2 witness rule

by punkofnice 72 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • StephaneLaliberte
    StephaneLaliberte
    Listener: Their two witness rule is really a two eyewitnesses rule in most cases

    I have thought about this one further and it is obvious that they do accept other type of proofs as well. For instance, if a single sister becomes pregnant, they won't accept "It was the holy ghost." She will be disfellowshiped. Or a brother sent to jail for steeling, even if he claims his innocence, he will likely be disfellowshipped.

    So the problem really is the fact that the JW do not encourage the victims to seek out help from the police in order to get the second witness, hence, generally, they are unable to find such witness on their own as they are not police.

  • OrphanCrow
    OrphanCrow
    Steph: So the problem really is the fact that the JW do not encourage the victims to seek out help from the police in order to get the second witness

    Exactly.

    A child who says "I have been abused/raped/touched, etc is the first witness. The second witness may very well be the medical report that the police would pursue if and when they were contacted. The second witness then becomes the physical evidence that the doctor finds. Like ripped anal tissue, vaginal tears, etc. Second witness is forensic evidence that is discovered if and when the child is taken to the police/doctor.

    Eyewitnesses are unreliable. Physical evidence is reliable and valid.

  • LoveUniHateExams
    LoveUniHateExams

    Ok, I'll be blunt: part of the reason the WT has the 2 witness rule is because a baptised adult male with questionable sexual preferences is much more useful to them - and therefore much more worthy - than an innocent child.

    I'm sure it's also influenced by the retarded Stone Age mentality - the lives of women & children aren't worth as much as the lives of men.

    It happens in various branches of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

  • Fisherman
    Fisherman
    A child who says "I have been abused/raped/touched, etc is the first witness. The second witness may very well be the medical report that the police would pursue if and when they were contacted. The second witness then becomes the physical evidence that the doctor finds. Like ripped anal tissue, vaginal tears, etc. Second witness is forensic evidence that is discovered if and when the child is taken to the police/doctor.
    You are trying to pass off your personal beliefs and personal definitions of what is evidience, plaintiff or witness as blanket International requirements that should cover every jurisdiction, fact is they don't, you are confused.

    In the US, it doesn't take much to have someone investigated for child abuse but you can't go around accusing people of charges. If such accusations turn out to be false, the person making false accusation faces defamation proceedings besides ruining the life and reputation of an innocent person. Who would ever trust someone with a child who was accused of child abuse even if he later was found not guilty in Court? Some people don't care.

  • OrphanCrow
    OrphanCrow

    Oh Fisherman. You and your loaded Watchtoweresque language contortions.

    I was not "trying to pass off" anything. I said nothing about blanket international requirements. You did.

    I am not confused.

    You are.

  • Fisherman
    Fisherman

    You shouldn't go around lynching everybody as a prophylactic remedy for child abuse. If the church is required to report any accusations or beliefs or suspicions of child abuse, that can also become grounds to require the church to report other criminal conduct by its members as well. Therfore, any protected church communication can be disclosable, not only those of a criminal nature, but also personal information as well including testimony of church elders, in any criminal or civil proceedings.

  • dubstepped
    dubstepped

    Again I ask the person more concerned about the potential pedophile than the potential victim:

    @Fisherman - Do you personally have the opinion that Jehovah's Witnesses handle child sexual abuse allegations in a way that protects children to the best of human abilities? If not, where do you think they fall short? If you do, please highlight the ways in which they best serve children in these cases through their policies.

  • konceptual99
    konceptual99

    I couldn't care less if an elder keeps his mouth shut or runs off to the authorities about a brother he knows to be doing cash jobs or some other activity.

    I care greatly when an elder when he knows about a child claiming they are being abused only ends up doing the bare minimum just because some goon on the other end of a phone line at Bethel tells him what is strictly necessary.

    No one is talking about lynching anyone. Stop conflating things Fisherman.

  • konceptual99
    konceptual99

    Oh and please answer dubs' question. I am bored of seeing him ask it over and over again.

  • Diogenesister
    Diogenesister

    LoveUniHateExamsThat is exactly what I mean when I say it is the culture of the Watchtower that needs to change.

    Ok, I'll be blunt: part of the reason the WT has the 2 witness rule is because a baptised adult male with questionable sexual preferences is much more useful to them - and therefore much more worthy - than an innocent child.

    Heartbreaking but true.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit