Posts by OrphanCrow

28

One of the most important questions.

by Lemonp in

it is enthralling having everything being dragged kicking and screaming into the light of day.

however one of the most important things to ask is this:.

is the rc evidence admissable in other countries and other courts?.

OrphanCrow

Petraglyph: Ew OrphanCrow, that's a perspective I'd never thought of :o
So they'll reappoint someone to an Elder position who will savour some poor child abuse victim giving details of what happened. Ugh, it's making me feel sick writing that.
This is sick sick sick! Beyond sick!

Yes, it is sick. Issues around the production of sexual images and materials has been an integral part of my university education - I taught photography and obscenity laws and responsible use of the image was integral to an understanding of how cultural production develops. The same laws that apply to image production also apply to written material.

Child pornography laws are one of the tools that international agencies that fight against the expoiltation of children worldwide have at their disposal. These laws have been used in circumstances that under other laws they would have had a hard time making a charge stick.

The whole process that the JW elders engage in, of collecting sexual material from minors, has been making me uncomfortable for a long time. I know why that is - it is a process that fits the legal definition of producing and distributing child pornography.

48

Dr Applewhite and Child Abuse

by snare&racket in

jw
friends

i am shocked that an expert would simply examine only the literature given to her by the organisation she was defending and simply accept it.

also the ease she has in making huge sweeping statements when comparing the jw's to all other international religious organisations simply undermines her professionalism.. i am also thoroughly shocked at her blatant, 'expert for hire', 'will defend anyone' apparent decision making, the organisation is responsible for covering up thousands of abuse victims by its own records, in australia alone!

never mind their judicial process being heartless and traumatic!.

OrphanCrow

You're confusing theoretical science with the legal system

I don't think so. I am well aware of the standards that are held in the Canadian court system for the acceptance of credible expert witness testimony. The standards are rigourously upheld. You cannot just call anybody into court and say that they are experts - they have to have the research behind them and the credibility to be accepted. Canada, and I would imagine Australia as well, does take scientific considerations into account when it comes to measuring expert status.

The Australian court system is very similar to Canada - we both arise out of the British court system.

48

Dr Applewhite and Child Abuse

by snare&racket in

jw
friends

i am shocked that an expert would simply examine only the literature given to her by the organisation she was defending and simply accept it.

also the ease she has in making huge sweeping statements when comparing the jw's to all other international religious organisations simply undermines her professionalism.. i am also thoroughly shocked at her blatant, 'expert for hire', 'will defend anyone' apparent decision making, the organisation is responsible for covering up thousands of abuse victims by its own records, in australia alone!

never mind their judicial process being heartless and traumatic!.

OrphanCrow

Oubilette: She is an "expert witness," not a researcher.

Well, in Australia (and other countries, too...) it is expected that experts do research. That is the standard that qualifies them to use the title "expert". Their research is their knowledge.

Expert = Researcher.

In Australian language.

64

Dr Monica Applewhite!

by username in

i'm just listening to this so called doctors testimony.

where did the watchtower dig her up from.

her answers have mostly been maybe's and i think!.

OrphanCrow

Applewhite's own letter aknowledges her unprofessional conduct. Whether or not the reports she claimed she recieived were falsified, she did not report the alleged abuse. She is a mandatory reporter.

That is unprofessional. By her own admission. Her letter speaks for itself.

64

Dr Monica Applewhite!

by username in

i'm just listening to this so called doctors testimony.

where did the watchtower dig her up from.

her answers have mostly been maybe's and i think!.

OrphanCrow

Marvin... point 27 and down. It clearly lays out the evidence. And clearly states Applewhite's response.

http://images.bimedia.net/documents/St+Aug+v+Applewhite.pdf

The school's letter is simply an attachment to the court document.

28

One of the most important questions.

by Lemonp in

it is enthralling having everything being dragged kicking and screaming into the light of day.

however one of the most important things to ask is this:.

is the rc evidence admissable in other countries and other courts?.

OrphanCrow

Vidiot...I meant ...not allowance by the WTS.. but, rather, why is society at large allowing the JW elders to collect, produce, and distribute stories about sex with minors?

There are international laws and agencies that are in place to prevent that exact thing from happening. The victim can be protected from giving testimony to the elders - under child pornography laws.

64

Dr Monica Applewhite!

by username in

i'm just listening to this so called doctors testimony.

where did the watchtower dig her up from.

her answers have mostly been maybe's and i think!.

OrphanCrow

Marvin, this is the link to court document:

https://scholar.google.ca/scholar_case?case=5894609768075002642&q=monica+applewhite&hl=en&as_sdt=2006

This is also a document filed in court:

http://images.bimedia.net/documents/St+Aug+v+Applewhite.pdf

64

Dr Monica Applewhite!

by username in

i'm just listening to this so called doctors testimony.

where did the watchtower dig her up from.

her answers have mostly been maybe's and i think!.

OrphanCrow

umber: Wow OrpanCrow !!!, Do you think Stewart knows this? Did you watch the last 30 minutes?
It's up on utube now. Have a good look at her tired and feddup to the gills face. I think she may hate WT right now. She wants to vaporize out of there. Her reputation took a hit today.

I don't know. I would hope so. The defamation suit in New Orleans is particualry damning. Stewart brought up the UK case where her testimony was rejected by the judge. This other case in New Orleans really puts the nail in the coffin as to how she will even falsify testimony for reports.

It is interesting that in that case, what was being looked at was the use of corporal punishment in the institution and Applewhite upheld the insitutions' use of coporal punishment as suitable. And that was only a few years ago! She said it was ok! And she was a mandatory reporter and she didn't report the alleged abuse!!

Her conduct was seriously unprofessional in that case, and, even when she was confronted with the evidence that she had falsified reports of abuse, she refused to correct her report. If Stewart and McClelland haven't read about that case, they should.

*I will rewatch the last 30 minutes...in a bit...

64

Dr Monica Applewhite!

by username in

i'm just listening to this so called doctors testimony.

where did the watchtower dig her up from.

her answers have mostly been maybe's and i think!.

OrphanCrow

umber: I feel she may have done work and fairly good work in other ways for other organizations.

You might want to read about her "good work" for a high school in New Orleans. They sued her only 3 years ago for defamation after gving false testimony.

http://media.nola.com/religion_impact/other/st-augustine-lawsuit.pdf

And Candace Conti may disagree with Applewhite's position when she presented testimony in her case. Applewhite didn't do any "good work" then for anyone concerned with JW policies and the Candace Conti case - it was Applewhite's testimony that validated the WTS policies.

Applewhite is a typical Catholic social worker. I have worked with a Catholic pyschologist very much like Applewhite. We worked together serving a Northern community with an almost exclusive Aboriginal population. Her attitudes were astoundingly prejudical against Aboriginal people. It was horrilble. Yet, in that woman's eyes, she had done wonderful work with Aboriginal people. She,and her superiors in the Catholic Church who gave her kudos, used Catholic Church ideology to claim that her credibilty was good.

Any dealings I have had with Catholic based helping services and institutions have not been positive.

She is so feddup with the whole thing, that I predict she will not be able to prepare all that WT lawyer wants her to present in two weeks, by hookup. She will be angry with these asshole lawyers for taking so much more than a pound of moral flesh out of her soul.

Maybe. But just think of all those professional fees piling up rapidly that she will be paid to do all that work. Besides, she will be told exactly what to put in her report by the WTS - that is what they will pay her for - her signature and testimony to say that it is truth. They buy her testimony.

I wonder what her hourly rate is? I noticed that when Stewart asked her if she "got paid expert rates" to act as an expert for the WTS, she said "yes"...and her eyes blinked fast...I betcha she got paid more than just that. But, technically, she didn't lie.

A day rate for an expert appearance at the Commission is... (I can't remember exactly...) $1,749 (?) per day of testimony.

I want him to marry me and while I'm at it,....I want Stewart too....

Lol! I would be happy just getting to plant a big kiss on each of their cheeks!!

64

Dr Monica Applewhite!

by username in

i'm just listening to this so called doctors testimony.

where did the watchtower dig her up from.

her answers have mostly been maybe's and i think!.

OrphanCrow

Has the society used this Dr. Monica before?

She was the WTS' expert in the Conti proceedings. She gave testimony that the WTS' policies were acceptable and the WTS was not accountable.

.

https://scholar.google.ca/scholar_case?case=1459454263317018183&q=monica+applewhite&hl=en&as_sdt=2006

Monica Applewhite, a clinical social worker and an expert on child sexual abuse, testified for defendants that Watchtower's policy against "disclosing private information . . . very closely mirror[ed]" the codes of ethics of the National Association of Social Workers and the American Counseling Association. Based on her review of the evidence, Applewhite opined that the Congregation never put Kendrick "into a position that required or allowed him to be alone with children, to be in supervision of children, [or] to spend time with children away from their families." Because the church's activities did not separate children from their parents, Appelwhite opined that its best means of protecting children was to educate parents about child sexual abuse, and it exceeded the standard of care for such education in the 1990's. According to Applewhite, the elders met the standard of care in Kendrick's case when they left it up to Evelyn and her daughter whether to tell the police about the abuse he admitted, and "they kept a special watch on him and paid attention to whether or not he had any inappropriate contact with children within the meetings at Kingdom Hall."