance of that premise can only be considered a non-genuine, sarcastic one. By making a callback to that previous conversation you were not keeping it “topical” rather answering snark, with snark of your own. (and done rather well I might add, which is why I answered with the patronizing, “see thats much better”) So keep it real.
183 · HMF said
Dude, HMF, you play a mean backhand.
‘Zounds! This feud has become Shakespearean. A curse on both your keyboards!
I don’t have to do anything. That’s the beauty of the internets.
any exchange with you is never divorced from the rules you see governing your own, rather wacky world (HMF’s story of the year–that a comedian validates his convictions about gender relations. I’m sure one of us other mutineers will one day find a piece of media that resonates with our beliefs as well…if only). One where inferring that one’s family members were sub-human (unless ‘raised by’ refers to an orphanage) isn’t an aspersion on that individual’s family. One in which talking in circles constitutes productive discourse.
I’d rather not ‘keep it real’ if this ‘reality’ has anything to do with your own.
I don’t have to do anything. That’s the beauty of the internets.
alright, then continue making unprovoked sarcastic statements towards me (oh sorry, gentle chides), getting your ass handed to you, then hypocritically claiming “why me?”
One where inferring that one’s family members were sub-human (unless ‘raised by’ refers to an orphanage) isn’t an aspersion on that individual’s family.
You’re the one who paraded your upbringing as some kind of unique insight providing trait, to which Camille answered that infact the b*llshit thanksgiving narrative and dressing up as pilgrims is actually quite common in mainstream elementary schools, and that I wasn’t exaggerating.
‘the raised by wolves’ was just an exaggeration to your own setup premise of having a unique non-standard upbringing, I could have said oompa loompas, or blue peacocks or society of montel williams worshippers, wolves just came to mind.
Again, to which I only made the wolf comment to your initial (poorly crafted) snark (or as you retroactively described it “gentle chide”) at my statement of CR’s joke, and casted it as some kind of plea for personal sympathy? (or who the hell knows what, and yes, he’s a comedian, what of it?)
(go back to the chappal thread and, do, whats that thing? oh right.. read it.) If I’m this family-insulting machine why have you been the only one at the receiving end of that missile? Are you just that special?
187 · HMF said
If we learned anything on this thread, HMF, it’s that you should not feel ashamed to seek help. That’s your ass which is repeatedly being handed to you.
that a comedian validates his
A comedian whose happend to:
have 3 HBO specials in the last decade. host his own HBO show host the academy awards (quite possibly the only thing whiter is the “Frasier” fan club) executive produce one of the most successful sitcoms “everybody hates chris”
likewise, in your reality, one could only wish for “sadly declining” status.
That’s your ass which is repeatedly being handed to you.
Im rubber and you’re glue, anything you say to me bounces off to me and sticks to you.
190 · HMF said
Does not.
thanks for clarifying whose juices you have been chugging. Your undying loyalty to your source of nourishment is admirable.
thanks for clarifying whose juices you have been chugging.
There’s a lot worse people out there to chug from, dont you think?
Seriously? On-topic or it closes.
I wonder after the entire ordeal, if Dig will buy a-nu car.
thank you.
Is there an innuendo in there somewhere? (wink)
Desidawg, enough with the “FOB men are non-creative in the bedroom” scenario….
Not when;
From; http://www.chicagogigs.com/las-vegas/chippendales-tickets.htm