“We will decide who is a predator!” – New Watchtower Instructions to Elders on Child Abuse

by Jaime l de Aragon 104 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  Finkelstein

  You'll notice in the letter that the WTS is once again down playing the motivating concept of taking the intuitive of calling

  the police upon hearing of a situation of pedophilia, they make the pronouncement that elders are to contact the legal

  department of their local governing branch, first and foremost and to only call the police when its legally enforced in the

  area of the supposed attack. Why ? Because the WTS think they're gods' chosen organization and have power over all of his earthly

  belongings, there's always a persistence that any outside government institutions are worthlessly evil and are being guided by

  Satan's works. But when one reflects upon what institutions harbors pedophiles from the grasp of the proper legal authorities ?

  one of course is religious institutions.
• 

  bafh

  I'm amazed that there is no mention of elders being mandatory reporters. If they want to exercise the "clergy" privileged communication, they need to consider themselves clergy and in most states clergy are mandatory reporters. UGH.
• 

  Chariklo

  Exactly, bafh. I believe that (here anyway) even doctors have to divulge any child abuse.

  I am certain that the WT are infringing British law in this policy.
• 

  AndersonsInfo

  The following is what I wrote in my new article, "Megan and Candace - Casualties of Known Molesters" (Abridged article at jwsurvey.org. Longer article will be posted on the Freeminds.org website in a few days.)

  http://jwsurvey.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Megan-and-Candace-Casualties-of-Known-Molesters.pdf

  "In 1997, the Watchtower developed what I call a “known molester policy.” Some thought it was Watchtower’s child sexual abuse policy, but it didn’t protect kids, just the opposite, in that, before appointment, if a remorseful, repentant man wasn’t perceived (or known) by the community and the congregation to be a “former” child molester, he could be considered for a position of trust." I was actually told in defense of the Watchtower that this business about "known" molester was the WT's child abuse policy and an excellent one it was too! But upon evaluation, as many posters have presented on this thread, that January 1, 1997 Watchtower article statement about "known" molesters had in it as many holes (legal loopholes) as Swiss cheese. As far as I was concerned, WT's Legal Department had its footprints all over it. It's just great that as per the October 1, 2012 BOE letter, now WT headquarters will determine who the "known" molesters are in congregations and the elders are taken off the hook. You know it when the elders read this letter, they heaved a collective sign of relief because the WT took the decision-making out of their hands and they can sleep better at night knowing that the liability buck stops at WT headquarters and not with them.
• 

  breakfast of champions

  Just 'cause you can't be too careful, has anyone double checked this letter to make sure it's legit? While the writing style and content has WTBTS written all over it, it almost seems too good to be true. . .
• 

  King Solomon

  Anderson info said:

  As far as I was concerned, WT's Legal Department had its footprints all over it. It's just great that as per the October 1, 2012 BOE letter, now WT headquarters will determine who the "known" molesters are in congregations and the elders are taken off the hook. You know it when the elders read this letter, they heaved a collective sign of relief because the WT took the decision-making out of their hands and they can sleep better at night knowing that the liability buck stops at WT headquarters and not with them.

  Yup, there's a HUGE assumption of liability for WTBTS vs elders, as now they're involved in EVERY case as a potential defendent (with deep pockets). I'd have thought they were trying to let the individual elders hang out to dry, to protect the Mother Ship? Hmmm...

  But off the top of my head, I'd think one possible explanation to implement the "call us for any pedophile issues" policy might be that the Legal Dept is going to start accumulating a database of known pedophiles, and they don't want to release the entire list of names to the individual KHs for privacy concerns (and risk getting sued for defamation of character, as wrongly labelling someone as a child predator might do!), where leaks will likely occur (such as this letter itself was leaked within days). Here's where my ignorance of Bethel practices shows: do we know for a fact that they HAD been accumulating such a list in Brooklyn in the past?

  It would be interesting development, if not, as the hacker group Anonymous was trying to hack WTBTS servers to get a list of pedophiles, when that list may not have even existed before the Condi verdict....
• 

  free @ last

  Does Atlantis no longer post here? I don't remember seeing any post of a 10/1/12 BOE either.
• 

  Finkelstein

  The WTS and their legal department are bunch of stupid twits for all they had to do to remove themselves from any legal

  wrangling is simple take every possible situation of pedophilia to the proper legal authorities as the general public would

  expect them to do.

  Now they are being publicly identified as just another religious organization that has being keeping quiet about pedophilia

  within their organization similar to the Catholics etc. .... Dumb and a bit dumber
• 

  King Solomon

  Uh, HERE'S an eyebrow raiser, in their scriptural definition of pedophiles:

  What is child molestation from a congregational standpoint? Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary defines “pedophilia” as “sexual perversion in which children are the preferred sexual object.” (See “Questions From Readers” in The Watchtower of February 1, 1997, page 29.) Deuteronomy 23:17, 18 condemns such practices as “detestable.” (See the footnotes to verses 17 and 18 in the Reference Bible. Also, see the footnote on page 10 of the October 8, 1993, issue of Awake!) In harmony with these references, we are herein discussing sexual perversion in which children are the object of sexual abuse, including fondling, by an adult.

  We are not discussing a situation wherein a minor who is a willing participant and who is approaching adulthood has sexual relations with an adult who is a few years older than the minor nor, generally speaking, are we discussing situations in which only minors are involved. Rather, we are referring to situations in which it is established that an adult brother or sister has been guilty of sexually abusing a young childor has been sexually involved with a minor who is approaching adulthood and who was not a willing participant.

  And with that statement, the WTBTS has seemingly just eliminated the broad category of not just statutory rape (where the minor MAY have given their consent, but cannot, since they're below the age of being able to give consent), but even rape of a minor!

  Are elders considered mandatory reporters of rape cases, or are they free to sweep THAT under the rug, too?

  Elders are not experts on legal matters, and without Divine Direction to guide their paths, fools will rush in where angels fear to tread.

  It sure seems the safest approach would be have all suspected cases reported to Police, let them investigate, and THEN let the religious boys play their power trip games. They'll not do that, though, to protect their public image (as what: door-to-door annoyers?).

  EDIT: BTW, to fix a mistake I made in the above statement (saying ALL cases of child abuse must be reported):

  The policy is NOT to contact Bethel with all cases of child abuse, but only in the case of "known predators".

  13. If the individual does not follow the above direction from the elders, or if the elders believe he may be a “predator,” the elders should immediately call the Service Department for assistance. A “predator” is one who clearly lacks self-control and by his actions provides reason to believe he will continue to prey on children. Not every individual who has sexually abused a child in the past is considered a “predator.” The branch office, not the local body of elders, determines whether an individual who has sexually abused children in the past will be considered a “predator.” If the branch office determines that an individual will be considered a “predator,” parents with minor children will need to be warned of the danger that exists so that they can protect their children.
• 

  Violia

  I see this also as placing the blame on the parents. Of course the parents do have responsibility to care for their children but most of us have felt we could trust our children in FS with a jws we knew. Part of the letter looks to me as a way to assign blame to the parents legally, maybe even involving CPS. I can see a parent possibly being afraid to call the police if they knew the elders were going to say they were neglectful of their child. and you know they will say that, they will just lie.