What is the official Watchtower policy? How does it compare with state child abuse laws? Is the Watchtower more concerned with their image to the "world" than they are to the safety of children within their religion?
How are child abuse laws different from Watchtower corporate policy?
by Resistance is Futile 14 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
-
Lurker555
They have a 2 or 3 witnesses policy both in the OT and NT.
However, they don't follow the biblical precedent of a public trial.
They have 3 man secret tribunal star chamber hearings. The elders
are not to be questioned because they are appointed by God and we
can 100% trust them :( .
If it was handled similar to when 2 women brought about a dispute before
King Solomon in a public setting people would know about the accusation regardless
of the 2/3 witness rule. However, Eccliastical Law says you can't have a public hearing
to protect the public image of those involved. Probably brought about by church leaders
a long time ago so they could have their inquisition and kill all heretics in private, not to mention
the Satanic religious pharisees set this standard in the trial of Jesus.
-
Resistance is Futile
After doing some research it looks like in California elders aren't required by law to report child abuse that they learn of. These exemptions to the reporting of child abuse need to be repealed. I wonder what the process is to get initiatives on the voting ballot. If given the option I strongly believe that a majority of voters would repeal these exemptions.
Cal. Penal Code § 11166(c)(1)-(2) (West, WESTLAW through Ch. 10 of 2003-2004 Reg. Sess. & 1st Ex. Sess.)
A clergy member who acquires knowledge or reasonable suspicion of child abuse during a penitential
communication is not subject to the requirement to make a report. For the purposes of this subdivision,
‘penitential communication' means a communication, intended to be in confidence, including, but not limited to,
a sacramental confession, made to a clergy member who, in the course of the discipline or practice of his or her
church, denomination, or organization, is authorized or accustomed to hear those communications, and under the
discipline, tenets, customs, or practices of his or her church, denomination, or organization, has a duty to keep those
communications secret.
Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to modify or limit a clergy member's duty to report known or
suspected child abuse when a clergy member is acting in some other capacity that would otherwise make the clergy
member a mandated reporter. -
Lurker555
Just remember it that does not apply to JW's because they report everything to "Mother".
And ometimes they're 2 elders at a confession.
-
cedars
Resistance in Futile - I hopefully answer your question in my article:
http://jwsurvey.org/general-information/the-watchtower-punished-society-loses-legal-battle-over-child-abuse-case
Hope it clarifies things!
Cedars
-
Band on the Run
I thought CA would be among the first states to carve out an exemption for child abuse. It is usually the leaderf in American law. I am concerned about the trial judges ruling on priest/pentinent privilege. My concern is whether there is a problem with extending it to only one person when the religion teaches multiple people will be present. It becomes confusing to me, also, because of the word "sacramental." Has anyone read the papers thorougly and can point to me precisely where to read?
-
DesirousOfChange
After doing some research it looks like in California elders aren't required by law to report child abuse that they learn of.
If that was the case at the time of the molestation, and esp if it is still the current law, then I am with BAND-OTR on this: I would not be at all surprised to see a panel of appeal judges overturn the judgement against the Cong and WTS based on the responsilbilty of the clergy/church to maintain the confidentiality of the confessing member. I would see the report to "Mother" as (1) just an extension of the "priest/clergyman", and (2) I could see it actually being used to make the case that the abuser could never be allowed to be admitted to the "clergy" position again in the future -- quite different from allowing them to continue to be in the "church/cong".
JMHO
Doc
-
wha happened?
The WT won't change, but enforcement likely will. This occured under the radar as the persons left with the responsibility of reporting these crimes apparently aren't interesed in protecting children. So some change in enforcement will hold their feet to the fire.
-
mind blown
In California and other states it is the law to report sexual abuse or abuse of any kind of children.
http://file.lacounty.gov/lasd/cms1_145191.pdf
On line 4( a ) they are called "Mandated Reporters in Puplic Positions" under "Clergy Members" and "Any Custodian of Records of a Clery Member".
I can't wrap my head around the WTS reasoning for their rules for handling such matters. The three witness rule would apply to adults, doesn't it? Wasn't it grownups/adults who were waging law suits with one another? Not children who are being rapped by adults. So how can they reason this?
They claim to be caretakers of Jah's people and children. Even if the didn't have to officially report crimes due to clergy privledge, just to make sure the congregations were not harmed/cleaned, why not report an abuse to police to let the proper authroities investiage. You can't be sued if a child wages an accusation, investigate and keep a police investigation private in the congregation.
It seems they can side step or get around red tape to do their preaching work, but have not real caring or justice for humans who are supposed to be Jah's people.
It feels as the GB has taken their position as too loftly for their own good, putting their rules above what's really right not to harm people or stain Gods name.
-
mind blown
it will not be overturned, pedo signed a confession in order to avoid paying the fine. He made a deal, also the Elder rule book was also sumitted as evidence. Again Calfornia law does not exempt clergy in confession if it pertains to the sexual abuse of a child.