SF's S.N.A.P. Requests Assistance

by abbagail 17 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • abbagail
    abbagail

    This just in from silentlambs.org:

    From: "silentlambs" [email protected]
    Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 01:05:05 -0600
    To: [email protected]
    Subject: FW: URGENT-FORWARD FAR, WIDE & FAST PLS

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: [email protected]
    To: [email protected]
    Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 2:24 PM
    Subject: URGENT-FORWARD FAR, WIDE & FAST PLS

    HELP!
    Our brothers and sisters in the Bay Area need our help. Some high ranking police offiicals, along with nearly 100 officers, publicly stood with an accused priest on Wednesday (see article below). As a result, it may well be harder than ever for victims of sex crimes to feel safe and comfortable reporting their victimization to the police.

    Please consider calling/e mailing the SF Police Chief Sanders & expressing your conern/outrage. (Calling actually has more impact!!) As you can see from the letter below, we're asking for a public apology and several other steps to make sure this doesn't happen again.

    Phone numbers, all 415 area code: 553-1551, 553-1561, 553-9228 ,553-1511

    Sanders' email is: mailto: [email protected]

    It doesn't matter who you reach or who you talk with. We want to reach a number of people at police headquarters and get them all talking.

    PLEASE CIRCULATE THIS far and wide NOT JUST to survivors, but to anyone else who might care and make a call - women's groups, therapists, anti-crime groups, whoever.

    Thanks very much.
    David Clohessy, SNAP

    Apology sought for backing priest
    S.F. police enrage victims' group

    Jaxon Van Derbeken
    San Fraqncisco Chronicle Staff Writer
    mailto: [email protected]

    Saturday, February 1, 2003

    San Francisco -- A group representing people molested by Roman Catholic priests is demanding the San Francisco police chief apologize for his officers' public support of a department chaplain accused of molesting a boy 40 years ago.

    "Your job is to prevent crime and catch criminals," leaders of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) wrote to Chief Earl Sanders in a letter dated Friday, two days after a deputy chief and dozens of officers appeared at a bail hearing for Monsignor John Heaney.

    "You can only do this if crime victims feel safe cooperating with you," the SNAP leaders said. "That won't happen if crime victims see your employees rallying behind accused child molesters."

    Besides an apology, the group called for sensitivity training of officers and discipline of any officer who appeared at Heaney's arraignment Wednesday while on duty.

    Sanders declined to comment through a department spokesman.

    Heaney, senior chaplain to the Police Department for more than three decades, has pleaded not guilty to eight felony counts accusing him of molesting a boy for more than two years, starting when the child was 7 years old in September 1961.

    The molestations stopped around the time the boy turned 10, prosecutors said, adding that the man's two brothers are corroborating witnesses.

    The alleged victim is now 49 years old. Neither he nor his brothers were identified in court filings.

    Among those standing by the 75-year-old Heaney was Deputy Chief Greg Suhr, who was in court Wednesday for the hearing at which Heaney's bail was cut to $150,000 from $800,000. Others who have offered their support to the defense are Assistant Chief Alex Fagan Sr. and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.

    SNAP said Suhr's presence in court was "particularly upsetting. . . . An individual in his role with his title and authority should certainly have known better and shown better judgment."

    Suhr stood by his decision to attend the hearing.

    "Here is a 75-year-old man who has suffered a stroke and done as much good as he has done," Suhr said. "I don't think that it serves anybody to go past 'innocent until proven guilty' here.

    "He has always, always shown up for the Police Department, no matter the hour of the night," Suhr said. "To that end, we need to wait and see what the judicial system determines."

    At Wednesday's hearing in San Francisco Superior Court, Heaney's attorney, Jim Collins, pointed to the crowd of about 100 former and current officers, firefighters and other colleagues as vouching for the retired priest's reliability and character.

    Terrie Light, a local leader of SNAP, said Friday that police were sending the wrong message to molestation victims.

    "It's totally outrageous," she said. "There's many of us, victims, counting on the Police Department and the district attorney to put these bad guys in jail. Hearing all these comments -- from people in very prestigious, powerful positions -- supporting him, I felt this sense of overwhelming sadness."

    Light said the Catholic Church has long harbored child molesters. "But the police, their call is to the public safety and, it seems, above all, the safety of children," Light said.

