as a one time lawyer, pleadings are broad and trials narrow. you sue every possible defendant and narrow down to the central ones with deep pockets at trial. so i confirm it is a disingenuous quibble, or a dishonest quibble, to claim it matters that several other were sued. furthermore, people don't pay out substantial damages unless they are culpable. their insurers would breach them immediately if they did. these groups will have some or total liablilty insurance--if they are run properly. moreover, the idea that liabilty in a law suit is less than criminal charges is a silly splitting of hairs. often people will get better results in a civil claim, which can include substantial damages and injunctions against behavior that cannot be attained through criminal proceedings. sogyal was sued for substantial damages and he paid out. he did get a non disclosure clause. however if you know the jurisdiction where the suit was filed you can usually obtain the law suit documents, which can include discoveries depositions and exhibits. these are public records in most common law jurisdiction such as canada, the usa new zealand and australia and the uk. (even india , hong kong, singapore and mayasia in a modified form) .
claims otherwise are fatuous or dishonest to say the least, why waste people time with such nonsense.
claims otherwise are fatuous or dishonest to say the least, why waste people time with such nonsense.