JW News Article - "Satan's Witness"

by UnDisfellowshipped 12 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  UnDisfellowshipped

  I have Edited this to correct some of the errors and wrong info.

  While checking out http://Watchtower.Observer.org I found a very old News Story about a JW Pedophile from 1977!

  Here is info about that Article:

  Child Molester in U.K. behind Bars, Still a JW

  Western Daily Press (West England) Newspaper

  March 25th 1977

  "Satan's Witness"

  Here is the Link to the Web Page on Watchtower Observer where you can see a Scan of the Actual 1977 News Story: http://watchtower.observer.org/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date=20020510&Category=JWANDCHILDREN2&ArtNo=205100005&Ref=AR

  Here is some information about the 1977 News Article (this info is from Watchtower Observer):

  (THIS IS NOT THE ACTUAL ARTICLE):

  Jehovah's Witness preacher and ministerial servant Dennis Atwell [58] was convicted of child abuse at Bristol Grown Court on 21st. March 1997, Father of six, Atwell, married to wife Betty for 37 years, was a respected member of the congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses in Burnham-on-Sea, West Somerset. He admitted to 12 counts of indecent assault, indecency with a child, buggery and incest. The selected representative incidents cited took place between 1968 and 1982.

  Ian Pringle, prosecuting, told the court: "This indictment represents a long history of sexual abuse against children." David Osbourne, defending, said "He pleaded guilty at the first opportunity and made it clear he would confess to everything the victims alleged - this has spared them the ordeal of reliving a very traumatic experience." (Following interviews with the police and counselling by social workers the three Atwell children, Kathy, Annette and William - all now adults with children of their own - had made written statements which were presented to the court in the form of Affidavits.)

  Awaiting trial, Atwell was secretly relocated by the Watchtower leadership to the nearby town of Weston-Super-Mare where he attended meetings at a Kingdom Hall and mingled freely with other unsuspecting sect members including children. He was also `assigned territory` where he could continue his 'full time ministry', termed 'pioneering', selling Watchtower literature door to door - usually alone. He was never 'disfellowshipped' or excommunicated.

  The Atwell family members who have found the courage to speak out against their wicked father also feel that they have been emotionally abused by the Watchtower Society. They want to expose it for what it is. They all agree to the widest coverage of their plight and want the world to know their story. Watchtower officials think differently of course, and would like the whole thing to go away. They reason that the less people know the better.
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Does anyone have a copy of the 1977 Article, or does anyone know where to get a copy of the 1977 Article?

  Any comments?

  Edited by - UnDisfellowshipped on 13 November 2002 0:51:22

  Edited by - UnDisfellowshipped on 13 November 2002 1:36:36
• 

  hurt

  Reply to the above from a JW drone:

  "Why shouldn't he remain a Witness? The congegational arrangement for dealing with molesters is superior to the government procedures, and the elders have not only the interest of the abused children bat heart, but also the unity of the family, the peace of the congregation, and the non-defamation of Jehovah's name. Perhaps there were no two witnesses to any one of the events. The evidence may not even have been clear, the alledged abuse happened many years ago; may be they're just repressed memories. We must stick to what the bible says about witnesses, who must be credible; we cannot afford to allow the innocent to suffer to satisfy the whims of a few who simply want to see the accused in jail. In due course, the truth will be known."

  SIGH. What else isn't the WTS guilty of?
• 

  plmkrzy

  buggery

  What does that mean? I'm not up on all the diferent defs. I thought it mean being lazy?
• 

  UnDisfellowshipped

  plmkrzy,

  Good Question!

  I checked Webster's Dictionary, and the Definition of Buggery is SODOMY.

  Here's the Definition of SODOMY:

  Etymology: Middle English, from Old French sodomie, from Late Latin Sodoma Sodom; from the homosexual proclivities of the men of the city in Genesis 19:1-11

  Date: 13th century

  1: copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal
  2: noncoital and especially anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex
• 

  UnDisfellowshipped

  Also, check out the DATE on that Article above.

  Man, their Cover-Up has been going on for a LONG LONG TIME.

  Hmmmm, who were all the Governing Body Members back then?

  Edited by - UnDisfellowshipped on 12 November 2002 6:55:39
• 

  ignored_one

  Shouldn't that be 1997?

  Ignored One.
• 

  NeonMadman

  The JW respondent says:

  Perhaps there were no two witnesses to any one of the events. The evidence may not even have been clear, the alledged abuse happened many years ago; may be they're just repressed memories. We must stick to what the bible says about witnesses, who must be credible; we cannot afford to allow the innocent to suffer to satisfy the whims of a few who simply want to see the accused in jail. In due course, the truth will be known.

  Does the article not clearly state that he admitted the abuse? Yet he continued as a pioneer and ministerial servant.

  What a filthy organization!

  Edited by - NeonMadman on 12 November 2002 8:51:56
• 

  gumby

  Excellent article short and hits the nail on the head with few words. A perfect example of the "Erica' story" being true , and not "dateline lies".

  This type of abuse and policy is longstanding.....not new!
• 

  jack2

  "Secretly relocated by the Watchtower leadership" (same thing the Catholic Church has done, which the Witnesses were always too happy to publicize), and of course, not one of the unsuspecting folks in his new congregation would have a clue as to what type of man was now in their midst.

  Thanks for the informative post Undisfellowshipped.
• 

  Nathan Natas

  I'm having difficulty locating the link for this 5 year old story - could you please provide a direct and fully qualified link, Undisfellowshipped? The generic link to watchtower observer does not take me directly to the article, and a search at http://www.westpress.co.uk/ was also fruitless.

  Were you aware that this story was 5 years old when you posted it, or had you thought you discovered something new? Why does your headline date indicate thatthe article is 25 years old - written 20 years before the trial?

  An old news story like this should be presented as an OLD NEWS story, hopefully with some discussion to show the value of the historical reference.

  Thanks for your diligence in searching out useful current information.

  Edited by - Nathan Natas on 12 November 2002 9:44:19