CO says :
"WT elders are not qualified individuals to handle child abuse"
this is the bottom line no window washer has no busines playing investigator with an issue this:
3. and physically damaging-
as well as being a crime
as mentioned if you break your hard you don't let a jackleg dr reset the bone
elders are JACKS OF ALL TRADES (marriage, career advice, investment advice, medical advice, and legal advice) AND MASTERS OF NONES
Catch my thread on JR Brown leaving the elders hanging out to dry...again.
Excellent point and so true that is why the wt has been for the last few years setting the elders up by distancing themselves from what they do - Notice these instructions to the elders:
What Not To Put On Disfellowshipping
During the Kingdom Ministry Schools that were held during November and December of
1994, elders in the United States were given information that was to be written into their
"Pay Attention To Yourselves And To All The Flock" book.
This information concerned the
S77 and S79 forms that local judicial committees use to report disfellowshippings to the
branch office in Brooklyn.
The following was read to the elders, twice, for them to write
word for word into their books.
Six Expressions That Should Not Be Used on S77 and S79 Forms
1. Anything alluding to or naming one of the Society's attorneys
2. Any mention of the Legal Department
3. Any comments referring to direction from the Society
4. Any comments mentioning anyone other than the committee itself as a
possible influence in the decision reached
5. Any comments that might suggest to someone with a critical eye that the
committee did not reach its decision on its own but, instead, somehow
yielded to the influence of an outside party
6. Any comments indicating that the elders mishandled the case or committed
any error in the investigation or the judicial committee process.
I will now take these points one at a time and pose some questions and make some
comments about them.
1. Anything alluding to or naming one of the Society's attorneys 2. Any
mention of the Legal Department
The first two points are closely related, so I will take them together. Normally, the Society's
Legal Department would be consulted only under very unusual circumstances. There
would not likely be any inclination for the judicial committee to mention either the Society's
Legal Department or their attorneys by name on the S77 or S79 forms unless they had
been consulted on that case. If the Legal Department had been consulted, then it would
have had some effect on the conduct and possibly the outcome of the judicial hearing.
That being so, why is the Society telling the elders on the judicial committee not to mention
them if they had to be consulted?
3. Any comments referring to direction from the Society
Why are the elders told not to mention it when every aspect of the judicial process is
conducted according to direction from the Society?
Go to Watchtower Observer , press the button for "Pay Attention to Yourself and all the
Flock" and look at Units 5a and 5b to see how precisely the Watchtower Society directs the
elders in their conducting judicial matters. Having been an elder for many years, I can
attest to the accuracy of what is presented there.
This proscription against mentioning and direction from the Society, presumably includes
not referring to any comments referring to direction from the Society not to mention
direction from the Society. But I have to ask, why does the Society not want the judicial
committee to mention this direction from the Society?
4. Any comments mentioning anyone other than the committee itself as
a possible influence in the decision reached
Notice that there is nothing that says that the committee cannot be influenced by someone
else when trying to come to a decision. The elders are just told not to mention it if there
was any such influence. I would think that the most likely sources of outside influence
would be elders who were not serving on the committee who might be related to, or be
especially close friends with, the accused, or perhaps the circuit of district overseer.
This leaves the way open for circuit or district overseers, who are directly appointed by the
Society and thus are its direct representatives, to exercise influence in a judicial situation
and never be called to task for it. At that point, the local elders are left with total
responsibility for their decision.
Why doesn't the Society admonish the elder not to allow anyone outside the committee to
influence them rather than tell them not to report it if such influence was exercised?
5. Any comments that might suggest to someone with a critical eye that
the committee did not reach its decision on its own but, instead,
somehow yielded to the influence of an outside party
Who, with a critical eye, would have access to these forms? They are for internal use only.
Even the local elders who were not on the judicial committee that handled the case in
question are not supposed to see them. One possibility is that a friend within the
congregation would somehow gain access to them and call the committee to task for
yielding to an outside influence. Another possibility is that the Society is worried about
these forms either being seized or subpoenaed.
Again, the judicial committee members are not told to disallow any outside influence, but
just not to put it on the report if it occurs.
6. Any comments indicating that the elders mishandled the case or
committed any error in the investigation or the judicial committee
Is this a problem? Does the Society receive disfellowshipping forms that say "We
disfellowshipped this person, despite the fact that we mishandled his case."?
"How the structure of this organization has been formed was explained so well. I think it is a shame so few have actually given any thought to how it all actually works."
The above statement is truly the bottom line and we this in the comments of so many jw online as well as the folks who have spoken with their family they have no idea of how the SYSTEM WORKS.
Tanalyst JT you got that right!
The head honcho at Service Dept. used to be a painter at Bethel;Campbell is his name
Yes his name is Merton Campbel he was my New Boy instructor- dyed in the wool SOCIETY MAN TO THE BONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The child should be interrogated by a TRAINED EXPERIENCED person FIRST, social worker or police, who are trained
Interrogated is a strong word for this maybe assessed by a trained psychologist would be more accurate.
### actually i was quoting someone else above who used the term "INERROGATED" AND I Agree it is a little to strong as well
Imbue goes on to say:
"In my area many elders are college educated. Some are professors, psychologists, accountants, lawyers and too many programmers to mention. However NONE of them are trained for the special situation of child molestation. An elders lack of education, special training and experience is the issue."
## the above statement is the bottom line ---they are at that JACK OF ALL TRADES STUFF AGAIN when they get into child molestation
TO ALL OF YOU ABOVE IT IS GOOD TO BE BACK
we are out of school for the summer