Seminary Scandal: Clarifying Rav Aharon Feldman's role

 update: Includes rebuttal by a knowledgeble anonymous source
update: additional comment from Rav Feldman

The following letter is published with permission to clarify the role of Rav Aharon Feldman.

I received your letter. Without going into discussions over issues which are no longer relevant, I would like to correct the following misconception which you seem to have:

Although I signed on the shtar beyrurin as the official to’en, I was never appointed by anyone to represent him nor did I ever intend to supply you with substantiation of any claims for the simple reason that I did not have this information. My role in this affair was merely to serve as a liason between the Chicago Beis Din and Torah Umesorah who asked me to do this. I even asked Rav Shafran, the Rosh Bes Din, before the hearing of his Beis Din to be excused because I had no information to add and the first question I would be asked would be, “Who appointed you as a toen?” But Rav Shafran asked me to come nevertheless. Out of respect for his request I came and sat for a while. 

When the first question of the counsel for defendant was exactly as I had predicted, Rav Shafran’s reply was that the counsel was correct but that we did not need a to’en since the defendant had already confessed to the charges and the trial was dealing with the damages the defendant was liable to and the culpability of the principals. When I asked permission from Rav Shafran to leave after I sat and listened to the testimony of two people, Rav Shafran—nor anyone else—did not ask me to stay to supply any evidence because everyone knew and I had made it clear that I had none. Especially there was no purpose for me to stay since Rav Shafran had conceded that I was not an empowered to’en.

I hope I have corrected your misconception.

With berachos for success In all your endeavors,

Aharon Feldman

If you desire to reply, which is unnecessary, please do not do so by e-mail but my ordinary mail or fax..
 update

THE FOLLOWING IS FURTHER CLARIFICATION FROM RAV AHARON FELDMAN SHLIT'A

Thank you for forwarding the letter. It appears from the letter that I have a say in matters which takes place in the schools, such as firing staff members, an assumption which has no basis in fact. I would appreciate informing your correspondents and whoever is involved that I have nothing to do with the schools, or with the din torah, except for the fact that I signed on the shtar berurin as a pro forma plaintiff.

Aharon Feldman

==========================================

A knowledgeable party responded:

There seems to be a misconception whether or not there was a misconception.

One party was left out of the "liason loop" mentioned in Rav Aharon Shlita's letter. The IBD, after R'Aharon Shlita signed the shtar beerurin.

Indeed, it was never thought that he personally had any knowledge of any evidence. But as the "liaison" with Chicago (as he states) he was asked repeatedly, by the IBD, and this is well-documented, to ask Chicago for the evidence ,as we would be shortly starting to deal with the matter. Rav Aharon received letters from the IBD asking him to come to these sessions,as the appointed apotropos. and to bring what they needed to deal with any culpability on the part of the hanhalot. (Gottesman received these requests as well)

Who ever suggested that Rav Aharon Shlita was there as a to'en????? (besides the to'en who was there)

Rav Aharon Shlita is signed on the shtar as the appointed apotropos for girls who had a tevi'ah.What technical legal standing this has is a fair question (which should be asked of Chicago,who "appointed" him") But the fact remains that he acted as such .And he received the IBD letters, read them, saw the requests that in his role as the liaison to Chicago (and as the signee on the shtar beerurin)he should get from Chicago any "evidence" ; and he indeed came, sans any evidence.

Rav Aharon's letter unfortunately does not address any questions of why Chicago did not see fit to give the IBD this information in any event; nor his reaction to the two infamous e-mails sent to the IBD by Gottesman, to which the IBD responded to Chicago how it was a complete contradiction to what Chicago did in Eretz Yisrael after flying here.