Watchtower Website to Report Child Molestations

by Ray Skyhorse 8 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • Ray Skyhorse
    Ray Skyhorse

    I’ve been reading a lot on the issue of child molestion and the Watchtower Society. I’ve read some things about the Borg settling cases out-of-court but I haven’t heard many details.

    Does anyone know if the Watchtower has agreed to any terms for settling a case that involve non-monetary terms? For example, today I read in the L.A. Daily Journal about the Catholic Church settling a case that involved these terms:

    1) The priest must give up his collar

    2) The archdiocese must institute a toll-free number and a Web site for victims to report molestations.

    3) The archdiocese must start a victims' assistance program and place a green page in employees' files, signaling that any "sensitive" information on that employee is in another file. (During discovery, the plaintiff's attorneys discovered two sets of files: a clean set and a set that noted molestation allegations.)

    4) If officials determine that a priest has molested a child, that priest may never again live or work in an environment with children.

    5) Each diocese must issue letters of apology to the plaintiff and other victims.

    (This story can be found in the LA Times http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-082101priest.story )

    I would love to see the Watchtower do #2 and #5, in particular. I think the Borg needs to put up a Website to not only help report molestations but to act as an archive and as a memorial to all of those who have been harmed by them. It should be a site that the JW sponsors so that it would not be considered apostate. In fact, I think that they should be forced to advertise its existence.

    I hope a victim forces them into terms such as these. IMHO, money just isn’t enough to cover the pain.

    Peace,

    Ray Skyhorse

  • Tanalyst
    Tanalyst

    After WT. is finished with all their child molestation court cases and have any $ left over. Implementing #1-#5 would be good.

  • Maximus
    Maximus

    Ray, a very thoughtful post. Thanks for sharing it.

    Permit a small clarification. The suit was not against the Catholic Church but against the Bishop and Archbishop, much like the Circuit Overseer and District Overseer. They were charged with failing to act on the information they received. Interesting. There was insufficient evidence for authorities to file criminal charges, but that did not stop church officials from doing something positive anyway. The terms you note are either in place or under development in various dioceses around the country.

    The Society's settlements always incorporate a gag order. That's why you don't hear about those cases. They pay up to $150,000 for that privilege, and they set their own favorable terms.

    I wonder how much the Society would be willing to pay to settle the Berry case? The lawsuits cherry tree is full of fruit, ripe for shaking ....

    Here's another article on the incident:
    http://www.msnbc.com/local/knbc/nbc5vioinqc.asp

    Snippets:

    Under the settlement providing for payment, the church also will implement a program of action against priests and other church employees alleged to be molesters, according to the attorneys and the Archdiocese of Los Angeles.

    The $5.2 million settlement stems from a lawsuit filed by Ryan DiMaria of Laguna Hills against the Bishop of Orange and the Archbishop of Los Angeles, alleging that as a 17-year-old he was molested in 1991 by Monsignor Michael A. Harris, then principal at Santa Margarita High School in the southern Orange County community of Rancho Santa Margarita.

    Kathy Freberg, the attorney for DiMaria, said the church has agreed to pay her client $5.2 million -- "the largest pretrial settlement of any Catholic priest molestation case in the United States."

    Under the settlement, Harris agreed to ask the Vatican to remove him from the priesthood, Freberg said.

    But despite his reported agreement to leave the church, Harris continued to deny he molested anyone and said in a statement that church leaders agreed to settle the case for "their own business reasons."

    One senior cleric, Bishop Tod D. Brown, head of the Diocese of Orange, effectively derided Harris's denial of involvement.

    "Although Michael Harris continues to deny any wrongdoing, the Diocese of Orange has grave doubts about his innocence in these matters, taking into consideration the number of complaints made against him, the similarity of those complaints and the apparent sincerity of the persons making these statements," Brown said in a statement.

    He expressed "profound sorrow" over the ordeal experienced by Harris's accusers, who he said had been courageous to come forward.

    "In a lawsuit brought by Ryan DiMaria against the Roman Catholic Bishop of Orange, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Los Angeles and Michael Harris, it has been stated that in 1980, a priest of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles was informed of but failed to act upon information that Father Harris had sexually abused a student in the late 1970s while he was principal of Mater Dei High School in Santa Ana.

