I've never spoken on this subject at all, not that anyone was waiting for me to, but I thought I'd finally chime in.
First, the original post is in bad form. If you're trying to get anyone to actually listen, you might want to change your tactics. Then again, it is reminiscent of the ego driven organization that I was involved in for so long, devoid of empathy and usually either on the attack or playing the victim.
However, that doesn't mean that I don't agree with some of nitty's points. I actually was in a congregation where a convicted molester started studying and coming to meetings. He was related to another family in the congregation. The elders did a good job of letting everyone with children know the concern and he was watched. That's really about all they can do. If he went on to molest someone with everyone aware and on guard, that's not the organization's fault.
I also grew up with a friend in my congregation who I later found out was molested. His parents, both of them as far as I'm aware, perpetrated it and forced the kids to do things to one another. Just absolutely horrible stuff. Was that the organization's fault in some way? Nope.
People do all kinds of messed up things. In my opinion, many here hate the organization and want to see them taken down by any means possible. I've seen posts here lately that make it seem like the entire congregation is nothing but evil people looking to prey upon children. Saying that nobody should answer their door for JW's if they have kids. That kind of hysterical speech just casts doubts when someone really was hurt because it becomes so overblown. People always want to sue and go after the deep pockets feeling that someone should have to pay, particularly in such emotional events as the devastating effects of molestation on kids and their families. I understand why, but you don't necessarily get to sue people that couldn't have prevented something just because they have money and you got hurt. Well, you do get to sue, but not necessarily win. Going around labeling people based on one accusation is a great way to get sued yourself, and in one's honest hope to protect children they may be hurting other people unnecessarily. It is a slippery slope, and I don't believe that there is any way to prevent such things. That doesn't mean that the organization shouldn't try, but they can only do so much.
In the end, there isn't a really great way to handle this. You can't just go around labeling people with such a horrendous tag as a sexual predator without some sort of proof, physical or someone corroborating something. Nobody can really know what goes on behind closed doors. Only the people living there know, and we don't live in a world where we can police everything. With that said, the police do exist, and I'm in favor of every case being sent to them as the authorities. Barring another adult in the family going to them, if elders know about something I think that they should have to report it and let the authorities do a professional investigation, not one performed by untrained general laborers.
For years it seemed that everyone turned a blind eye to what was going on with sexual predators. People didn't seem to understand the depths of the compulsion to do what they do, and often if a person "found God" in some way and appeared to be a fine, upstanding citizen, they were cleared of suspicion. I would be concerned that in the organization this would still be true on some level. People in the organization seem to trust one another implicitly, and often to a fault. They see the organization as a romanticized group of people that are like a fantasy, all good upstanding people with hearts of gold that carry nothing but Jehovah's laws and principles on their hearts. There is an unrealistic view of one another, and of those taking the lead, that does scare me for kids. In the instance that I mentioned above where the elders warned our congregation of the new person that was attending, I shuddered as I watched my own parents let my little sister talk to him. In my opinion, he should have known better and kept great distance, especially as he was new. But like I said before, he was related to others in the congregation, and we know that we have to keep up appearances and look a certain way, even if it means possibly exposing a little girl to someone that could be very bad for her.