Finally an Article About Unthank!

by jamiebowers 62 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • jamiebowers
    jamiebowers

    http://www.latrobevalleyexpress.com.au/news/local/news/general/private-prosecution-gets-thrown-out-of-court/2468225.aspx?storypage=2Private prosecution gets thrown out of court
    BY LOUIS NELSON
    27 Feb, 2012 01:00 AM

    A Toongabbie man's personal quest to hold a religion "to account" over its past "refusal" to comply with child protection legislation has been thrown out of court.

    Carpenter Steven Unthank, a former Jehovah's Witness member, took his former religion to the Latrobe Valley Magistrates' Court in a private prosecution for failing to ensure its ministers adopted Working with Children Checks, as required by State Government legislation.

    The prosecution, comprising a total of 35 charges against five organisations which make up the Jehovah's Witnesses structure, alleged religion elders had engaged "in child-related work at the Traralgon Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses ... knowing that (they did) not have a current 'Assessment Notice' as required under the working with Children Act 2005."

    Mr Unthank said he hoped the court case, if successful, would set a precedent for all religions, nation-wide, who "refused to take leadership and the law seriously".

    However the charges were officially withdrawn by the director of the Office of Public Prosecutions on Tuesday, as they were "not seen to be in the public interest".

    The court, before Magistrate Daniel Muling, heard the Department of Public Prosecutions had applied to take over the conduct of proceedings to withdraw all charges.

    Mr Unthank said he, and other members of the Traralgon congregation who wished to remain anonymous, were "disappointed" with the decision, and said it "sent a very clear message" to religions who "thought they were above the law".

    The WWC was introduced by State Government in 2005 to ensure volunteers and employees, including ministers of religion, working with children went through background checks.

    However, the Jehovah's Witness' corporate body, the Watchtower and Bible Tract Society, informed Victorian congregations their elders required the WWC in November last year.

    Jehovah's Witness Traralgon Chaplain Albert Helbling said due to the "family orientated" nature of the religion, with Bible study classes "always conducted in the presence of family members", its six elders - some of which he said already held a WWC - had not seen the need for the background checks.

    "Families are responsible for their children, they stick together and work together; that's how we operate;" Mr Helbling said.

    "If a parent is not with the children, it's because the parent has agreed that the child goes alone with another family.

    "As far as we're concerned, we've never had a problem with (not having the WWC); from our stand, is all we can see (Mr Unthank) is trying to cause ill feelings and problems."

    Conjecture remains over whether Jehovah's Witness members, involved in door-to-door preaching methods in the company of children, referred to as 'publishers', were required to undergo the background checks.

    In an audio recording of a letter from the Watchtower Society, read to a local congregation in late 2011 and heard by The Express, it was stated door-to-door activities were part of a member's "personal ministry", and 'publishers' were not representatives or volunteers of the Watchtower Society.

    However the letter reading went on to state, "nevertheless, an individual may volunteer to apply (for WWC)", which Mr Unthank said was the religion absolving itself of responsibility, and putting the onus on individuals.

    Watchtower Society senior elder Alan Wood, confirmed a letter had been sent out to Victorian congregations "about November" last year, informing elders of their requirement to apply for WWC.

    This came after a Watchtower Society spokesperson told the Herald Sun in July last year it did not believe its ministers were required to obtain background checks "because they did not typically work unsupervised with children".

    While Mr Wood said that "unclarity" initially surrounded the legislation and WWC criteria, he confirmed the Watchtower Society had been in discussions with the Department of Public Prosecutions, but would not comment on whether it was ordered to conform with the legislation, or had voluntarily accepted it.

    Bold type is mine.

    If I understand correctly, the case was trown out, because the Watchtower instructed the elders to comply with the law, but the Watchtower won't admit whether it was ordered to do so or if it volunteered to do so.

    Theses bastards really leave everyone out to dry, don't they?

    "Families are responsible for their children, they stick together and work together; that's how we operate;" Mr Helbling said.
    "If a parent is not with the children, it's because the parent has agreed that the child goes alone with another family.

    But in reality the instruction is run to the elders for advice on just about every aspect of daily life.

    In an audio recording of a letter from the Watchtower Society, read to a local congregation in late 2011 and heard by The Express, it was stated door-to-door activities were part of a member's "personal ministry", and 'publishers' were not representatives or volunteers of the Watchtower Society.

    Yes, spend your time and resources to publish and peddle Watchtower material, but by GAWD, you're not a representative of the organization.

  • wha happened?
    wha happened?

    Did every JW miss that underlying message? No one outside the GB means a damn thing to that organization. You are on your own!

  • JW GoneBad
    JW GoneBad

    What....... S O Bs!

    Yes, spend your time and resources to publish and peddle Watchtower material, but by GAWD, you're not a representative of the organization.
  • wha happened?
    wha happened?

    yea personal ministry, thats why they total the hours and publish the report as an organization

  • smiddy
    smiddy

    Doesn`t this quotation need to get widespread coverage ? "door to door activities were part of a members personal ministry and publishers were not representatives or volunteers of the watchtower society " ??? WTF ? Maybe this very quotation needs a thread of it`s own.....Who the hell and what the hell were we representing when we spent years volunteering and representing the WTB&TS ?? Every rank and file member should be offended and insulted by this statement.

    smiddy

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    They dropped the prosecution b/c it was not "in the public interest." I wish this journalist had probed a tad more. What were the reasons? Prosecutors have broad discretion. I posted several times that Unthank's victory, the WTBTS order to comply with the law, made the case moot. Since they are complying, which is not clear to me from the article, there is no remedy a court could provide.

    If the WT is in compliance, Unthank's efforts being dropped by the prosecutors, is no defeat. It is a great victory.

    I love how we are not representatives of the Watchtower. My mom who had to practice neutrality statements for the SS in America (my gm was convinced they would win. My mom said U-Boats were in NY Harbor) and was expelled from school at fourteen because of flag salute would have loved to know it. What were those JW identity cards? It is such an organization, so regimented. Roman Catholics have far more freedom.

    Did I miss where it says that the Society actually is in compliance. One would think these were Quaker meetings. It makes the Witnesses sound like a local, family vague worship body. Why the uniformity of literature? I do agree that individual JWs cannot bind the Society legally. And I don't know who could. It also would have nice if the journalist researched whether mainstream religions were in compliance.

    The size of their legal dept. might rival large Wall St. global law firms with thousands of lawyers. I see legal pawprints everyplace.

  • jwfacts
    jwfacts

    That is a good article, pity it is only the Latrobe Valley Express and not global as it deserves to be.

    "Families are responsible for their children, they stick together and work together; that's how we operate;" Mr Helbling said.

    "If a parent is not with the children, it's because the parent has agreed that the child goes alone with another family.

    "As far as we're concerned, we've never had a problem with (not having the WWC); from our stand, is all we can see (Mr Unthank) is trying to cause ill feelings and problems."

    That sounds so creepy, something that you would expect from some small family cult.

  • MeanMrMustard
    MeanMrMustard

    There is one comment left to the article that states this (sounds like a pretty good summary to me):

    Although the Prosecutor did say that proceeding is 'not in the public interest', this should not be misconstrued to mean that protecting children isn't. He was referring to the fact the case was unwinnable, given the Watchtower had in fact complied by that time. He meant that funds spent prosecuting the Watchtower would be wasted.

    I'd point out that Mr. Unthank's efforts were instrumental in forcing the Watchtower Society to change course. Unable to justify their position any longer, they caved because Mr. Unthank held their feet to the fire.

    The WT was forced into changing its course, and elders are now required to get these checks.

    MeanMrMustard

  • sizemik
    sizemik
    He was referring to the fact the case was unwinnable, given the Watchtower had in fact complied by that time. He meant that funds spent prosecuting the Watchtower would be wasted.

    This is what it came down to and I think the judiciary is justified, unfortunately. These were criminal charges which meant they must be brought against individuals . . . not an incorporated society. Proving beyond doubt, that individuals knowingly and willingly refused to comply when they knew they should, would be stretching a very long bow . . . and a very expensive one, with little chance of winning.

    In hindsight, it is easy to see that Steven Unthank achieved all that was possible. While the reporting of a dismissed case carries little interest . . . I wouldn't rule out some magazine-style Media treatment of it in the weeks to come.

  • Azazel
    Azazel

    Well if the end result is a letter to BOE to keep on top of known pedos and keep them away from the children then Stevens efforts will have paid off. It was more about protection of children than punishing a corporation that we all know is morally corrupted.

    I will wager some of the group who slagged of Stevens character will find fault with the newspapers website that those two photos were "obviously" photoshopped . The website is actually hosted in New Caledonia. Its not a real website because it ends in .au

    Lets see if a cyber messiah and a shepherd of the flock respond with abuse.

    To Steven well done mate it was a result of sorts.

    Az

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit