Jehovah's Witnesses refused leave to appeal to charity tribunal over regulatory action
------
Joe Grundy, did you manage to send any of those links?
defender of truth
JoinedPosts by defender of truth
-
76
WT loses appeal in UK!!!!!!!
by Viva la Vida inthe wt lost its appeals regarding the charity commission inquiry.
here is the ruling:.
http://www.charity.tribunals.gov.uk/documents/decisions/watch-tower-ruling-03mar15.pdf.
-
-
defender of truth
-
6
Judges says Jehovah's Witnesses charity's attempt to delay inquiry led to 'ongoing risks' to children
by Watchtower-Free inhttp://www.civilsociety.co.uk/governance/news/content/19237/charitys_elongated_delay_to_commission_inquiry_led_to_ongoing_risks_to_children_says_judge.
jehovah's witnesses charity's attempt to delay inquiry led to 'ongoing risks' to children, says judge.
governance | emily corfe | 10 mar 2015 .
-
-
defender of truth
Hope you don't mind if I re-post for readability..
Thankyou for posting this.
"A judge has ruled not to allow a Jehovah’s Witnesses charity more time to appeal against a Charity Commission statutory inquiry.
At a tribunal last week, judge Alison McKenna said the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Britain, had caused prolonged delays to the regulator’s investigation leading to “ongoing risks” to children.
The Charity Commission initially opened an inquiry into the charity in May 2014 to investigate if adequate safeguarding procedures were in place, following revelations that trustees of the charity had allowed a convicted paedophile to question his victims.
Jonathan Rose, an elder of the New Moston congregation, was jailed for nine months for abusing two women when they were young girls, the Manchester Evening News reported.
According to the paper, after his release in March 2014, a series of “disfellowship” meetings were held to decide whether Rose should remain a member of the organisation, and the women were asked to recount their ordeal. At one meeting, Rose was allowed to ask the women questions.
The regulator said at the time that it has had “ongoing serious concerns” about the charity and had previously opened regulatory compliance cases into the Watch Tower Bible in July 2013 and the New Moston congregation in December 2013.
Last week, judge McKenna, said the charity was given 42 days to make an appeal but overran the allocated time period and instead called for a time extension while applying for a separate judicial review at the Administrative Court.
Delays
McKenna said the charity’s delay of “over six months” in making the extension application to the tribunal “elongated unreasonably the period of time” in which the Commission would be “delayed from carrying out its inquiry pending determination of a challenge to its decision”.
“I give weight to the fact that the [Commission’s] inquiry and production order relate to safeguarding matters which could… logically concern on-going risks to people who are still children”, she said.
McKenna said: “it seems to me that the continuation of the court proceedings was [the charity’s] main priority at that time… I also conclude that there was not a good explanation for it”.
The judge noted that the charity would not be able to challenge the decisions of the Commission if its application “to proceed out of time is not allowed”.
“I accept that that is a serious matter,” she said. “However, it seems to me that the charity, in adopting the litigation strategy it did, must have factored that risk into account.
“I also note that the [Commission] has already delayed its inquiry and the enforcement of compliance with the production order for over six months while the charity mounted a challenge to its decisions, in the forum of its choice. It does not seem to me that it would be fair and just to allow the charity to start new proceedings in the tribunal now and thus and delay matters further, having taken the course that it did.
“In these circumstances, I do not consider that it would be appropriate to… extend time to allow this application to proceed out of time and I now refuse the charity’s application.”
The Watch Tower was approached by Civil Society News for comment but did not respond by the time of publishing. "
-
76
WT loses appeal in UK!!!!!!!
by Viva la Vida inthe wt lost its appeals regarding the charity commission inquiry.
here is the ruling:.
http://www.charity.tribunals.gov.uk/documents/decisions/watch-tower-ruling-03mar15.pdf.
