The most critical question about the JW and pedophilia?

by Check_Your_Premises 13 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  Check_Your_Premises

  When looking at the jw pedophilia problem it is important to make the distinction between "theocratic" and secular authorities. As we all know, the jw consider only their authority to be legitimate and secular authorities as a necessary evil to be "rendered unto".

  Here is my summary of the pedophilia problem in the organization:

  1. A person accused of pedophilia by a child cannot be found guilty within the org without another witness.

  2. A person accused or even found guilty within the org will not be turned in to secular authorities unless the state has mandatory notification laws.

  3. A person accused of or found guilty of pedophilia within the org or by secular authorities will not have his specific guilt made known within the congregation because that would cause "division". Anyone making this info known could be df.

  4. A person found guilty by secular authorities will suffer no sanction within the org, and anyone making this info known would be df. There does seem to be a strict df policy for those caught outside the org and reported to the press. Did Jesus Cano have two witnesses come forward for his df?

  5. A basic refusal to acknowledge that pedophilia is chronic and incurable. People who have practiced pedophilia but "repented", eventually can be allowed to have leadership positions and go door to door.

  These first 5 deal with "theocratic" justice. As we can see, these leave the congregation and the general pubilc in the dark as to the tendencies of it's pedophile members, and therefore leaves children at risk. The most serious question though is in regards to secular authorities. The best protection for children is to simply have pedophiles locked up. Officially there is no sanction within the congregation against reporting a jw pedophile to the police. However, the Dateline special presented people who were disfellowshipped apparantly for doing just that. Furthermore, when they requested information on cases where jw's had reported abuse to the police, they only presented two cases. And those were both cases of a jw being abused by a non-jw.

  This evidence very strongly implies that reporting abuse to secular authorities is not allowed within the theocracy and therefore would be guilty of protecting pedophiles. How else do you explain an organization having 1 million members in the US, but not being able to produce a single case where a jw reported abuse by a jw and the accuser was not disfellowshipped. Is that still the case? We all here know that the society has an unnofficial rule to df those who report pedophilia. But how do we make it clear to those who don't want to accept it?

  To me this is the most critical question.

  What are the cases where a jw has reported sexual abuse of a child by another jw, and that jw was not in anyway punished or disfellowshipped.

  Sounds like a good question to ask next time some one gets that JR Brown guy on the phone. Anyone? Beuller? (and the crickets said... chirp-chirp)

  CYP
• 

  AlanF

  An excellent summary!

  AlanF
• 

  Confession

  Hi, CYP. My comments...

  1. A person accused of pedophilia by a child cannot be found guilty within the org without another witness.

  This is the case, basically because another witness is usually considered necessary to confirming the act(s). I suppose if they have video, this replaces the need for another witness.

  2. A person accused or even found guilty within the org will not be turned in to secular authorities unless the state has mandatory notification laws.

  I know quite a few years ago the official instructions to elders were definitely to discourage reporting. Around 9 or 10 years ago the instructions were to "neither encourage nor discourage" reporting. But even since then we've certainly heard many, many reports of great trouble being made for those who do.

  3. A person accused of or found guilty of pedophilia within the org or by secular authorities will not have his specific guilt made known within the congregation because that would cause "division". Anyone making this info known could be df.

  Not necessarily the case. Even 10 years ago (maybe more), when someone was found guilty of pedophilia (by the congregation) they were definitely to be "marked." You know how that goes: the person is either DFd or Publicly Reproved and there is a talk about the subject in which parents are cautioned to watch their children. But any emphasis is on children at the Kingdom Hall. Nothing at all was done about protecting children outside the organization.

  4. A person found guilty by secular authorities will suffer no sanction within the org, and anyone making this info known would be df. There does seem to be a strict df policy for those caught outside the org and reported to the press. Did Jesus Cano have two witnesses come forward for his df?

  A person found guilty by secular authorities but not by the congregation may suffer no sanction. Not sure about the policy as it relates to the press finding out. I'm sure Bill Bowen would be able to relate stories of those who were not DFd, but perhaps only reproved.

