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)