    "It is one thing to . . . sit back and say, 'Wait and see,' and personally not believe it," she said. "But to be allowed to go public for the support. . .

    What does that say to the public? In my mind, it says, 'He is not guilty. We know him. We are going to vouch for him. He's a good guy.' "

    SNAP - THE SURVIVORS NETWORK OF THOSE ABUSED BY PRIESTS

    January 31, 2003

    Chief E. Prentice Sanders
    San Francisco Police Dept.
    850 Bryant Street #525
    San Francisco, CA 94103

    Dear Chief Sanders:

    A physician's first rule is "do no harm." That, we believe, should be a police officer's first rule as well.

    Yet on Wednesday, 100 of your officers stood in court behind a man criminally charged with child sexual abuse. That insensitive action may have harmed many molestation victims and may have impaired your department's ability to pursue abusers in the future.

    As men and women who were victimized by sexually abusive Catholic priests, we were hurt and angered by what these officers did. We strongly suspect that other victims of sex crimes feel just as hurt and betrayed.

    Particularly upsetting was the presence of Deputy Chief Greg Suhr. An individual in his role with his title and authority should certainly have known better and showed better judgment.

    The impact on those already victimized is significant. But even more significant is the impact on those who have yet to report their victimization. Some of them may be frightened or discouraged into keeping silent.

    Your job is to prevent crime and catch criminals. You can only do this if crime victims feel safe cooperating with you. That won't happen if crime victims see your employees rallying behind accused child molesters.

    Your department's hard-won reputation for integrity and independence is threatened by what these officers did. We call upon you to do everything you can to undo this damage, by

    - making these officers publicly apolgize for their inappropriate action,
    - sending them to a training session run by a professional knowledgable about abuse issues,
    - forbidding any department staff from taking such actions in the future,
    - removing any and all of these officers who may serve on your Sex Crimes unit, and
    - formally disciplining them through a letter in their personnel files.

    It is imperative that you take immediate steps to reassure hurting men, women, and children that the San Francisco Police Department investigates child molestation thoroughly and impartially, and will not tolerate any future public displays of support for Msgr. Heaney or any other accused molester.

    We don't doubt that Msgr. Heaney has provided dedicated service to your department. Most priests who molest do outstanding pastoral work. Some psychologists offer a simple explanation: abusers feel deeply guilty for the pain they inflict on innocent kids, and attempt to "compensate" for their wrongdoing by becoming "super priests," working longer and harder than their colleagues. Other psychologists offer a more devious explanation: by ingratiating themselves with influential people, abusers win deference and trust, which then gives them even more opportunities to abuse, and more "cover" and protection when they get caught.

    But regardless of Heaney's motives, and his record of service, the fact is that he is charged with a heinous crime. Therefore, your employees ought not to publicly show support for him and thereby intimidate other victims into silence.

    We in SNAP believe in Christian charity and compassion. We believe that everyone, including molesters, deserve sympathy and understanding. But even more, we believe that children deserve to be safe, and crime victims deserve to feel safe. The natural human kindness we feel towards an adult we personally know must not cloud our obligation to protect vulnerable children we don't know.

    Across the country, police departments are becoming increasingly creative and assertive in catching child molesters. They are becoming more and more sensitive to the needs and feelings of those devastated by abusers. On Wednesday, your officers, however, did just the reverse. They aided and abetted sexual predators and they rubbeed salt in the already deep wounds of many of us.

    We look forward to your prompt reply and your prompt corrective action. We would like to meet with you very soon to discuss this matter. Please call us anytime.

    David Clohessy
    National Director, SNAP
    Survivors Network of
    Those Abused by Priests
    7234 Arsenal St.
    St. Louis MO 63143
    314 566 9790 cell
    314 645 5915

    Terrie Light
    Northwest Director, SNAP
    Survivors Network of
    Those Abused by Priests
    20632 Glenwood Drive
    Castro Valley, CA 94552
    510 517 3338 cell
    510 649 4965 ex 309

    Three strikes and I'm out as far as getting the formatting straightened out! Sorry about that!/Grits

    Edited by - grits on 3 February 2003 2:52:22

  • Valis
    Valis

    GRITS, why doesn't Bill post this himself? I mean really it becomes more and more like the nancy park stuff all the time.... You and others decry the fact that he gets criticized in threads like this, but he does nothing to stop it...and when he does come here and defend his views by demonizing people by name it doesn't last very long....I.E. NO DEFENSE.AND when that happens some choose to shift focus and say "let us not forget the victims!!!!!!!!"...all the while none of those victims stand up for the rights of Ray Franz who never wanted to get dragged into something like this and his name is only mentioned because BB has "clout" and can get away with it...I really want a cause where I get to be a the star and get to say anything I want about people to suit my words...especially when I have supporters that will post anything anywhere to further the cause. Now that pisses me off!