  5. A basic refusal to acknowledge that pedophilia is chronic and incurable. People who have practiced pedophilia but "repented", eventually can be allowed to have leadership positions and go door to door.

  This used to be the case, but as of about 10 years ago elders received a letter which stated in no uncertain terms that anyone "known to be a child molester" would never again be able to serve in the congregation. The only distinctions made (as I recall) were that this might not apply to a boy who was fourteen having sex with a girl who was 12, since this was not necessarily an indication of pedophilic tendencies. I think the only problem was the wording, "known to be a child molester." I think it suggests that if few people "know" or if the elders involved believe that few people know, that it may be okay to let the person serve. A loophole that I'm sure some used.

  I think the Society is scared into submission on the subject of pedophilia at this point, but it's pretty frigging late. And, in traditional fashion, instead of admitting to apalling former laxity, they attempt to put a pretty face on their past. I believe the organization needs to do the following...

  1) When any victim or his/her family comes forward, the elders involved need to let them know that they have every right to report this matter to authorities--without sanction, and the family should be provided with a list of professional therapists for their child. It should be made clear that, while they will be handling things "congregationally," they are not professionals in this area.

  2) If the congregation determines that someone is guilty of pedophilia, they should themselves report this matter to law enforcement--regardless of the prevailing laws.
• 

  fullofdoubtnow

  Good post CYP, I totally agree with this statement, and so should anyone with an ounce of decency:

  The best protection for children is to simply have pedophiles locked up

  However, in the case of the wts, it might more accurately read:

  The best protection for the organisation is to keep cases of paedophilia secret

  They seem more concerned with the "clean" reputation of the org than with the safety of the children who attend kingdom halls. While that remains their priority, no child can ever be completely safe in the wts.
• 

  avengers

  
  Glad you posted about this subject.

  I know of at least one case where the perp was punished by the secular authorities, but nothing was done by the cong.
  
  In fact when he was in jail he was regularly visited by the elders because he was having a hard time
  
  and he "repented" from his sins.

  This "man" whom I'm referring to had abused his daughter fom baby on till she was about 15.
  
  He was my "friend". Nice friend.
  
  My wife (now ex) always had a feeling something was wrong, but never in the furthest part of our minds
  
  had we anticipated this.

  One day when the girl was at our place she started revealing what she was experiencing and the shock was big, believe me.
  
  I gave advice to her that she should reveal this to the elders, which she did.
  
  The elders talked to him, but because of the 2 witness rule nothing was done.
  
  He did admit to it partially though.

  I did not agree to how the elders handled the case and neither did the victim.
  
  My wife (now ex) said to leave it further in Jehovah's hand.
  
  This started to cause divisions between my wife and me right away.

  In the 2 years that followed I encouraged her to report the case to the police, which she did.
  
  He was sentenced to a year in jail, but the girl whom he abused for 15 years was reproved for
  
  reporting it to the secular authorities.
  
  They couldn't find anything to reprove me at that time.

  The victim now has left Jehovah's clean Organization, but the perp still has a good standing in the
  
  cong and regularly goes from house to house.

  This what I'm talking about is not heresay. I experienced this personally, firsthand.
  
  I'm glad I helped her put the guy away so he could keep his hands to himself. (pun intended)

  This situation only boosted my thoughts about this religion on how they wriggle out of
  
  emberrasing situations.

  On the other hand if someone from the R & F tries to wriggle out of a situation they shall be DF ed.
  
  Reason: No repentance.
  
  It's ok for the org and it's puppets to do so though.

  It started becoming clear that something was really wrong with this org.
  
  I went to the elders with these thoughts, but got a big zero on my request.

  It all came to a head around 1989, but it still took me 10 years to leave.

  I have written about this before on this DB. If you're interested I'll find the posts back.
  
  I posted it several years ago.

  Keep up the good fight.

  Andy

  ps. If you want the name and place of the cong where this took place I'll give them to you.
  
  also the names of the elders and even the perps name if needed. edited to add oh yes, I almost forgot. I have sent names to Silent Lambs so they added them to their files.
• 

  thirdwitness

  http://thetruthaboutthetruthaboutthetruth.blogspot.com/2006/07/does-policy-of-watchtower-create-safe.html

  If you go to the above link you will find that what is presented on this thread is very much in error.
• 

  Check_Your_Premises

  If you go to the above link you will find that what is presented on this thread is very much in error.

