Victoria, Australia: Steven Unthank's Press Release: JW's Hierarchy Formally Charged Today With Child Abuse

by AndersonsInfo 243 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  MrMonroe

  I can't work out whether Curtains is a bit slow on the uptake or deliberately trying to mislead people to try to discredit Unthank. Let me put this as plainly as possible. Steven Unthank has:

  • Written a number of press releases (and a very long-winded treatise);
  • Appeared before a government inquiry to make submissions; and
  • Succeeded in laying private criminal prosecutions as an individual against a number of WTS entities.

  The inquiry continues, but he has finished his involvement with that. The criminal charges are yet to be heard in court.
• 

  Curtains

  madsweeney at the link I provided you click on public sittings and then you will see where I copied and pasted from. and yes this is separate from the court hearing which is only a filing hearing. this hearing will determine whether or not matters will proceed.
• 

  sizemik

  Why don't we just all wait until after September 13th (that was the date for the hearing, right?) and then see what really happens? . . . James_Woods

  Good idea! . . . that gives everyone who hasn't already, 10 whole days to research the facts (write letters or emails if you need to) rather than simply reading opinions on internet forums and blowing smoke out your ass!
• 

  steve2

  I wouldn't want to put too much emphasis on waiting until after September 13th. Court processes can test the patience of saints as it were. Besides, part of the 'joy' of being out of the Watchtower is freedom from 'waiting on Jehovah' to reveal everything. The invitation to wait is too close to the bone, I say!

  On a related matter, I was very surprised by Gary Boting's dismissively belittling opinion, whether offered on the fly or not. Something a bit more substantive would have been helpful. Were Gary and his wife the authors of 'The Orwellian World of Jehovah's Witnesses'? (circa mid-1980s). His being a legal' expert must mean something, so I'd hope he'd take the time to offer more that 'quick and dirty' comments about Mr Unthank. BTW has anyone here personally met Mr Unthank in person?

  Meanwhile, like the end of the world, we could be waiting and waiting and waiting for anything to emerge out of this case....
• 

  MrMonroe

  BTW has anyone here personally met Mr Unthank in person?

  Why? Are you doubting his existence as well? I have already provided a link for the transcript of the judicial inquiry where he appeared.
• 

  sizemik

  Besides, part of the 'joy' of being out of the Watchtower is freedom from 'waiting on Jehovah' to reveal everything. The invitation to wait is too close to the bone, I say!

  What about the invitation to become informed . . . is that too close to some sort of bone as well?
• 

  steve2

  What about the invitation to become informed . . . is that too close to some sort of bone as well?

  Feedback in life is sometimes hard to take but important. The point I was making is a simple one: It is human to wonder, to doubt and to hypothesize about matters, especially when there is a variety of opinions and the facts seem to be elusive or able to be interpreted more than one way. Human tendencies to wonder and to doubt were stifled by the Watchtower's use of seemingly reasonable phrases such as 'Are we willing to wait on Jehovah to have a matter sorted out rather than speculate about it now?' End of discussion and feelings of shame for having raised the matter in the first place.

  The other side is a preparedness to handle the evidence once - and if - it emerges. How open are we to it? How defensive are we if it contradicts our expectations? As much as I wonder - and doubt - my track record for valuing informed discussion is pretty robust. As I've said, I look forward to seeing how this matter will unfold in the legal system. I have eaten my words before and survived to be better informed.
• 

  sizemik

  the facts seem to be elusive or able to be interpreted more than one way.

  Steve . . . the statement I made which you quote above, was not an attack on you personally. The fact is, that a significant number of posters here have speculated and opined on issues, the facts surrounding which, are already available. Most (if not all) of the appropriate links have been posted here and on previous threads on the subject, through which those facts can be acessed. Yet the mis-informed speculation persists repeatedly. Some very ignorant statements have been made by the ill-informed . . . some of whom should know better.

  It's true we cannot access 100% of the facts . . . but the only remaining facts that remain elusive, or are awaiting interpretation, are those yet to be decided on and ruled accordingly on Sept 13th. Being a complex and as yet untested case, the outcome is far from predictable. In the mean time, it would be a good idea for the speculators (like those who question Mr Unthanks existence), to access those details . . . if they're genuinely interested.
• 

  Curtains

  In the OP Mr Unthank does strongly suggest instrumentality on the part of the justice department in bringing this case to court. In informing myself from the links it is obvious that this is not true.

  Many here myself included have become confused by the way Mr Unthank seems to suggest that there is a close connection between the governmental inquiry and the court hearing. This does not appear to be true either.
• 

  MrMonroe

  I don't see that he is trying to connect the two. He gave evidence at the judicial inquiry that happened to convene near his hometown and has more recently fulfilled his long-held ambition of having criminal charges laid against the organisation.

  You are correct that you are confused and that your assumption is untrue. I don't know who you refer to in saying "many here myself included" are confused. It's a matter of digesting clear information he has provided. Stop jumping to false conclusions.