ARC Analysis Summary of Case Files
I have been doing research on the ARC as some people on here have suggested. I find it interesting on the Case File Analysis some of the findings.
It looks like Queensland and New South Wales had the biggest problems with this. Which makes sense because just some quick research it seems like that is the most populous parts of Australia.
But it seems like over half of the cases that the ARC is looking at happened within the family of the perpetrator. Certainly, many would contest that they could have done more after the fact to support the victim and ensure that the offender went to jail, but sadly probably very little could have been done to prevent that terrible act. And even those that were Elders or servants at the time of the abuse 54 of the 104 occurred in the family of the appointed man.
And of course, allegations at any time in Watchtower history doesn't remove how horrible it is to the victim. In Australia, only 5 cases of appointed men being accused of child abuse has occurred in the last 10 years.
199 offenders had no connection to Watchtower other than the victim was either a JW or a child of a JW. Along with 287 offenders were parishioners of the church and had no official role within the church other than being members. That leaves only 50 offenders since 1950 that were either an elder or an MS when the act occurred.
I will have to say the troubling number is that 9 of these accused offenders were reappointed as either an MS or an elder and 1 was appointed as an elder by mistake when they moved to Australia from another country. That I do have to agree with everyone on here that those men should never have been allowed back in as an elder or a servant. That is putting people in a position of trust that should not be. I don't know if those 9 men did anything to children, but they did something not responsible that allowed themselves to even allow the accusation to occur.
I know there has been a lot of talk about the 1006 number. But I think if you break it down like the commission did, it is of course terrible but you see some actual data behind those numbers. I wanted to get peoples thoughts on that.
What is your point - specifically?
My point is to get people's opinion of not just the 1006 number but how the ARC staff broke down those numbers into different categories. Obviously, the ARC staff felt that the person's status was important in determining culpability of the organization in these terrible acts.
Obviously, the ARC staff felt that the person's status was important in determining culpability of the organization in these terrible acts.....RO
Another stab at being a WBT$ Apologist..
Wow Outlaw. I was hoping to have a rational conversation about this. I was hoping not to respond to anything and just get people's feedback on my question. But right out of the gate you attack.
But outlaw, I would love to get your actual opinion on this data. Does the numbers in the different categories not matter? Does all that matter is the 1006 number? I am just trying to get people's opinions. If you feel that the only number is the 1006 it is certainly a valid point but it requires a discussion and not just attacking right away.
1006 - or - 1 case.
It doesn't matter, because 1 case is 1 case to much.
There we have 1 victim - facing the hell on earth in "the spiritual paradise" for the rest of his/her life.
I suggest that we all copy and paste this information to have on hand. Broken down the internal sickness of these all involving JW's is indeed staggering.
Here are some interesting facts regarding child sexual abuse within Jehovah’s Witnesses that were brought out as part of that hearing:
- The child sexual abuse cases span 77 years, beginning in 1938 right up to 2015.
- There was at least 1732 children who were sexually abused. Over 650 of those children were abused by family members.
- At least 170 of the children sexually abused were under the age of 5.
- There was 1006 alleged perpetrators of child sexual abuse within the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Of that number, 15 were women.
- 579 of the alleged abusers confessed to their crime(s). 306 did not. Of the remaining 121, it’s unclear whether they confessed or not.
- 95 of the alleged child abusers were not Jehovah’s Witnesses when they committed their first sexual abuse.
- 65 of the alleged child abusers were ministerial servants; 42 were elders; 8 were pioneers; and 1 was a circuit overseer.
- At least 56 ministerial servants and 27 elders were deleted from their roles. 6 elders and 2 ministerial servants were re-appointed to their roles.
- Over 33 ministerial servants, 13 elders and 1 pioneer were disfellowshipped.
- 14 ministerial servants, 4 elders and 1 pioneer were convicted for Child Sexual Abuse by the Australian authorities, yet 3 of those elders and 3 of those ministerial servants were never disfellowshipped for their crimes.
- Not a single instance of Child Sexual Abuse was ever reported to the authorities by Jehovah’s Witnesses.
There were at least 1732 children who were sexually abused!
650 were abused by family members (the abuse is worse in my opinion because a trusted family member has continuous access to the child).
At least 170 were under the age of five!
The problem was and apparently still is that the Society did not see this as a crime but a sin. What else explains their inability to take quick action and notify the proper authorities?
RO: ...how the ARC staff broke down those numbers into different categories. Obviously, the ARC staff felt that the person's status was important in determining culpability of the organization in these terrible acts
Don't be stupid.
The ARC staff is presenting us with how the WTS broke down those numbers. The ARC staff are only working with what was given to them!!!
Ask yourself why the WTS broke the numbers down that way and kept them on record
So you are only troubled by 9 of the offenders? Is that what you are saying?
Cobweb. I never said that. I said that is where I agree with most members on here that Watchtower should not have reappointed those men. I may disagree with other factors but saying that is one point that I agree with many of you.