-
-
defender of truth
Sorry, I didn't see you had edited yours before I posted mine. What a muddle up ;) -
76
WT loses appeal in UK!!!!!!!
by Viva la Vida inthe wt lost its appeals regarding the charity commission inquiry.
here is the ruling:.
http://www.charity.tribunals.gov.uk/documents/decisions/watch-tower-ruling-03mar15.pdf.
-
-
defender of truth
I just posted the link to it ;)
This is the infamous october 2012 letter, which states that they decide who is a predator and that only a 'known child molester' will never be an elder again. It is now in the public domain, and Private Eye and other investigators (maybe even the Charity Commission) need to see this...
-
76
WT loses appeal in UK!!!!!!!
by Viva la Vida inthe wt lost its appeals regarding the charity commission inquiry.
here is the ruling:.
http://www.charity.tribunals.gov.uk/documents/decisions/watch-tower-ruling-03mar15.pdf.
-
-
defender of truth
Well done, excellent idea.
I am still in, so I'm not sending any emails.
But if you would care to pass these on in my behalf, I'd really appreciate it.
---------
According to Jwleaks, the letter is publically available.
See this thread, and click the link Jwleaks provided for the letter download..
"jwleaks 2 years ago
JW LEAKS has published the written submission, and annexures, made by Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia to the "Inquiry into the Handling of Child Abuse by Religious and other Organisations" and dated April 9, 2013.
Included is a copy of the October 1, 2012 Body of Elders letter on the handling of child abuse. This places the letter into public domain and now means it can be shared internationally."
Link to scan of the letter here:
-----------
And this article contains everything from a 9 month independent investigation:
-----------
If you can think of any.other agencies/ news outlets, please pass these on to them.
Got to go. Best of luck ;)
-
76
WT loses appeal in UK!!!!!!!
by Viva la Vida inthe wt lost its appeals regarding the charity commission inquiry.
here is the ruling:.
http://www.charity.tribunals.gov.uk/documents/decisions/watch-tower-ruling-03mar15.pdf.
-
-
defender of truth
Your welcome, Xanthippe.
Here it is again for any who missed it..
-
12
Anybody know what happened in this lawsuit, Frank Otuo suing the WT of Britain and an elder for defamation?
by AndersonsInfo inthis lawsuit was discussed on jwn five months ago: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/284881/brave-ex-elder-sues-over-defamation-over-fraud-claims?size=20&page=2 .
anybody know what the present disposition is in this case?.
the following link is to the actual newspaper article: .
-
-
defender of truth
Still can't find the case via online searches, and no topix responses..These are only the ways I can find, for you to possibly get the information.
Please update us if you find anything on the case, or if you are going to try one of these avenues. Best of luck :)
------
"if you are unable to find what you are looking for, you can make a request by filling in this online form:"
https://www.justice.gov.uk/information-access-rights/foi-requests/make-an-foi-request-online
"Please be as specific as possible about the information you are seeking to obtain, such as by providing a specific time frame to assist staff in locating the information (for example, January 1999 to October 2000).Being specific in your request also makes it less likely it will be turned down on cost grounds.."
"You have the right to appeal these decisions and to have them investigated (see ‘What if I am unhappy with the response?’)"
-----
Also, the registers held by Trust Online cover the High court:
"England & Wales Section 2: High court judgments"
What you need to know to search the registers
"To search the registers, you need to give the full name and address of any person or business."
"The fee for a search of the England & Wales Register is £4 per section - you just choose the sections which will help you."
http://www.trustonline.org.uk/search-others
------
(Thanks to Splash finding that pdf, we now know the case was at the Queen's Bench)
To speak to Queen’s Bench court staff please telephone:020 7947 7772
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/rcj-rolls-building/queens-bench
------You will let us know if you find anything, won't you? Thanks for posting this, it's an interesting case. -
76
WT loses appeal in UK!!!!!!!
by Viva la Vida inthe wt lost its appeals regarding the charity commission inquiry.
here is the ruling:.
http://www.charity.tribunals.gov.uk/documents/decisions/watch-tower-ruling-03mar15.pdf.
