It's a small world.
Communications are cheap now.
Give him a call.
It's not like he's the invisible man and nobody really knows who he is or how to phone him.
Victoria, Australia: Steven Unthank's Press Release: JW's Hierarchy Formally Charged Today With Child Abuse
by AndersonsInfo 243 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
-
Curtains
mr monroe
regarding the points you mention here
I don't think Steve Unthank has a case because jehovahs witnesses do not engage in specific child related work according to the Act. they don't have separate sunday schools. Wherever children take part in religious activities adults are not excluded - the activitities apply to adults and children. If this goes to court Jehovahs witness lawyers will be able to refute his claims very successfully imo.
Sorry, Curtains, you're wrong. The Sunday school defence is a distraction. As a former book study conductor I was often in a situation in congregations where I was out witnessing with a child who was not my own. Sometimes we would transfer from one part of the territory to another and a child would ride with me in my car on my own. Sometimes we would be working on our own in a block of flats, out of sight of the rest of the group. I don't think those situations are at all rare.
I can also think of many situations at hall cleaning groups, when turnout was pathetic, that an adult was there pretty well on their own with a child, or alternatively there were so few adults around that a paedophile adult JW could easily coax a child to a toilet or back room or whatever.
The issue here is not that all JW adults are prone to sex abuse. It would be a rarity. But the law is the law: for the sake of appearances ALL church ministers, Scout leaders, footy coaches, youth group workers etc take out WWC checks. It helps to ease the mind of parents, but it is also the law. A legal requirement.
If we put aside the issue of fulfilling the aspect of whether or not Jehovahs witnesses do engage in child related activities and assume that they do then one has to address the next issue. The act says that in religious organisations parents are exempt if the child related activites they are usually participating in are also usually participated in by their children. So, for example, were you a parent when you participated in providing lifts for other people's children? If you were a parent then you would have been exempt.
the same question could be asked regarding the specific congregation elders that Mr Unthank is accusing. If they are all parents then they are exempt and if they all exempt then this weakens his case. If even only one of the ones below is not a parent then he has a stronger case.
All charges are in relation to allegations of unlawful activities carried out within the Traralgon Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses by the entire Body of Elders within the Traralgon Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses. (Mr Unthank, p1 of this thread)
I guess the same apples to any aspect of Mr Unthank's charges if they relate to the above elders' failure to ensure that non parent members of the congregation who engaged in child related activites had had their checks completed.
-
james_woods
I still say that we should just wait until Sept. 13th.
I will go on record to say that I am skeptical that anything of value is going to come out of this - but I am not willing to denounce it until the game has been played out.
Probably too much sensationalism and speculation has already occurred about the action - which actually has served nothing.
-
steve2
I still say that we should just wait until Sept. 13th.
I will go on record to say that I am skeptical that anything of value is going to come out of this - but I am not willing to denounce it until the game has been played out.
On reflection, good advice. The court will do what courts usually do: Deliberate - and in court time, that can be a very, very long wait. The Watchtower will be well-lawyered. Whatever people may specualte about whether or not the Watchtower is "worried" about this, their well paid specialist lawyers are very practised at articulating their religious interests. I'm inclined to agree with you, James; indeed, in the overall scheme of things, the JWs could end up with a victory and not give a toss about what critics think.
But, yes, a lot has been said!
-
ziddina
Marking...
And hoping that this will indeed lead to exposure of the Watchtower corporation's heinous record of covering up pedophelia in the organization and thereby engaging in a form of collusion with pedophiles...
Zid
-
Aussie Oz
regardless of all pro and con opinions out there, one things is undeniable.
The action or whatever it may be, is real, has hit the news, has reached the court system and must be played out.
the legal system and courts are full of gobbledegook jargon and loopholes and whatever. Thats why it takes lawyers to understand it, even then, they get it wrong too... how much harder then must it be for us on the outside to understand?
It gets pretty pointless for us to be debating the intracasies of the victorian legal system and whether he can or cant do this or that. So called 'respected' professionals from other countries weighing in with what may well be ill thought out aspersions make it even worse.
Dont wait for some news on September 14. This is going to take months if not years to play out. I wouldn't expect the WT to come to much grief over this either. Quietly as possible they will eventually comply with the WWC i am sure. And if so, that in itself will be a victory.
Another certainty... one side or the other of this online debate is going to have egg on their faces, and i hope whatever side it is has the graciousness to admit it!
oz
-
Mad Sweeney
one things is undeniable.
The action or whatever it may be, is real, has hit the news, has reached the court system and must be played out.
And yet you will still have people come into this thread and deny the undeniable, claim they are confused and don't know what's going on, and then proceed to type a dogmatically worded essay explaining to everyone else exactly what's going on. The intellectual laziness and/or dishonesty seen in this thread has been striking and disappointing.
As to what exactly is going to come of all this, does anyone really believe Mr. Unthank expects the GB members to be rounded up and imprisoned? He's not a stupid man. You don't go up against the Borg and expect to bring it down with one court case. Best case scenario, in my opinion, would be for them to have to pay some sort of fine, require all elders and MS to submit to the background checks, and get enough publicity to prompt similar laws to be passed in other jurisdictions and to inform the public about the Borg pedophile coverups. The bonus Mr.Unthank seems to also be shooting for is to get another set of court transcripts (much like the ones with Franz, Moyle, etc.) where Borg leadership admits things under oath that we can use against them. That's why he's charging the FDS in addition to the GB and the corporations. Those are my opinions.
-
steve2
The intellectual laziness and/or dishonesty seen in this thread has been striking and disappointing.
They're strong words to describe the views of people you disagree with. I may share your views of a possible outcome of the court proceedings and, like you, I may also disagree with the 'essayed' views of some others. However, I don't improve the standing of my views by criticising the character of those I disagee with (such as by accusing them of intellectual laziness and/or dishonesty). Surely it is enough to focus criticism on the views in and of themselves without resorting to character attacks? Shades of the watchtower's tendency to not respond to other people's views but to attack the other people's characters instead?
-
sizemik
The intellectual laziness and/or dishonesty seen in this thread has been striking and disappointing. . . . Mad Sweeny
As an opinion I have to agree with it . . .
Some posters have expressed views which fly in the face of the easily accessible facts known thus far . . . then they have been provided repeatedly with links etc in order to be able to access those facts for themselves. Some have responded by repeating the same un-informed views.
It's patently obvious . . . if they have continued to remain ignorant in spite of the above . . . . they are intellectually lazy
If they have accessed the facts yet continue to question them arbitrarily by feigning ignorance . . . they are being dishonest.
The criticism is directed at the posts that appear here . . . if it extends to define their character as well . . . they have the choice to get off their ass and do something about it . . . or not.
-
steve2
The criticism is directed at the posts that appear here . . . if it extends to define their character as well . . . they have the choice to get off their ass and do something about it . . . or not.
I have to acknowledge that some judgemental thoughts passed through my own mind when I read on the current thread Gary Boting's breezily dismissive opinion about Mr Unthank's non-existence . It was a silly thing for him to have said, or at best, it did not convincingly show that any constructive thought had been given to the matter. If it is the Gary Boting (author of the Orwellian World of Jehovah's Witnesses), I'm even more surprised. We all harbour our own emotion-based thoughts about all sorts of things, but to rush some of them into the printed word does invite others to think the words sum up our character. So, yes, sizemilk, I know what you mean!