One of the difficulties with your "question" is it was presented in a "loaded" context which, even though carefully worded, appeared to be a rational apologetic. You are on a hiding to no where - and your subsequent comments have the flavour of special pleading.
Numbers aside, here's the thing:
JWs policies and practices in responding to child sexual abuse have been appraised by the Australian Royal Commission and found to be seriously flawed, with the child potentially re-traumatized by the practices, among other negative effects.
Played out at a local congregational level, it means that bodies of elders are ill-equipped to handle allegations of abuse and are virtually tied to phone contact with the branch office. A few of the more egregiously disgusting parts of their policies have been modified in more recent years; specifically, victims are no longer required to confront their alleged abuser and a child can have a support person and/or parents present (which is tricky if the alleged offender is a parent).
Interestingly, as publicity about JW organization's patriarchal policies and practices spreads, it becomes apparent that, in one form or another, the organization is bedevilled by uninformed practices at the congregational level. I am privy to feedback from at least 3 regional congregations in my locality (New Zealand) in which women have come forward to belatedly disclose demeaning experiences they had as children in the context of child-sex allegations. None were reported to authorities - and in each case, the offender faced no sanctions whatsoever. Each of those women described the "follow up" by local elders as focused on their characters and the risk to the local congregations was not addressed.
Yes, you could argue that we now live in more enlightened and informed times regarding responses to allegations of child sex abuse - but I would expect the "sole channel of Jehovah's work on earth" to be at least open and accepting of "best practice", reflected in their policies and practices. Oh, and the way the organization doggedly sticks to the two witness rule is sickening - given the highly secretive and controlling nature of child sexual abuse.
Unfortunately, these kinds of experiences are "hidden" - they do not make up "numbers" of officially reported cases.