LoveUniHateExams: "Yes" in answer to your first question. "I don't know" in answer to your second question.
Barbara
AndersonsInfo
JoinedPosts by AndersonsInfo
-
105
Consider the "outcome" when elders apply the two-witness "rule"
by AndersonsInfo injehovahs witnesses two-witness rule is applied by elders when a witness member accuses another member of a sin, even if that sin is a criminal act.
if there arent two witnesses to the accusation, it goes nowhere, including not being reported to the authorities.
and in the case of an allegation of child abuse, the accused is free to molest again.. watchtower attorney, jim mccabe, recently stated this about jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule which he described as a bible-based belief :.
-
-
-
4
The Christian Post: Lawsuit Awards Man $13.5 Million In Jehovah's Witness Sex Abuse Case
by AndersonsInfo inthe christian post.
http://www.christiantimes.com/article/lawsuit.awards.man.13.5.million.in.jehovahs.witness.sex.abuse.case/49231.htm.
lawsuit awards man $13.5 million in jehovah's witness sex abuse casesarah adams 31 october, 2014. .
-
-
AndersonsInfo
The Christian Post
Lawsuit Awards Man $13.5 Million In Jehovah's Witness Sex Abuse Case
Sarah Adams 31 October, 2014
A recent lawsuit settlement in San Diego, California awarded a man $13.5 million after he claimed he was severely abused by the teacher of a Bible study when he was a youth.
35-year-old Jose Lopez alleged in the lawsuit that Gonzalo Campos, a teacher and leader at Linda Vista Spanish Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses and Playa Pacifica Spanish Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, sexually abused him and other children in the 1980's and 1990's.
According to NBC San Diego, most of the money awarded to Lopez through the court ruling comes from the entities that oversee the Jehovah Witness denomination. The judge said in his ruling that these were the responsible parties in Lopez's abuse because of how they failed to handle the incident.
"Damages that reflect the reprehensible conduct of the Watchtower in how they covered this up for years and allowed multiple children to be injured," Lopez's attorney Irwin Zalkin told NBC 7, referencing the umbrella group Watchtower Bible that oversees the Jehovah's Witnesses. "They protected and harbored a criminal."
Another bombshell lawsuit was filed against the Jehovah's Witness in Plano, Texas recently, where lawyers filed a civil lawsuit against Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York Inc. for sexual abuse that occurred in Plano, Greenville and Dallas.
"[WBTS is] the top of the chain of command; they oversee and are involved in the decision-making ... daily function – everything has to be approved," Steven Schulte, a lawyer with the Turley Law Firm in Plano, Texas, said of the lawsuit. "They are intimately involved […] have absolute authority over the congregation and had every reason to know [of the abuse]."
-
300
ALERT: NEW LAWSUIT settlement - $13 MILLION
by Watchtower-Free inhttp://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/135m-awarded-to-bible-teacher-gonzalo-campos-alleged-abuse-victim-jose-lopez-281031832.html.
(published thursday, oct 30, 2014).
thursday, oct 30, 2014 updated at 11:58 pm pdt.
-
-
AndersonsInfo
Of course it's not over until it's over, BOTR. Why the negative message? This is a huge win. Terminating sanctions are rarely used and the Plaintiff won. We should rejoice. We're not fools; we know the Plaintiff is in for a long wait because of WT's plans to appeal. We rejoiced with Candace Conti too. It was a milestone win and so is the Jose Lopez judgment. For a Plaintiff, an appeal seems like forever but they have patience. Let us be happy for now without rain clouds hanging over our heads. All of us who have worked so hard over many years to get the message out to the world about what the Watchtower has been covering up for decades love this moment. Give us that, will you, BOTR? Money isn't everything you know!
"hildebrando," I guess you didn't notice my post that I will have all the Jose Lopez court documents on my website by tomorrow as I have the other Zalkin (Campos) case documents. And also the Conti court documents are there too. Plus, all the court documents from the 2007 WT out-of-court settlement with 16 victims for $12.5 million are on the website too. All you have to do is copy them, or download them, or just read them on the website. It's free and my pleasure to offer them to all who want them.
Barbara
-
300
ALERT: NEW LAWSUIT settlement - $13 MILLION
by Watchtower-Free inhttp://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/135m-awarded-to-bible-teacher-gonzalo-campos-alleged-abuse-victim-jose-lopez-281031832.html.
(published thursday, oct 30, 2014).
thursday, oct 30, 2014 updated at 11:58 pm pdt.
-
-
AndersonsInfo
More Information- Press Release
NEWS
October 31, 2014
Contacts: Irwin Zalkin
858-259-3011 office
858-945-2144 mobile
Victim of Childhood Sexual Abuse Awarded $13.5 Million Default Judgment Against the Jehovah’s Witnesses National Organization the Watchtower
Childhood Victim Suffered Sexual Abuse from his Bible Study Teacher and Ordained Minister of the Jehovah’s Witnesses
San Diego, CA, October 31, 2014 – San Diego Superior Court Judge Joan M. Lewis has entered a judgment against the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. (Watchtower) for $13.5 million in punitive and compensatory damages in a civil lawsuit filed by the Zalkin Law Firm on behalf of a victim of sexual abuse who was a child member of the Linda Vista Spanish Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses in 1986.
The case involved child sexual abuse by a serial child sexual predator within two local San Diego congregations of the Jehovah's Witnesses. The Zalkin Law Firm filed this civil lawsuit in February of 2013 (Case No: 37-2012-00099849-CU-PO-CTL). The plaintiff, Jose Lopez, was a minor child whose family was active in the congregation at the time of the alleged abuse. In her ruling at the end of trial on Thursday, Judge Lewis found the conduct of the governing corporate leader, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. and its governing body's efforts to cover up the abuse and protect the perpetrator “reprehensible and reckless”.
“Mr. Lopez has suffered for years as a result of this horrendous abuse and we are pleased that he will finally receive justice and compensation as a result of Judge Lewis’ strong ruling against the Watchtower,” said Irwin Zalkin, attorney representing Mr. Lopez. “The Watchtower has ignored sexual abuse complaints from its members for years, choosing to protect sexual predators and not children. This ruling may hopefully awake the Jehovah’s Witnesses leadership to the standards of morality and care for children that our society demands.”
In a highly unusual case, Judge Lewis had entered a default judgment against the corporate head of the Jehovah's Witnesses after it refused to obey court orders to produce documents that would show the depth and breadth of the problem of sexual abuse of children within congregations of the Jehovah's Witnesses throughout the United States. In addition, Watchtower refused a court order to produce the longest serving member of its governing body for a deposition.
Both the Fourth District Court of Appeals, and the California Supreme Court rebuffed Watchtower's efforts to reverse Judge Lewis' orders on these matters. Despite the decision of the Appeals Court and the California Supreme Court, Watchtower refused to produce the documents or the witness.
California law permits the court to strike the answer of a defendant that refuses to abide by a court order and to enter a default judgment against them. After giving Watchtower every opportunity to comply with her order, Judge Lewis issued the terminating sanction and entered a default judgment against Watchtower. She then ordered the Zalkin Law Firm lawyers for the victim to prove their case by putting on evidence to support the allegations of the victim’s complaint.
After hearing six days of testimony and presentation of written evidence, Judge Lewis was satisfied that the Plaintiff had more that adequately proved his case. Accordingly, she issued a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff in the amount of $13,500,000.00 that includes an award of $10,500,000 in punitive damages intended to punish Watchtower for its reprehensible conduct.
The case itself involved a known serial child molester by the name of Gonzalo Campos. At the time he sexually abused the plaintiff, Jose Lopez, in 1986, who was only 7 years old, he was an ordained minister of the Jehovah's Witnesses and had already abused four other children. Evidence in the case showed that Elders of the Linda Vista Congregation of the Jehovah's Witnesses were aware as early as 1982 that Campos was a child molester but chose to take no action against him. Further evidence showed that Church leaders did not report him to law enforcement, they did not warn other parents of the congregation, they never checked to see if he might be abusing other children of the congregation, they allowed him to give bible study to young children and ultimately recommended him to Jose's mother as someone Jose should study bible with.
According to the evidence presented in the case, after Campos spent months grooming Jose and sexually molesting him, Jose reported the molestation to his mother. She and her mentor, a senior female member of the congregation, reported the sexual abuse to a congregation elder appointed by Watchtower. That elder and another elder confirmed that the sexual abuse occurred. Both Jose's mother and her mentor were told by church leaders not to say anything that it would get handled. Nothing was done, and ultimately, Jose and his mother disassociated themselves from the Jehovah's Witnesses.
Case evidence presented in the trial further showed that despite the reports and confession by Campos of abusing a child in 1982 and Jose in 1986, he was allowed to remain in the congregation and over the next twelve years was actually elevated up the organizational ladder ultimately becoming an elder himself in 1993. During this time frame he has confessed to sexually abusing at least eight children.
Documents and testimony in the case showed that elders and the Watchtower took no action for almost a year after receiving a written complaint in April of 1994 from a mother of one of the victims whose son was molested by Campos in approximately 1984. During this time as an elder, he continued to abuse young Jehovah's Witness children. Even after he was expelled as a known and confessed child molester, he was reinstated within a few years without any warning to parents of children within the congregation.
After hearing testimony from numerous witnesses and seeing dozens of documents, Judge Lewis stated that the testimony of many of the elders and experts of the Jehovah's Witnesses was not credible and appeared to cover up the truth.
“Rather than reaching out to victims, the leadership of the Jehovah's Witnesses consistently treats victims as adversaries. They circle their wagons and attack the victim”, said Zalkin, who has filed cases in five other states on behalf of other Jehovah’s Witnesses childhood sexual abuse victims. “This court ruling is a clear condemnation of the disgraceful conduct of this organization, conduct that is totally contrary to what one would expect from a religious institution that promotes itself as living in the Truth.”
About The Zalkin Law Firm
With offices in San Diego and New York, The Zalkin Law Firm (www.zalkin.com) is one of the premier sexual abuse and personal injury law firms in the country. The firm's lawyers have represented hundreds of survivors of childhood sexual abuse and achieved groundbreaking results in numerous high-profile clergy abuse cases across the United States.
The Zalkin Law Firm has aggressively represented hundreds of survivors of child sexual abuse, including former Boy Scouts. The firm has negotiated over $200 million in settlements in Catholic clergy sex abuse cases. The firm currently has more than 20 active lawsuits against the Jehovah’s Witnesses in five states, representing victims of childhood sexual abuse.
-
300
ALERT: NEW LAWSUIT settlement - $13 MILLION
by Watchtower-Free inhttp://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/135m-awarded-to-bible-teacher-gonzalo-campos-alleged-abuse-victim-jose-lopez-281031832.html.
(published thursday, oct 30, 2014).
thursday, oct 30, 2014 updated at 11:58 pm pdt.
-
-
AndersonsInfo
All the court records pertaining to this case hopefully will be on my website by the end of the day. www.watchtowerdocuments.org.
On the website, I endeavor to explain what this case is all about which is "Terminating Sanctions." Here is what I will post and all the following information was taken by me from the court documents that will be on WD's website.
In 2013, the Zalkin Law Firm filed a lawsuit (civil action) in a San Diego court in behalf of a victim of child abuse (Jose Lopez). The Plaintiff was one of eight victims molested by Gonzalo Campos, one time Jehovah’s Witness Elder. The Defendants in the case were originally the Linda Vista Spanish Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses; Campos, the perpetrator, and the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of NY, Inc.
In this case, Watchtower had repeatedly violated or ignored court orders, or opposed several discovery motions, or produced documents with unreasonable redactions, rebuffed informal attempts to obtain discovery, and rehashed the same arguments over and over, even after they had been rejected by the Court.
Watchtower conceded that it was ordered to produce documents requested by Plaintiff, and that it did not do so. It sought to excuse its non-compliance by arguing that production was not required because Watchtower sought appellate review. Watchtower cites no case for this remarkable proposition, and of course, there is none. Imagine the legal gridlock that would be caused if no party had to comply with a discovery order until it had exhausted its appellate rights. The courts of appeal would be inundated with discovery writs, and the trial courts could not move cases.
At some point, the Court was justified in putting an end to WATCHTOWER'S WILLFUL FAILURES TO COMPLY and did so. Plaintiff asked for a motion for terminating sanctions which is punishment for grossly improper litigation behavior that ends the offending party's participation in the case, usually consisting of a default or dismissal.
Because terminating sanctions are a very harsh remedy they are only requested when the defendant or plaintiff shows persistent failure to comply with a court order to respond to discovery.In this case, when Defendant, Watchtower, failed to respond or to submit to authorized methods of discovery, and disobeyed a court order to provide discovery, and “failing to confer” it was a misuse of the discovery process.
California Code of Civil Procedure § 2030.290(c) states, in relevant part, “If a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to serve a timely response, the following rules apply: (c) …If a party then fails to obey an order compelling answers, the court may make those orders that are just, including the imposition of an issue sanction, an evidence sanction, or a terminating sanction.
Terminating sanctions are appropriate when a chronic pattern of delay or evasiveness by the defaulting party is egregious enough to warrant denial of a trial on the merits. In this case the Court ruled that terminating sanctions were appropriate when the defendants “persistent failure to comply with the court’s discovery orders resulted in a discovery stay...”
The Plaintiff asked that Governing Body, Gerrit Losch, be produced for deposition and all documents regarding child sexual abuse going back to 1977 also be produced.
On February 6, 2014, Watchtower asked the Court for a stay of both components of the January 2, 2014 order. When Watchtower and Losch separately filed Petitions for Writ of Mandate, both asked for an immediate stay. When Losch Petitioned the Supreme Court, he requested an emergency stay. None of these stays were granted, but Watchtower acted as though they were. As of March 31, 2014 through April 3, 2014, the standing order was that the materials and testimony must be provided. Watchtower refused. The Court was justified in putting an end to Watchtower's attempts to delay this case and deprive Plaintiff of important evidence.
In short, Watchtower made no legitimate effort to gather the responsive documents. Watchtower had not offered to provide Plaintiff with a partial production while the rest are gathered.
Documents relating to childhood sexual abuse:
Complaints of molestation known to 'Watchtower prior to 1986 are relevant to establishing the parameters of the duty of care owed by Watchtower. See Doe v. U.S. Swimming, Inc. (plaintiff arguing "logically, the higher incidence of prior wrongful conduct . . . the more care that should be devoted to the problem" by the defendant.) Such evidence is necessary to combat the expert Watchtower paid to opine that it had little knowledge about sexual abuse prior to 1986, and in light of that low amount of knowledge, offered superlative educational programs. The information is also necessary to defeat 'Watchtower's putative statute of limitations defense. A defendant's "knowledge must then be evaluated by the standard of either a reasonable person of ordinary intelligence, or of a person who has 'superior,' or specialized knowledge that would pertain to his evaluation of the facts he has acquired."
Complaints of sexual abuse known to Watchtower before and after 1986 are vital to establishing whether either Defendant is liable for punitive damages by acting with malice or ratifying the abuse (failure to discharge agent despite knowledge of unfitness may make principle liable in punitive damages through ratification.) Such evidence is also necessary to establish the amount of a punitive damage award. See Johnson v. Ford Motor Co. (2005) 35 CaI.4th II9I, I2OI (degree of reprehensibility of defendant's conduct is an important factor in considering the measure of punitive damages);
Complaints of childhood sexual abuse known to Watchtower after 1986 are relevant to Plaintiff s ratification claim. Such complaints help explain the development and deficiencies of the corporate policies that were utilized to ratify the abuse of Plaintiff. Post 1986 complaints give context to Watchtower's actions after that date regarding Campos, and are also relevant in assessing the quality of Defendants' knowing acceptance of Campos' actions. Documents showing Watchtower's tendency of protecting child molesters after 1986 tends to prove it did so with Campos.
Testimony of Gerrit Losch
Losch has been a member of the Governing Body since 1994. The Governing Body reviews and approves policy within the organization. Evidence from Losch regarding the formulation and approval of policy regarding molestation, why the policies were created or altered, and the Governing Body's knowledge of the likelihood that such policies would result in the protection of molesters in the organization is relevant to Plaintiff s ratification theory. Also, as a managing agent of Watchtower, Losch's actions may form the basis of an award of punitive damages against Defendant. Cal. Civ. Code $ 3294(b). Evidence of Losch's knowledge of the prevalence of molestation in the organization, his role in formulating policy, and his knowledge of the tendency of those policies to protect molesters at the expense of children, are necessary to determining Watchtower's liability for, and the measure of, punitive damages.
CONCLUSION - For the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiff asked the Court to award terminating and monetary sanctions.
Respectfully Submitted, Dated: April 25, 2014 - Zalkin Law Firm
-
105
Consider the "outcome" when elders apply the two-witness "rule"
by AndersonsInfo injehovahs witnesses two-witness rule is applied by elders when a witness member accuses another member of a sin, even if that sin is a criminal act.
if there arent two witnesses to the accusation, it goes nowhere, including not being reported to the authorities.
and in the case of an allegation of child abuse, the accused is free to molest again.. watchtower attorney, jim mccabe, recently stated this about jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule which he described as a bible-based belief :.
-
-
AndersonsInfo
I would like to add some further comments to my last post: When I first read the quote under discussion, I wished that I could have contacted Jim McCabe to ask him why he would have said such a despicable thing. But since I'm disfellowshipped, as a Jehovah's Witness, Jim McCabe is not permitted to talk to me, and especially not me because it was made clear by a staff member in the Service Department, said after my disfellowshipping, that since I caused thousands to leave the organization when I appeared on Dateline, I am to blame for their deaths at Armageddon, so I'm the worst of the worst.
However, back to the subject of that quote in the Christian Post. When I first read it, I spoke to an attorney, though not a Witness, about the quote, and he said he had read that quote before and thought it was attributed to McCabe so it appeared to me it was legit. Well, live and learn!
Enzo, although I was wrong on the other issue, one thing I am sure of is unless there is in writing a change of policy, the two-witness belief as used in a JW judicial setting is still in force. As far as I know, the last thing said about this matter is found in the October 1, 2012 BOE letter. I learned in the Writing Department that the last thing in print published by the Watchtower about any theological belief or organizational rule is present policy. If you can produce a more recent statement on the need to have two witnesses when a child abuse accusation is made than what was published in the Oct. 1, 2012 letter which shows the policy has changed, we would like to see it. If there are any positive changes, I for one, would rejoice.
October 1, 2012
TO ALL BODIES OF ELDERS
Re: Child abuse
Dear Brothers:
---------
Page 3
"11. In addition, the elders should investigate every allegation of child sexual abuse. When elders learn of an accusation, in addition to this letter, they should carefully review the direction outlined in the Shepherding textbook, chapter 12, paragraphs 18-21. However, in evaluating the evidence for internal congregational purposes, they must bear in mind the Bible's clear direction: "No single witness should rise up against a man respecting any error or any sin...At the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three witnesses the matter should stand good" (Deut.19:15). This requirement to consider testimony of two or three witnesses was confirmed by Jesus (Mat.18:16). Thus, although they investigate every allegation, the elders are not authorized by the Scriptures to take congregational action unless there is a confession or there are two credible witnesses. However, even though the elders are not authorized to take congregation action when there is only one witness, the elders should remain vigilant with regard to the conduct and activity of the accused. (See paragraph 12 of this letter.) If two persons are witnesses to separate incidents of the same kind of wrongdoing, their testimony can be deemed sufficient to take judicial action. (1 Tim. 5:19, 24, 25)" ...
Barbara
-
105
Consider the "outcome" when elders apply the two-witness "rule"
by AndersonsInfo injehovahs witnesses two-witness rule is applied by elders when a witness member accuses another member of a sin, even if that sin is a criminal act.
if there arent two witnesses to the accusation, it goes nowhere, including not being reported to the authorities.
and in the case of an allegation of child abuse, the accused is free to molest again.. watchtower attorney, jim mccabe, recently stated this about jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule which he described as a bible-based belief :.
-
-
AndersonsInfo
“What we are doing is simply being consistent with the Bible lawsand principles, and as much as you dislike the outcome, we have told everyone of our stand, and you can’t fault us for being consistent,” the organization said in its defense of the rule.
It has been called to my attention that the above quote taken from the Christian Post that I attributed to Jim McCabe because of the placement of the quote by the reporter, Sami K. Martin, under a quote she identified as attributable to McCabe was in reality a quote the reporter for the Christian Post pulled from the Silent Lambs website.
http://www.silentlambs.org/twowitnessrule.htm
On that page of the Silent Lamb website the author stated:
"Watchtower has been severely criticized for their approach, which has been depicted as legalistic and needlessly biased in favor of wrongdoers, to the detriment of children. The Watchtower response has been that, as an organization dedicated to God and to upholding Bible principles, it would be unscriptural to accept the word of a single abused child, since doing so violates the biblical passages cited above.
“Up until now, this stance has led to a stalemate.
“Watchtower says, in effect: ‘You can disagree with our religion all you like, but we are a Bible-based organization, and we stand for upholding the Bible. What we are doing is simply being consistent with Bible laws and principles, and as much as you dislike the outcome, we have told everyone of our stand, and you can’t fault us for being consistent.’"I want to apologize to Jim McCabe for this mix-up and am actually relieved that he did not say these harsh words in the context we read them.
I met Jim McCabe when I was in Bethel and thought him to be a kind man. His reputation was of a person who loved his religion and his wife and children so it was difficult for both Joe and me to wrap our minds around that he or anybody representing the Watchtower organization would say such an insensitive statement, especially as an attorney who is defending the Watchtower in child sexual abuse cases.
Believing that it is in the best interests of the reading public, I will be contacting the Christian Post to discuss this situation and hope that they will endeavor to do the right thing by attributing the quote under discussion in a future article, not to the Witness organization, but to Silent Lambs.org, a website operated by a former Witness who, like me, is opposed to the use of the two-witness belief by Witness elders when there is an allegation of child abuse.
Barbara
-
105
Consider the "outcome" when elders apply the two-witness "rule"
by AndersonsInfo injehovahs witnesses two-witness rule is applied by elders when a witness member accuses another member of a sin, even if that sin is a criminal act.
if there arent two witnesses to the accusation, it goes nowhere, including not being reported to the authorities.
and in the case of an allegation of child abuse, the accused is free to molest again.. watchtower attorney, jim mccabe, recently stated this about jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule which he described as a bible-based belief :.
-
-
AndersonsInfo
I found a statement written by Attorney, Victor V. Blackwell, a one-time Watchtower attorney from long ago to be very interesting. He actually goes back to the "Rutherford" era, meeting Rutherford a year before "the judge" died in 1942. It was Rutherford who encouraged Blackwell to go to law school.
Blackwell said the following statement back in 1977 about "agents" of the Society:
"It is the unanimous opinion of all Jehovah's Witnesses who are lawyers, and I have talked to most of them, that the elders, committees, District Overseers and Circuit Overseers, all are agents of the Society. They are appointed by the Society directly, and act under its supervision and instruction. All the procedures, or lack of them, are provided by the Society. Their conduct becomes the conduct of the Society, for which it is responsible."
Blackwell wrote the book, O'ER THE RAMPARTS THEY WATCHED, published in 1976. He was globally-known counsel and trial lawyer for Jehovah's Witnesses.
-
105
Consider the "outcome" when elders apply the two-witness "rule"
by AndersonsInfo injehovahs witnesses two-witness rule is applied by elders when a witness member accuses another member of a sin, even if that sin is a criminal act.
if there arent two witnesses to the accusation, it goes nowhere, including not being reported to the authorities.
and in the case of an allegation of child abuse, the accused is free to molest again.. watchtower attorney, jim mccabe, recently stated this about jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule which he described as a bible-based belief :.
-
-
AndersonsInfo
Metatron: You said,
However, by isolating the CO's from the Society they get away with these crimes because the CO's are utter fools and have no property in particular. The sexual abuse of children in the Organization goes on indefinitely because they have found a way to insulate themselves from the horror they have caused.
In a lawsuit, it is my understanding that one or more of the legal corporations (WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY OF NEW YORK, INC. (and/or d/b/a or a/k/a, WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC.) that presides over Jehovah's Witnesses can't distance itself from the perpetrators if the WT corporation appointed these men as elders or ministerial servants. With appointment comes "agency." All elders are "agents" of the Watchtower. Molesters who are elders when they molest kids are "agents" of the WT.
Circuit Overseers are also agents of the WT. Under the new arrangement, circuit overseers appoint elders. However, as WT agents, when they do the appointing, they are merely doing their job as WT's appointed agents.
In a lawsuit, this doesn't mean that WT elders (agents) that recommended an elder, who turned out to be a molester, will escape responsibility either. That's why lawyers sue congregations. (KINGDOM HALL JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES (CENTRAL ENGLISH) OF DALLAS, TEXAS, KINGDOM HALL JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES OF PLANO, TEXAS, KINGDOM HALL JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES OF GREENVILLE, TEXAS) But the "buck" stops with the WT who started the chain of appointments. (Said Defendant [Watchtower of NY] has conducted business within the State of Texas through its agents, representatives, and alter egos.)
This chain of responsibility can be seen in lawsuits where lawyers sue everybody in the chain, which didn't include circuit overseers before, but will now since they make appointments at the behest of the WT. (The Defendant entities are collectively referred to herein as the “Watchtower Defendants” because each is the alter ego of one another and collectively operate in concert as a single business enterprise.)
I hope this information is helpful.
-
105
Consider the "outcome" when elders apply the two-witness "rule"
by AndersonsInfo injehovahs witnesses two-witness rule is applied by elders when a witness member accuses another member of a sin, even if that sin is a criminal act.
if there arent two witnesses to the accusation, it goes nowhere, including not being reported to the authorities.
and in the case of an allegation of child abuse, the accused is free to molest again.. watchtower attorney, jim mccabe, recently stated this about jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule which he described as a bible-based belief :.
-
-
AndersonsInfo
Phizzy, you wrote:
Even assuming the two-witness rule makes sense Scripturally, which I dispute, but that is for another Thread, it is concerned with when it is appropriate to exercise Church discipline. Nowhere does a Scripture say that what are considered crimes by the Civil Authorities should be ignored and not reported to those Authorities.
You're absolutely correct. JWs interpretation of the need for two witnesses doesn't make sense scripturally. One former-JW in the UK did considerable research on the matter which I point to after my discussion on the harm of the two-witness belief found at http://watchtowerdocuments.org/bible-based-beliefs-harm-children/
I wrote the article because I noticed that WT spokesmen and also in WT BOE letters, WT writers never say, "two-witness policy" or "two-witness rule." To WT oracles/leaders, it is the two-witness BELIEF. It is noteworthy and that's why I named my article, "Bible-Based Belief Harms Children" and then I explained my position after the article:
I am in no way critical of the use of the Bible requirement for the need of two witnesses when there is an accusation of “sin,” not crime, in a religious setting. However, there is more behind the ways Jehovah’s Witnesses apply their “two-witness rule” than meets the eye. In fact, the scriptures Jehovah’s Witnesses' leaders most frequently cite are misapplied. Examples of this fact can be seen from the research presented on the following website – Jehovah's Witnesses Refined.
-------
For the sake of convenience, I picked out a few of the author's excellent thoughts found on Jehovah's Witnesses Refined on the matter and posted them here:
Examining the Scriptural Position
Here we look at the scriptures that refer to the requirement for two or more witnesses [that are most often quoted by Jehovah's Witnesses].
Deuteronomy 19:16-21
“If a malicious witness takes the stand to accuse a man of a crime, the two men involved in the dispute must stand in the presence of the Lord before the priests and the judges who are in office at the time. The judges must make a thorough investigation, and if the witness proves to be a liar, giving false testimony against his brother, then do to him as he intended to do to his brother. You must purge the evil from among you. The rest of the people will hear of this and be afraid, and never again will such an evil thing be done among you. Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for
It must be remembered that in ancient Israel there were no police or courts. The judges acted in these capacities; hence the requirement for two or more witnesses. This situation does not exist today in the modern Christian congregation.
The Bible states that God has placed the secular authorities as his “ministers” to act in criminal matters (Romans 13).
Romans 13 is clear that the superior authorities stand placed by Jehovah to deal with criminal evil, not the elders.
In the case of one person’s word against another, did the judges in ancient Israel consider that their hands were tied and they could do nothing? No! If there weren’t enough witnesses the king became the judge and had to decide the final outcome.
Deuteronomy 25:1
“When men have a dispute, they are to take it to court and the judges will decide the case, acquitting the innocent and condemning the guilty.”
Notice here that it was the judges, not the priests, who made the “thorough investigation” (19:18). The priests served in a spiritual capacity, not a legal capacity. At this point the priests became observers only and left the investigation to the judges. In the case of one person’s word against another, the matter moved from being a spiritual, priestly matter, to a criminal, legal matter to be investigated by the judiciary arm of the nation, not the priestly.
Matthew 18:15-16
“Moreover, if your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established. (New World Translation)”
By using the term “brothers,” Jesus set out a process for resolving disputes between adults, not children. This is clear from the fact that the first step is for the brother sinned against to approach the accused alone. Obviously, Jesus did not intend for a child victim of sexual molestation to have to do such a thing. Jesus is saying that the one sinned against should approach the offending party to reason with them and reach a resolution, and for forgiveness to follow. It is obviously inappropriate to expect a child to do that.
Consider also that if the matter is not resolved privately between the parties, and it remains unresolved after two or more witnesses are brought in, Jesus says the matter should be referred to the whole congregation. Would Jesus intend for a terrible perversion such as child sexual abuse to be adjudicated by the whole congregation? Absolutely not. The congregation does not perform the function of the superior authorities of Romans 13. It is not the police force or a courthouse.
1 Timothy 5:19, 24, 25
“Do not admit an accusation against an older man, except only on the evidence of two or three witnesses. Reprove before all onlookers persons who practice sin, that the rest also may have fear…. The sins of some men are publicly manifest, leading directly to judgment, but as for other men [their sins] also become manifest later. In the same way also the fine works are publicly manifest and those that are otherwise cannot be kept hid.” (New World Translation)
Child abuse, like murder or rape, is a terrible crime, so it becomes a matter that needs to become publicly manifest through the involvement and judgment of the secular legal authorities. It is not just a sin to be handled only within the congregational arrangement. Being a crime requiring police involvement puts it in a different category, in which the standard of evidence is not the Apostle Paul’s congregational standard of two or three witnesses but the public standard of evidence the legal authorities use. The court’s judgment then counts as the public manifestation of the sin that suffices to prove congregational guilt in the absence of two or three witnesses.
It is disgraceful that in a letter to elders following the Conti verdict, the Watchtower Society quotes these verses from 1 Timothy as if to insinuate that if there is only one witness and the elders can do nothing at the time, eventually the paedophile’s sins will “become manifest” after abusing more victims who then might come forward as additional witnesses. This tends to reduce child victims to mere pieces of evidence that must accumulate over time before there is enough evidence for the elders to finally take action. So much for the Watchtower Society’s claim that “one victim of pedophilia is one too many.”
Jesus showed that the Old Testament requirement for two or more witnesses is really the principle of requiring sufficient evidence for proof. Forensic and other scientific methods for solving crimes didn’t exist in ancient times. If sufficient evidence to prove guilt is gathered through such modern methods, with or without two or more human witnesses, the Biblical principle is satisfied. The same standard should also apply at the congregational level for dealing with the crime as a sin, which in turn makes it compulsory that the elders engage the secular authorities on every occasion whether or not mandatory reporting laws apply.
http://jwsrefined.com/2014/07/27/jehovahs-witnesses-child-molestation-and-the-two-witness-rule/