2 witness rule

punkofnice

I'm gobsmacked.

The 7 rock star popes in Warwick know darned well that the 2 witness rule allows child rapists to get away with their crime.

Geoff (Whacko Jacko) Jackson was at the Australian Royal Commission and should have seen first hand what a vile man made law the 2 witness rule is.

My question is, why do they still insist on this pervert protecting rule?

I know it's a highly controlling cult but still...........................stuff my old boots, mate!

The above is more a rhetorical question. All the speculation in the known universe probably won't answer it.

I am utterly, utterly gobsmacked. Extremely angered by their enabling paedophiles to be safe-ish, within the cult confines.

Sorry. Rant over.

Two-witness rule cannot be from God who would have better and more effective, foolproof method to bring the culprit to justice. See what happened when queen Jezebel misused this two-witness rule (1 king 21:10)--The innocent suffered with no help from anybody.

That means two witness arrangement is the sign that it originated from human organization.

punkofnice

venus - Two-witness rule cannot be from God who would have better and more effective, foolproof method to bring the culprit to justice.

I agree. Once again this religion shows itself to be a 'snare and a racket(tm)'.

I know this is an unpopular viewpoint, but never mind.........it makes me wonder if 1 or more or all of those on the Governing body have connections with paedo rings....or are paedos themselves. I have no proof but it makes me wonder why they're so precious about the 2 twitness rule, if not to protect themselves.

ttdtt

Its funny how a Dog who can give his servants shoes that last 40 years, and perform all kinds of magic, says that you can have someone killed if 2 people say she was a witch.

What could go wrong?

punkofnice

ttdtt - and that Dog always wants money. You'd think Dog could easily get around capitalism...but...nah.....

keinlezard

Hello,

I think that GB doesn't need to have something to do with pedophiles, but rather it's a manner to gather jw.

Look at the video of november Gary braux doesn't speak about pedophiles or trials or Royal Commission.

He speaks only about "apostate", in fact he has same approach than Lett , Morris, Splane or Jackson

"There are no pedophiles witin JW organisation"

The aim of this , I think, is to have a hard core of jw , those who are like me or other "normal" person are lost for WT and GB. And the GB know it !!!

Another facts is since .all publications are free.. we could honestly take Swagart trials date , it is obvious the economics model of WT must fall ! Today with all problem they ( GB ) could manage less growth in richest land and big growth in poor land ... but money comes from richest .

At the end they have a chronic shortfall , the only manner to stop that is ( like scientology ) have less member but members that are able to lie , or able to give "fake news"

best regards

PS: don't hesitate to correct my english ... i know i have a poor english :)

konceptual99

At the risk of being really unpopular I think the two witness thing is increasingly a red herring.

In the past there have been countless examples of where the elders have not acted on accusations because of two witnesses not being available. They have also not supported, suggested or taken any other positive action to ensure an accusation is reported to the authorities and in some case have gone so far as colluded to ensure an accusation has been suppressed.

The current guidelines to elders as a result of the ARC and other negative publicity has changed the framework. Elders still will not take congregation action unless they have the evidence of two witnesses. They will now accept the word of a different person or evidence from the authorities as a second witness. They are also instructed to ensure that the victim is clear they can go to the authorities even if the elders cannot take congregation action themselves.

I would agree with those that would suggest this still falls short of what they should be doing in terms of self-imposed mandatory reporting, active support of reporting and so on but is a step in the right direction and should prevent the repetition of these cases where the victim and family have felt it impossible to report an accusation to the authorities.

The two witness rule still applies to congregation action and this certainly leaves a risk that a perpetrator may still be free to access other vulnerable people if the elders take no action to monitor their behaviour. There is still a risk that an accusation may remain unreported if the victim or family decide not to report it themselves. There are still plenty of areas that the WTS should feel ashamed about in terms of their protection policy however I think there has been steps taken to separate the two witness rule and congregation judicial action from the secular side of things and that criticism of the policy should be focused onto those areas that still remain astonishingly weak and out of step with current best practice.

Fisherman

the 2 witness rule allows child rapists to get away with their crime.

Relating to church doctrine and practice, the "2 witness rule" applies but concurrently with that, the church also complies with all statutory requirements for reporting any allegation of child sexual abuse and child abuse to competent authorities as mandated in the local jurisdiction the church operates.

konceptual99

Statutory mandatory reporting yes however whilst there are arguments against mandatory reporting, many organisations have implemented a mandatory reporting policy regardless of what the local laws are.

Even if the WTS held back from implementing this themselves they also fall short from any form of pro-active support of the victim. They are simply told to make sure the victim and family are informed they can go to the authorities but given no support to do this. They should be doing everything possible to support the victim and help them get the right help as well as ensure the authorities are able to investigate an allegation so that the risk of leaving a predatory sexual abuser free to do whatever they want is minimised as far as humanly possible.

Fisherman

They are simply told to make sure the victim and family are informed they can go to the authorities but given no support to do this. They should be doing everything possible to support the victim and help them get the right help as well as ensure the authorities are able to investigate an allegation so that the risk of leaving a predatory sexual abuser free to do whatever they want is minimised as far as humanly possible.

That is arguable. Any accusation of wrong against the church is considered on a case by case basis.

2 witness rule

Share this