Understanding the Watch Tower's Claims about Child Abuse

by jamiebowers 7 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  jamiebowers

  The Watch Tower released a statement after the 2007 lawsuit settlement. It's found here:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses%27_handling_of_child_sex_abuse

  It reads:

  In the United States, over 80,000 elders currently serve in over 12,300 congregations ... During the last 100 years, only eleven elders have been sued for child abuse in thirteen lawsuits filed in the United States; In seven of these lawsuits against the elders, accusations against the Watchtower Society itself were dismissed by the courts.

  Let's examine this statement, shall we? Only 11 elders have been sued for child abuse in the last 100 years. First, the elder arrangement hasn't been in place for 100 years. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the elder arrangment wasn't formed until sometime in the 1970's. Second, no one ever claimed that only elders are child molesters. Third, 13 lawsuits had been filed by that time, and accusations against the Watch Tower in seven of the lawsuits were dismissed by the courts. Why is that? Why didn't the Watch Tower explain that in their statement? Could it be because they chose to settle out of court? If the Watch Tower's child molestation policies are so wonderful, why weren't all of the cases against them dismissed?
• 

  Iamallcool

  The elder arrangement started in the year of 1972. FYI
• 

  Iamallcool

  They can say anything they want.
• 

  Jeffro

  This is fairly typical misdirection. Most of the controversy relates to the way JW policies have made reporting of abuse difficult, and where JW clergy (they use this term when it's legally convenient) have known about offenders but taken no reasonable action to protect potential victims in relation to members engaging in events sponsored by the religion, including preaching and other formal and informal congregation activities. This is the reason it's important for them to claim that individual JWs 'aren't representing the Watch Tower Society' when they distribute JW literature after formal 'meetings for field service'.
• 

  Joe Grundy

  Jeffro: Agreed - it is absolute misdirection. I suspect that things may get more difficult for WTBTS in the future.

  As society becomes more litigious and it becomes more profitable to establish 'vicarious liability' so that defendants with assets can be included in lawsuits, WTBTS may have to start distancing themselves from the PBI aka R&F.

  In the UK, at least, there is quite a drive to identify and prosecute 'corporate liabilty' for both criminal and civil offences (cf. Health and Safety and 'corporate manslaughter' offences). The case law (judicial precedents) follows through from those cases.

  I believe that this will cause problems for WTBTS as a 'high control' organisation - whether or not they have the intelligence and knowledge to realise it.

  1. They issue written and verbal instructions as to how members will behave and conduct the 'publishing' work.

  2. The 'work' is directed and specified ('territories', 'car groups' etc.)

  3. 'Workers' are directed and briefed before being sent to do their tasks (FS meetings)

  4. The 'work' undertaken is supervised and reported back on (FS reports)

  5. Sanctions and discipline provisions are prescribed and can be applied in relation to the 'work'

  6. The stated policy is that 'there are no clergy but all are clergy'

  A good investigator/lawyer/prosecutor would not have much problem (IME) establishing a corporate liability for things that went wrong, especially using the Data Protection Act and other provisions to obtain documentation. I have no doubt that wherever possible WTBTS would leave local elders 'hanging out to dry'.

  Finally, I am reminded of the apocryphal court story where having been found guilty by the jury of an offence the defendant made an impassioned plea - 'As God is my judge, I didn't do this!' The judge gave a dramatic pause and said: 'He isn't. I am. Five years.'
• 

  skeeter1

  Look at how the WTS is trying to spin this:

  Kim McCabe, an attorney for the congregation, said he was very disappointed with the verdict and plans appeal it.

  have taken."

  "The Jehovah's Witnesses hate child abuse and believe it's a plague on humanity," McCabe said. "Jonathan Kendrick was not a leader or a pastor, he was just a rank-and-file member. This is a tragic case where a member of a religious group has brought liability on the group for actionshe alone ma y (really, "alone" well, there was a policy in place that HELPED him keep his sins in secret in this closed community. "May" - oh, you are denying he did these things. Guess that is true that he couldn't have done it since there were not TWO witnesses) Conti, now 26, was repeatedly molested by Kendrick from 1995-96, when she was 9 and 10 years old and a member of the North Fremont Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, Simons said. The lawsuit claims Watchtower formed a policy in 1989 that instructed the religion's elders to keep child sex abuse accusations secret. The North Fremont congregation elders followed that policy when Kendrick was convicted in 1994 of misdemeanor child molestation in Alameda County, Simons said. "That abuse case had been reported to the elders," he said. "But they kept it secret and didn't do anything to stop him from molesting more kids." Kendrick, a registered sex offender, was convicted in 2004 of molesting another girl in Contra Costa County, Simons said. "That policy is still in place and it was a secret until, through the power of the court, it was put into evidence," he said. "That policy was what this case was all about." Criminal charges have not been filed against Kendrick in the Conti case, but Simons said authorities are investigating. Sources confirmed the investigation but declined to comment further. McCabe said there is a lot of dispute regarding the plaintiff's accusations. (ah, deny, deny, deny defense. See two witness rule. How dare a sister accuse a fine brother of sexual abuse) "But if she was, in fact, (This makes this media man look like a complete BOOB, again, he is denying it even AFTER the jury hear evidence) abused then we feel horrible, and hope she can make a full recovery and lead a normal life," he said.
• 

  Disillusioned Lost-Lamb

  In the United States, over 80,000 elders currently serve in over 12,300 congregations ... During the last 100 years, only eleven elders have been sued for child abuse in thirteen lawsuits filed in the United States; In seven of these lawsuits against the elders, accusations against the Watchtower Society itself were dismissed by the courts.

  Is it just me or does this seem like a wash-towel magic trick?

  It's like they just tried to pull a dozen roses out their ass; we all look at it and say WTF? However most R&F will just say, "oh how pretty" and take a big whiff.
• 

  hamsterbait

  " ... only 11 elders have been SUED for child abuse.."

  "In 7 of these cases, charges against the Watchtower ITSELF were dismissed." All that means is that the court decided the WTBTS was not responsible for what the elder did. In those cases what was the result in connection with the elder being sued?

  Note the word SUED - this is a civil action where one citizen takes action against another.

  How many Elders have been charged by the police, convicted and imprisoned by the courts?

  WELL?? how many, Witchtower??

  More than 11 in any case. Weasel talk again.

  HB