So lets get this down on record Nitty Gritty, your in supportive agreement to the way the WTS has been handling acts of pedophilia within their organization ?
Candace Conti Settles
by Nitty-Gritty 204 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
-
Incognito
@Nitty-Gritty
It takes both sides to agree to any settlement. If a SC appeal was so sure to go in the Watchtower's favor, then why would WT agree to a settlement? Since the original decision was in Candace's favor, it was likely WT that initiated a settlement offer.
While you infer some sinister reason as to why Candace didn't appeal, I understand that the WT was only successful in overturning the punitive portion of the award. If Candace had appealed the unfavorable appeal decision, that would seem to better support your claim that she was only in it for the money. Since she didn't appeal, it appears you have little to brag about.
There are also adulterers, fornicators, liars and the like in Congregations. But guess what, no one can control what you do, it is up to individuals to apply Bible principles and not do these things. Some lead a double life for a while, before they are found out, but once they are found out to be practicing these things they are disfellowshipped and no longer JWs.
A sin committed is not the issue. In the matter of sexual abuse which is a crime, at issue is what happens after it becomes known by Elders as well as the lack of protection demonstrated for those already abused and other members of the congregation.
Without being either witnessed by two parties or a full confession by the accused, there is nothing that will be done to further protect others from the abuser, least of which reporting a crime to proper authorities for them to investigate. The abused is often told to keep quiet, thereby keeping the matter secret.
While Kendrick already had a history of abusing other children, nothing was demonstrated as to have occurred, to protect Candace and others from a known offender who was in good standing within that congregation.
While you state:
who was not in it for the money but to change policies, settled without changing anything?
Candace cannot change WT's policies - that is WT's responsibility to do. Candace could only expose WT's policies as defective and inappropriate, hoping the public exposure would motivate WT to initiate policy changes. While Candace did what she could, so far WT has been uncooperative.
While appropriate policy changes would serve to to help protect those needing protection, the question arises as to why WT opposes making changes?
A further question is; why do you continue to defend an organization which clearly shows it has no interest in protecting or at least assisting in the protection of the most vulnerable within the congregation?
-
Nitty-Gritty
@Iincognito A further question is; why do you continue to defend an organization which clearly shows it has no interest in protecting or at least assisting in the protection of the most vulnerable within the congregation?
My question is, how exactly has the organization clearly shown no interest in protecting or assisting in the protection of children?
-
Nitty-Gritty
@FinkelsteinSo lets get this down on record Nitty Gritty, your in supportive agreement to the way the WTS has been handling acts of pedophilia within their organization ?
No, I cannot say that. Mistakes have been made. And that not always being the fault of the WT as pedophiles can be very insidious. I used to think that a known pedophile (one who without a shadow of a doubt has been convicted and is considered a predator) should be announced from the platform for all to know. However, even such a vile person can change and publicly announcing him in this way would make anyone accepting a change in him very difficult. Basically this person would become an outcast with no hope. This is not Christian. Plus, if he did change, and moved to another congregation, would it be expected to announce him as a former pedophile? Would that be reasonable and a Christian thing to do?
A pedophile who is convicted and a recognized predator is disfellowshipped, so announcing him as a pedophile is not needed as all in the congregation will stop associating with him. However, he does have hope, he can change if he wants and be accepted back. But can WT be blamed if he reverts back to his perversities and molests again? Hardly fair to say that.
However, if there is a known predator in the congregation the parents of all minor children are discreetly informed of who he/she is. That’s better than announcing it from the platform.
As for the 2 witness rule, obviously and in most cases a molester has no witnesses. But if he denies it, what can the WT do? The parents can go to the police, the police can investigate, but most of the time they come to the same conclusion as the WT, that in this case they can’t really do anything either!
-
sir82
However, if there is a known predator in the congregation the parents of all minor children are discreetly informed of who he/she is.
You hope.
IF the elders do what they are supposed to do.
They don't have a sterling track record.
the police can investigate, but most of the time they come to the same conclusion as the WT, that in this case they can’t really do anything either!
What statistics are you basing that on?
Are you saying that police also rely on a "2 witness rule", instead of, oh, say, rape kits, forensic evidence, criminal records, etc.?
-
LisaRose
My question is, how exactly has the organization clearly shown no interest in protecting or assisting in the protection of children?
Let me count the ways.
Two witness rule.Appointing elders when there have been multiple accusations of child abuse in the past.
Pressuring victims not to go to the authorities and "bring reproach" on Jehovah's name.
Blaming the victim. They actually have a form that asks what the CHILD did to cause the ADULT to molest them. You know, because five year olds are such hussies.
Disfellowshiping people because they insist on telling.
Pretending such a thing is almost unheard of while secretly maintaining a list of 56,000 names of accessed molesters.
Standing by while an admitted child molester marries a woman with children and threatening the victim's mother for being concerned and warning the woman he married. (Personal kowledge of this one).
Forcing the victim to recount the molestation in front of the perpetrator, thus victimizing them again.
Treating child abuse as any other sin, as if it's no worse than two teens having sex out of wedlock. Once a pedophile is reproved or reinstated they're considered forgiven, free to molest again with no one the wiser.
Settling out of court and demanding non disclosure agreement so the Watchtower can continue to pretend they don't have a problem.
Disfellowshiping young girls for fornication because they didn't fight off their adult abuser.
I count eleven ways
-
Nitty-Gritty
sir82
Are you saying that police also rely on a "2 witness rule", instead of, oh, say, rape kits, forensic evidence, criminal records, etc.?
Yes they are, since those things are considered "witnesses" as in they are additional proof (they don't have to be people). So if the rape kit, forensic evidence, criminal record shows up nothing, guess what, the police can't do a jot!
-
sir82
You're being disingenuous again . Doesn't it get tiring?
You well know that the JW "2 witness rule" refers to eyewitnesses.
Please cite your references to your assertion that "most of the time" police are unable to prosecute child rapists in instances where there are not 2 eyewitnesses.
-
Nitty-Gritty
@Lisarose
Standing by while an admitted child molester marries a woman with children and threatening the victim's mother for being concerned and warning the woman he married. (Personal kowledge of this on).
So, this is the only one you have personal knowledge of.
Apart from the two witness rule, How can you be so sure about the others?????
You just don't know. Just like I don't know what Candace's motives were and why she agreed to a settlement, as sir82 would like to remind me. -
DesirousOfChange
I'd wait and see for changes. I doubt you'll see them broadcast in the WT - they're more likely to be tucked away in letters to elders.
Changes on matters this "delicate" will likely be dispersed only verbally to all Elders at their Business Meeting at the Circuit Assembly where they personally write the info in their "Shepherd the Flock" book. No paper trails that way.
Doc