    Sincerely,

    District Overbeer

  • UnDisfellowshipped
    UnDisfellowshipped

    Valis,

    If you (or anyone else) have problems, concerns, questions, or complaints about Bill Bowen, I suggest that you (or anyone else) E-Mail Bill Bowen at [email protected] or call him at 1-877-WT-ABUSE.

  • Valis
    Valis

    I can certainly do that as easily as he can post here himsel and not have you speak for him.

    Sincerely,

    District Overbeer

  • UnDisfellowshipped
    UnDisfellowshipped

    Where have I spoken for Bill Bowen?

    I think it is obvious that Bill speaks for himself.

    I simply stated that if you have a problem with Bill then contact him directly.

    No one is obligated to post on this Website.

    That is the same thing that you should do if you have a problem with ANYONE. You should contact them privately first.

    If you have a problem with me, you should contact me by E-Mail.

    If you have a problem with GRITS, you should contact her by E-Mail.

    If you have a problem with Farkel, well, everyone has problems with Farkel

    Edited by - UnDisfellowshipped on 3 February 2003 4:37:14

  • Cassiline
    Cassiline

    This message originated from [email protected] , who is the director of SNAP, The Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests.

    David Clohessy
    National Director, SNAP
    Survivors Network of
    Those Abused by Priests
    7234 Arsenal St.
    St. Louis MO 63143
    314 566 9790 cell
    314 645 5915

    Terrie Light
    Northwest Director, SNAP
    Survivors Network of
    Those Abused by Priests
    20632 Glenwood Drive
    Castro Valley, CA 94552
    510 517 3338 cell
    510 649 4965 ex 309

    http://www.survivorsnetwork.org/SNAP%20Regional%20Offices/SNAP_Regional_Offices_Page1.htm

    The title of this thread is, SFs S.N.A.P Requests Assistance . I understand your argument Valis, but I honestly do not see a problem with this being posted here. Its an organization who in no way is connected to Bill Bowen, he just happened to pass the letter on as the subject line asks; URGENT-FORWARD FAR, WIDE & FAST PLS, and GRITS did the same. Requests Assistance

    Edited by - cassiline on 3 February 2003 5:2:43

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    It seems that zealous dubs who ditch their unimpeachable wt leaders together w the wt mantras, sometimes get new mantras w new unimpeachable leaders. Their new evangel must be allowed passage wherever the disciples wish to proclaim it.

    SS

  • abbagail
    abbagail

    Oh brother... I posted this BEFORE I even knew about the "OTHER" thread (BB's Comments on the CBC Program), which I found later. It seems the argument from THAT thread has spilled over to this one.

    You know, I did "think" as I was posting this whether to leave in that it came thru Bill's email list or not. But then it would look like I had come upon this SNAP info myself, which I, of course, had not. It came thru BB's SL Email List. So I give credit where credit is due.

    This particular thread has absolutely nothing to do with B.Bowen whatsoever, as Cassiline correctly pointed out (THANK YOU CASSI!) The SNAP rep did us (abuse victims) a favor when he came in support of, and spoke at, the NY SL March back in September. For all I know, he may have supported SL in other ways as well. I'm sure Bowen appreciates that, as did the rest of us. So, in turn, Bowen supports SNAP in whatever small ways he can, such as helping to spread their messages using his Email List (and this is only the SECOND time he has done so, that I personally know of). In turn, I was doing the same for SNAP -- and not for B.Bowen -- by posting it in the CHILD ABUSE section here at JWD. I also put it at LRD, FWIW. You'll note SNAP is asking that anyone, not just abuse survivors, get involved if they are so inclined. Those of you NOT so inclined, FINE. Just ignore the thread.