  Ok, I went to the link. Admittedly I didn't read every word because I don't have time at the moment. Upon reflection I realize my original post has left out alot of details. Admittedly, this is a very complicated subject. I certainly wouldn't want to join the slanderous crowd that tries to imply that the wt is evil simply because there are pedophiles in their midst. Pedophiles are everywhere.

  Where the wt comes under scrutiny is in considering the question of whether or not their policies in anyway protect pedophiles, or fail to protect children.

  I think we all can, and should agree, that protecting children is the highest priority. It should have priority over the reputation of any individual jw. It should have priority over protecting the wt from the bad publicity of having a pedophile in their ranks.

  With that said, instead of posting a link, could you answer the "most critical" question? Or could you ask the question to the wt itself?

  "Are there any cases where a jw has pressed charges against a jw pedophile, and they have not been punished in anyway by the congregation"

  The last time I heard the question asked, the wt only produced two cases and they were cases of non-jw's who molested jw's. If the wt can't even produce a number of such cases, then that is a very strong indication that there is a unspoken policy to keep all cases of molestation hidden from secular authorities.

  This policy would leave children at risk because ONLY placing pedophiles in prison can protect children completely.
• 

  avengers

  .If you go to the above link you will find that what is presented on this thread is very much in error.

  I suppose that which I posted above was a lie? This incident about which I posted was not the only incident. My eyes see it happen and still this thread is very much in error?
  Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining!

  In light of the evidence, it is amazing that anyone would believe the lies coming out of the mouths of Bill Bowen and his noisy organization and other critics and opposers of JW's child abuse policy. To the chagrin of all apostates and enemies of JWs, JWs have the best child abuse policy of any religion , bar none. And after all, isn't that what you would expect from an organization directed by the God that is love and the Most High over all, Jehovah

  Pure Ad Hominem.

  JWs have the best child abuse policy of any religion? In their own eyes maybe. The WT uses words to wriggle out of every situation. They wriggle out of the UN issue with fallacies and they think that people buy this nonsense crap. They tried to wriggle out of the Randcam issue, the 1975 issue where they blame the brothers. Now it's the child abuse issue.

  Don't they have any moral scrupules anymore? Why don't they just admit they were wrong about it? They admit to nothing. They never do. They just lick their fingers: "I''ve done nothing wrong".

  Here's one for you WT. Just keep your hands off the kids.
• 

  stillconcerned

  http://thetruthaboutthetruthaboutthetruth.blogspot.com/2006/07/does-policy-of-watchtower-create-safe.html

  There is so much 'in error' on this link, it's hard to know where to start.

  Most of what is written there is or has been disproven, legally.

  Notice none of the CURRENT cases or CURRENT rulings are addressed there?

  WHAT a co-inky-dink.

  Kimberlee D. Norris

  attorney at law
• 

  elatwra

  http://thetruthaboutthetruthaboutthetruth.blogspot.com/2006/07/does-policy-of-watchtower-create-safe.html
  
  

  wow, that article is trying to scare victims from ever suing the society, because of all the legal fees that the judge will make them pay the society after their lawsuit is dismissed as frivolous. Oh yeah and its not the society's fault that the bible has a two witness rule! Its the bible's fault!!!!

  "If the accused denies the charge, the two elders may arrange for him and the victim to restate their position in each other's presence, with elders also there. "

  HOW DARE YOU PUT THE VICTIM AND THE MOLESTER IN THE SAME ROOM SO THE ELDERS CAN PLAY DETECTIVE????????

  "Depending upon the U.S. jurisdiction where he lived when this happened, elders may have been required to report this as an incident of child abuse. Let us say that 20 years have passed. The child abuse reporting law may have changed; the man may have even married the girl! Both have been living exemplary lives and they are respected. In such a rare case, the man could possibly be appointed to a responsible position within the congregation."
  
  
  As we see the exception to the rule is both reasonable and loving and in no way would endanger children."

  The seem to be out of touch with the real world!!!!!!!