-
-
defender of truth
Article on original investigation:
" It emerged yesterday that the congregation held three “disfellowship” meetings during which the women were repeatedly asked to read a scripture on bearing false witness and consider what it meant. A source told theManchester Evening News: “They had to go through the abuse in detail and were asked if they encouraged it. One of the victims was asked if she had enjoyed it.“At the third meeting, Rose was present. He questioned the women in detail about the abuse with no one stepping in to stop bullying as would happen in court. The victims had already done this in court, which elders attended. But even though it was very distressing, they bravely went through it again.”
The spokesman said the church would not seek to shield those guilty of committing abuse and that elders were “responsible for shepherding the flock”.“When any one of Jehovah’s Witnesses is accused of an act of child abuse, the local congregation elders are expected to investigate. If a victim wishes to address a matter, this can be done directly or in writing. No victims are forced to attend a meeting or confront an alleged perpetrator of child abuse,” it said in a statement.
Fay Maxted, chief executive of the Survivors’ Trust said: “This shows a complete lack of understanding of the impact of sexual abuse on a victim and of how a perpetrator might behave. It shows a complete disregard for any kind of child protection or safeguarding policies.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/jehovahs-witness-abuse-victims-quizzed-by-their-attacker-at-church-9421040.html -
12
Anybody know what happened in this lawsuit, Frank Otuo suing the WT of Britain and an elder for defamation?
by AndersonsInfo inthis lawsuit was discussed on jwn five months ago: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/284881/brave-ex-elder-sues-over-defamation-over-fraud-claims?size=20&page=2 .
anybody know what the present disposition is in this case?.
the following link is to the actual newspaper article: .
-
-
defender of truth
Hi Barbara. I've asked for help on topix, no response yet.
Also, seeing as the papers were lodged at the High Court, here is the phone number if anyone wants to ring and ask them..
RCJ High Court: 020 7947 6562
https://courttribunalfinder.service.gov.uk/courts/royal-courts-of-justice
-
754
Theists, why does God allow suffering..
by The Quiet One in..specifically, the suffering of animals.
you can talk about free will/sin/people choosing to not listen to god etc to explain human suffering being allowed.. but how can you love a god that allows animals, that haven't sinned or chosen to not have anything to do with god, to have their short lives ended in often long, drawn out, painful ways.
i could list stories i've read that would probably make you feel ill, but i'm not looking to shock anyone or start an emotional debate.
-
-
defender of truth
Whenindoubt.. I have no idea what you mean. I'll leave it to more intelligient people than myself to assess whether my post about judging God on page 48 should have been worded better. It had 1 like, so hopefully someone got what I was trying to say.
-----
Head-of-feathers, welcome to the discussion.
"Let's look at quarantine in illness briefly. The illness is contained so it doesn't spread beyond the quarantine area, but it would be awful to destroy everyone because they were exposed to the disease."
It would also be awful to allow an entire planet to be exposed to a disease for which you had the cure, especially a disease that you had originally designed and released yourself for the purpose of infecting just one species. Wouldn't you agree?
"I'll go out on a limb and argue that God didn't wipe them out because He wanted them to have that right to choose.."
What choice has any animal had in the matter? None. Is that fair?
"We opened the door to the spread of infection."
It's not that simple. Biblically speaking, God chose to threaten mankind with the 'infectious disease' if they didn't obey him, infected us when we disobeyed, then (according to your proposition) allowed the 'infection' to spread to innocent creatures, when he could have contained it at any point.
"Humans have to witness the suffering they caused when they in essence said to their 'author': ''We don't like your plan. We can do better."
So you are suggesting that a 'God of love' let mankind harm, infect and destroy his creatures to show that his way of doing things is correct?
"Do I believe that animals should suffer? No."
And on that we certainly agree.
It is an injustice that even the most creative believers in a loving God cannot defend, they generally seem to blame it on humans.. despite the fact that animals suffered before any 'original sin' is supposed to have occurred.