    As far as the "new evangels" being "allowed passage" wherever we abuse survivors and/or supporters wish to post information (of which Saint Satan speaks), do you guys not want ANY child abuse info posted at JWD? Why not just stay OUT of the child abuse section if you don't like the info here? If Simon doesn't want the info here, I'm sure he will let all of us know.

    As far as Undf (or myself or anyone) being a spokesperson for B.Bowen, that is nowhere being accurate. I would think the likes of Hawkaw or Scully or some of those "old timers" much closer to Bill would likely be "spokespersons" moreso than myself or Undf. We tend to just POST information. It's as simple as that. I have no idea how many people are on Bill's SL Email List. But it's an avenue to Get-Information-Out-There, just as JWD, LRD, LMD are. Sometimes I put the info up first (I usually start at LRD, and if I make it here to JWD to post it, fine); sometimes Undf puts it up first; and sometimes -- believe it or not -- OTHERS put it up first.

    The point is: What the hell does it matter WHERE the info originates? (whether it comes from Silentlambs.ORG or not)? That's the BIG PICTURE, but you guys are stuck on the "smaller picture" of the "beefs with BB." Those people who ARE interested in ALL child abuse efforts & info really don't give a hoot whether it originates from "Bad Boy Bill" or not.

    Why doesn't B.Bowen post it himself? I have several guesses on the matter, but that's all they are. One reason I've heard more than once -- TIME, not enough hours in a day to hit all the forums. Is that just an excuse? Well, if I thought Bowen was sitting around on his duff doing nothing else, I might would think so. But that's obviously not the case, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

    And, if any of us had an Email List that was going out to hundreds, maybe even thousands, we may likely "assume" and even "hope" some of the recipients would then spread the news even further by whatever means those people use.

    BTW, Bowen has NEVER asked me to post anything that came from him. As a matter of fact, he has suggested I NOT post certain things, which really bugged me at the time because I felt it would help. But when he says, "Please don't," then I don't.

    Anybody want to know anything else? Like Undf said, ask the man yourself. I've never had a problem getting replies from Bowen via email about anything. Everybody else with a question should try it sometime. And how odd that you guys wants answers from us (asking, "Why doesn't Bill post this stuff himself?"), but if we do not KNOW the answer and we suggest you contact Bill yourself to ask him directly, then we are accused of being "spokespersons" FOR Bill. What's that they say about circular reasoning? Sheesh. Give Undf a break already. Can't you guys TELL we are merely NEWS HOUNDS whose main "thing" (i.e., what we ENJOY doing) is merely posting info? And we do not ONLY post Bowen/Silentlambs info either, if you've bothered to notice. How many of Undf's threads are from Bowen/Silentlambs? And, while you're at it, check out all threads by SLC at LRD. How many are from BOWEN? I post there more often than here.

    One final comment: FWIW, I am partially on BB's "poo-poo list" anyway since I stuck up for Rev in that last go-round. But that's not going to stop me from "working for the abuse cause" in any way at any time, no matter WHO has the information that would benefit the public at large. Anybody have a problem with that?

    Grits, of the
    "Put Up your Dukes Class" LOL!
    Sheesh, get over it and look at the Big Picture already...

  • Yerusalyim
    Yerusalyim

    Sounds to me like fellow employees are standing by someone who is accussed of a crime, but not found guilty yet.

    Not being a big fan of SNAP and their founder, a failed candidate for the priesthood, reject because of emotional instability, I think SNAP needs to stick to supporting victims, and stay away from fellow employees supporting some one not yet guilty of a crime. Sounds to me like they expect everyone to abandon a person accussed of a crime. To hell with the courts and due process.

  • abbagail
    abbagail

    I guess it all depends on "who" one believes. The SNAP people obviously believe the victim and his siblings (Chronicle: "The molestations stopped around the time the boy turned 10, prosecutors said, adding that the man's two brothers are corroborating witnesses.")

    Whereas the employee has his co-workers and bosses believing his side of the story. Aren't police depts. notorious for the "wall of silence" when it comes to one of their own? That reminds me of how the WT plays its game.

    As far as the chaplain not yet being found guilty: All the JWs sat on the side of the JW Rapist, Beliz, at Erica's trial, before HE was found guilty. Ditto Vicky Boer trial, etc. If I had to choose, I'd side with the victim any day.

    As for the SNAP leader being emotionally unstable... I wonder why?... was he not abused as well? What is his side of the story?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit