Okay: Who is Barb & What's the "news"?

by lynnmelo 52 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  lynnmelo

  Thanks, FreeWilly and others. I went on the silentlambs.org site yesterday and viewed the Dateline episode. To say I was appalled is an understatement. I'm sincerely disgusted, sad, and disappointed. I realize that there are two sides to every story, but some things can't be defended: 1) letting a confessed pedophile back out on the streets to witness to other unsuspecting people; 2) Erica Garza's congregation supporting the confessed pedophile instead of her, the victim.

  I'd like to know what the Society's current policy on reporting child molesters is. It seems to me that they're treating a child molester in the same manner they might treat someone who, say, was discovered stealing. However, a child molester is a very particular type of criminal. The recidivism rate for child molesters is nearly 100 %. They cannot be trusted. To me, child molesters should have two choices: 1) death penalty or 2) life imprisonment with chemical castration. Even if you were to forgive such an animal, how in the world could you put him out on the street?
• 

  jgnat

  As far as I know, lynnmelo, the current policy of the WTBTS is to have the elders report where the law requires. I do believe that congregation members are expected to speak to the elders first, however, which potentially hamper investigative efforts. (What would happen for instance, if an elder confronted the pedophile prior to the investigation, allowing time for the suspect to cover up any evidence of the crime?). I believe the "two witness" rule or confession still applies, so a child may be further traumatized by being required to relate their experience in front of the abuser.

  My church goes farther, requiring all potential child workers to attend an awareness workshop (what is permissible, what is out of bounds, and the signs of abuse). We also had to submit to a criminal records check before working with children. Our seminar leader says a couple of applicants a year back out when they find out about the criminal check. Makes you think. We're not that big a church.
• 

  Lady Lee

  I'd like to know what the Society's current policy on reporting child molesters is.

  The current public policy is that they report abuse cases to the authorities. The real policy is that when an elder hears of a case he must first call headquarters to determine what the reporting policy is in that area. There must be two witnesses to any accusation for the elders to take action. They refuse to warn the congregation that a person has been accused and that people should be very careful with their children.

  Shortly after this hit the media a new case was disclosed near where I was living. The elder's solution ---- move him into a different hall --- and tell no one.

  Even if a person is accused and if he denies it the elders do nothing. He is able to go out in service like you saw in the video of Dateline. If no one knows he was accused he could show up at a pre-service meeting and if he is the only male he will be expected to take the lead. That means he says the prayer and decides who works with who. And if there is a child in the group --- would you want him going anywhere with your child? The problem is that because no one knows he is free as a bird.

  Even if he admits it but is remorseful, most likely nothing will be done. He might be privately warned to stay away from kids in the hall - but what about the book study group? what about him going door to door on his own and finding some kid who is alone and opens the door!!!

  It seems to me that they're treating a child molester in the same manner they might treat someone who, say, was discovered stealing. However, a child molester is a very particular type of criminal. The recidivism rate for child molesters is nearly 100 %. They cannot be trusted.

  Absolutely!!!

  To me, child molesters should have two choices: 1) death penalty or 2) life imprisonment with chemical castration. Even if you were to forgive such an animal, how in the world could you put him out on the street?

  Denial. What it boils down to is that if the WTS can sweep it under the carpet, they will
• 

  MuadDib

  "I think I may have connected a dot or two and come up with a Matisse. If the way my thoughts are running is in line with the real deal this may be the break in the hull of Constitutionalized protections for institutional religion—and tilting of the scales in favor of the individual—that a lot of religious people have been waiting for. It may eventually be much bigger news than for just JWs, but JWs will be in the mix."

  I've often thought of what the internal reaction to such a thing would be. Obviously the JWs are going to take any indication of such a thing as the onset of the scarlet-coloured beast's attack on Babylon the Great - aka the destruction of all world religions by secular governments. It would be neat to see how that would shake them up, especially when nothing really happened... probably another aggressive campaign by the Society ala 1975, lots of people selling their houses and pulling their kids out of school, and then leaving in droves after the fallout from the non-event.
• 

  Confession

  I've been struggling now for more than a year with the information I've found in this forum and elsewhere about Jehovah's Witnesses and child sexual abuse. To be clear: I am an EX-JW elder who has moved 2500 miles from the only state in which he ever lived as part of his fade from the organization. I am stunned at how my entire family could have been duped by this organization for four generations. That said, I've had difficulty identifying with certain things posted here.

  About nine years ago I was the chairman of a judicial committee, handling the case of a fellow elder being accused of pedophilia. Only then did I find out that five years previous he'd been accused of this also. We spoke to brothers from the previous committee. It seems that while they only had one witness, (a 13 year old boy,) they still didn't feel like letting this matter go. So they called the Society and were given the okay to conduct an investigation. They spoke to all the families with children in our congregation--as well as some from other congregations. Apparently they were unable to find other accusers.

  So, without any corroborating evidence, they could not conclude that he was guilty of pedophilia. He was counseled for showing poor judgment in allowing young boys to sleep with him in his bed and was removed as an elder.

  That brings us up to the committee I was chairing. New information came to light about another accuser, then 24 years old, but who'd been molested by this brother when he was a young boy. So we now had two accusers. We consulted the ks91 (elders' manual,) and found this...

  If there are two or three witnesses to the same kind of
  wrongdoing but each one is witness to a separate incident,
  their testimony can be considered.

  We used this as the basis for eventually finding him guilty and disfellowshipping him. Nine years later he is still disfellowshipped because he refuses to own up to it.

  This is why--even though I am sickened by the Watchtower Society, and certainly now see the wisdom of letting the authorities do their job--I shake my head every time someone in this forum makes the claim that the Society has always required two or more witnesses to a single event in order to find someone guilty. I remember hearing that in the Dateline episode too--and finding it on the Silent Lambs site. It's just not accurate--at least for many years now. Is this really the first time this has been brought up?

  I in no way want to support the WTS--or diminish the pain experienced by so many abuse victims. I just want to provide clarification because it seems that continuing to say this may provide opportunity for detractors to accuse us of not telling the whole truth.
• 

  lynnmelo

  Thank you, Confession, for that information. I am not discounting anything anyone else has said, but I do think it is extremely important to get all sides of an issue. Someone like me who is searching for the truth (this time, I'm referring to the truth about the organization) and who has already been warned about the danger of "apostate" sites would be inclined to discount a lot of what might be true because other facts weren't brought to light (perhaps because they weren't known, which is why I try to be thorough).

  That said, Confession, in the personal example you shared, I don't believe that the elders did the right thing by just letting that guy go without reporting it to the police or social services even with the first accusation but definitely not with the second. In my view, they had an obligation not only to protect a particular congregation's children but also to protect other children in that society. So they disfellowshiped him--big deal. He's still a potential child predator who's now on the loose. He should be investigated by the secular authorities at the very least.

  Nevertheless, I do agree with your overall point about having the whole story. In that same vein, one thing about the Dateline interview bothered me. Stone Philips asked Bill Bowen something like (I'm paraphrasing), "So, you talking with me is like you talking to Satan?" Bowen answered "Yes." He followed that with something stating the Witnesses's view of the outside world as Satan's world. The latter statement was more representative of what I've learned about the Witnesses, while the former statement was a total oversimplication, IMHO. I don't think that any Witness I know would ever equate speaking to individuals who are non-Witness as speaking with Satan. It's stuff like that that bothers me. I wish people would just stick to the straight facts about something without trying to exaggerate it or filter facts. Again, I'm not applying this statement to anyone who has responded to me here; I'm just agreeing with the point Confession made.
• 

  stillajwexelder

  These threads are getting irritating. sKally

  The fire goes out if one does not put fuel on it
• 

  Lady Lee

  Confession

  This has been posted so often on this board that there is a whole section in the Best of series dedicated just to sexual abuse.

  From every story I have heard your congregation is an exception. There are literally dozens of stories on this site where the whole thing is swept under the carpet.

  I was abused by 3 baptized uncles and my stepfather who was studying.

  In the case of my stepfather

  • he was sexually abusing my aunt who was one year older than me (we were 11 and 12 yrs old.
  • he was caught in the act abusing my aunt. The PO's recommendation was to send my aunt to live somewhere else.. The abuse was not reported and the abuser stayed in the home and in the cong.. She committed suicide shortly after being moved.
  • Then he was caught abusing me. The same PO recmmended that I be sent somewhere else. I went into foster care for 3 years. He remained in the home and in the congregation. it was not reported.
  • A couple of years later my mother and he had separated. They were told they could not be baptized until each got their divorces and married legally to each other. He kidnapped my 4 yr old sister and abused her. He did return her and then disappeared. Again it was not reported. My sister wound up living a life of drugs and abuse to block out the memories. Last month she comiitted suicide.

  Yup the PO really helped. The abuser got away. Seems he moved to the US and married a woman with --- daughters.

  My story isn't unique. Although my story happened 40 years ago I have been shocked and stunned at how similar some recent stories are at mine.

  Yes the elder's manual says

  If there are two or three witnesses to the same kind of wrongdoing but each one is witness to a separate incident, their testimony can be considered

  But the operative word there is "can". That doesn't mean "should" or "must" I do believe we have had some letters to the elders posted on the site also redefining this quote. In all cases the Society MUST be contacted before the elders do anything else. If the law in that area doesn't mandate reporting the abuse then the answer they will get is to keep it as quiet as possible.

  Some of the stories here are haunting, stomach churning tales of victims being abused, then getting no help from the elders, being forced to confront the abuser and in those cases where the abuser is a family member the victim is forced to go home with him.

  Bravo to you and the elders where you were. You are definitely the exception to the rule
• 

  Confession

  Lady,

  Yes, I've read many, many sad accounts like yours. My heart goes out to you. Can't imagine what such an experience must be like.

  If there are two or three witnesses to the same kind of wrongdoing but each one is witness to a separate incident, their testimony can be considered

  With reference to the above quote, I recall reading it to the C.O. when I spoke with him about the case. At first, he'd indicated that there might not be enough evidence because there was only one accuser for each incident. After reading it verbatim from the book, he did say...

  "Yes, "can." It can be considered. That's the thing. It will have to be determined whether or not it "should" be considered."

  I asked him if there was any auxiliary information from the Society to indicate when you "can" and when you "can't." The answer was "no." From the perspective of the committee, if the book said, "it can be considered," then we were going to consider it.

  Of course during my time in the organization many other judicial committees rendered "guilty" decisions to pedophiles; we were not that exceptional. At the time, the only important instruction from the Society was, if there is a "guilty" decision, you should neither en-courage nor dis-courage reporting the matter to the police. I know that, prior to this, it was definitely to "dis-courage" any such reporting. And both of these policies led to people thinking they would be disfellowshipped for not leaving the matter in Jehovah's hands. As a result, pedophiles were able to continue their activity and children went without the counseling they needed.

  My personal opinion is that it is ultimately the parents' job to report the matter. It is the congregation's job to inform them of their right to do so--and to explain the clear reasons why it's necessary. If the parents don't do it, then the congregation can report the matter. I think, up front, before the judicial committee even begins, the elders should refer the parents to experienced professionals in the area of child sexual abuse.
• 

  AlmostAtheist

  >> I am not discounting anything anyone else has said, but I do think it is extremely important to get all sides of an issue.

  Why not give the Watchtower a call? 718-560-5000

  They won't tell you much over the phone, but what they don't deny might be enough to help you out.

  Dave