    "Sexual abuse is a serious sin. It devastates its victims physically, emotionally and spiritually. It also erodes the confidence the faithful place in their pastoral leaders. Such activity simply will not be tolerated in our church."

    Freberg said the church has agreed to issue apologies to DiMaria, to three other victims, and to the mother of a victim who is now deceased, and to send letters to all Catholic organizations in Orange and Los Angeles counties informing parishioners of the allegations.

    The district attorney's office reviewed DiMaria's accusations last year but found insufficient evidence to file criminal charges.

    A settlement between DiMaria and church authorities was reached nonetheless. "The evidence in our case was so strong," Freberg said, adding that lawyers uncovered documents and four other victims who said they were molested between 1977 and 1983.

    "They have come forward and acted as witnesses in our case," she said.

    Slated to receive apologies are David A. Price, who says Harris molested him at Mater Dei between 1979 and 1983 and who is pursuing his own suit against church authorities; Lenora Colice, whose son, the late Vincent Colice, said he was molested from 1977 to 1979 while a Mater Dei student; former Mater Dei student Mark Curran, who alleged Harris molested him in 1979; and Larry Raheb, who said he was molested by Harris while seeking his spiritual counsel in 1979.

    Freberg said DiMaria suffered "emotional trauma and pain and went into a tailspin in 1991" after Harris molested him. He now is finishing law school and plans to specialize in taxes, she said.

    Harris no longer says Mass or works as a school principal, but he is still called "father" or "monsignor" and wears a priests' collar, she said.

    "We wanted to take away the key he used to gain the trust of his victims and molest them," she said. "The goal is to get his collar removed."

    During a settlement meeting, she said, "we demanded that he request to be defrocked."

    "At the end of the day, after kicking and screaming, he agreed to the request," Freberg said. "The bishop will file papers with the Vatican so it can issue a decree."

    The paperwork should be submitted about Sept. 15 and the process should take about two months, she said, adding that, unless he was formally defrocked, Harris could be a priest in another country.

    The statement by the Archdiocese of Los Angeles cited 11 points in the agreement with DiMaria "which are already in place or under development by the Archdiocese." These included:

    - Removal of priests who molest children

    - The establishment of an 800 number and a Web site to allow for child-abuse complaints to be submitted anonymously

    - The distribution of an informational pamphlet on sexual abuse;

    - The reporting of child sexual abuse to the archbishop

    - A no-fraternization policy

    - Assistance to sexual-abuse victims

    - A procedure under which clergy will sign an agreement to be bound by the provisions of the "Archdiocesan Policy on Sexual Abuse by Clergy."

    - The reporting to civil authorities of child sexual abuse by clergy

    - Check-and-balance procedures involving reviews of Catholic school principals

    - The introduction of an exit-interview procedure for use with seminarians who leave prior to ordination

    - The maintenance of personnel files, each of which will include information on where additional data about an employee may be obtained.

    Harris, known as "Father Hollywood" in Orange County because of his charisma and good looks, stepped down as principal of Santa Margarita High School in October 1994, citing stress.

    Weeks later, he spent four days at St. Luke's Institute in Maryland, the Catholic Church's medical treatment center for troubled priests. Church doctors recommended that he be admitted for in-patient treatment and have no unsupervised contact with minors, according to court records cited by the Los Angeles Times.

    Doctors offered a psychiatric diagnosis, records show, finding that Harris was sexually attracted to adolescent boys.

    "Our clinical team believes that there is substance to the allegations," the institute report said, according to The Times.

    "It has been our experience that in many cases like these, the allegations that have surfaced are only a few of the actual incidents of abuse that have occurred."

    Maximus

  • Had Enough
    Had Enough

    Hello Ray:

    Thanks for this very interesting post informing us of this news story. Its very gratifying to see all this being made public for all to know about. The WTS has encouraged us for a long time to look down our noses at the few scandals that have come out of the Catholic Church. Now its gratifying to see them have to publicly own up to it and now to see the WTS having to follow suit.

    I would like to see in the WTS, #4 implemented so that if a molester isn't put in jail, at least he will no longer be in an authoritative position again. In fact, all of the points are very good, but I wonder what the WTS would do with the info gathered on a 1-800 number and/or a website. Would they not still try to keep this info "secret" and try to protect their image?

    I will be interesting to see if that is implemented in the Catholic Church and if it works.

    Hello Maximus:
    As usual, you have given us "real meat to chew on". You said:

    The suit was not against the Catholic Church but against the Bishop and Archbishop, much like the Circuit Overseer and District Overseer. They were charged with failing to act on the information they received.

    Forgive me if this question has already been answered somewhere.

    - I wonder you expect this will be the pattern that will be followed for the WTS....suing the elders or COs and DOs instead of the actual org itself. They failed "to act on the information they received" but as we know in our org, that was the internal direction of the WTS....to handle these cases themselves and not go to authorities, even though in print for the public, the WTS says otherwise, much like when the Catholic Church said:

    "Sexual abuse is a serious sin. It devastates its victims physically, emotionally and spiritually. It also erodes the confidence the faithful place in their pastoral leaders. Such activity simply will not be tolerated in our church."

    Isn't that practically the same words the WTS uses in its PRs and literature that they will no doubtedly beat to death in their defense hanging the elders out to dry?

    - I understand the Berry case IS against the WTS itself. Do you many think others, having won their criminal case against their molester, will file suit against the WTS also?

  • Michael3000
    Michael3000

    RAY -

    Since the chances of the WT having a phone line or web site for reporting child molestation are slim to none, Bill Bowen has already designed a wonderful site for this:

    % http://www.silentlambs.org

    Hope that helps.

    --Michael

    "Any day spent NOT knocking on doors is a good day!"

  • Maximus
    Maximus

    : I understand the Berry case IS against the WTS itself

    More specifically the Writ indicts the congregation, which means its elders, and the corporate entities--for the first time the Governing Body is also fingered. The Berry case puts a face on "the Society." Please note that the indictment clearly spells out the relationship of COs and DOs to the GB and elders in the organizational schema. Think not for one minute that attorney Anderson will leave it to the imagination as to how this specifically works.

    What is of more than passing interest to me is that the Catholic Church, the Episcopal and many other churches have had very enlightened policies and procedures in place, even though not monolithic; they even provide treatment centers for offenders as well as victims.

    The Watchtower Society has had a very bad policy in place to begin with, and a culture of protecting the organization rather than a vulnerable child. Some "treatment" has involved sending victims to a theocratic therapist who reports back to the elders, thus victimizing the victim yet again.

    Treatment of the offender consists in moralizing with scriptures, and the prescription of more prayer, more meetings, more study, and------more service. Really enlightened, wouldn't you say?

    Sure, they are going to let elders hang out to dry. But they themselves will not be able to hide.

    I say again that a Berry victory will open the floodgates of civil suits. Rest assured the Society will pull out all the stops to win that case.

    Remember too, they cannot afford to lose their largest market: the U.S. public.

    Maximus

  • Had Enough
    Had Enough

    Thank you Maximus:

    Sure, they are going to let elders hang out to dry. But they themselves will not be able to hide.

    I can't tell you how good it makes me feel to be reassured that the GB are going to have to deal with their accountability. And I'm afraid I can't be too sympathetic with the elders who did what they were told. Conscience and reasoning power has to be a huge factor when dealing with the lives of those in your charge so passing the buck just won't cut it.

    Having been raised to hold the churches of "Babylon the Great" in total distain, I must say I'm impressed with the fact that many of them have treatment facilities and arrangements for the victims and the victimizers.

    To be reminded of the WTS treatment policies of more, more, more, and to read their crowings of how wonderful their methods, ideals and policies are, makes me quite ill to say the least. I'm not a victim of a molester but I am a victim of the WTS system and when I see such outright, boldfaced hypocrisy in the huge gap of truth between what they say and what they do, I can hardly contain myself.

    I am so happy to hear you say again that "the Berry case will open the floodgates of civil suits."

    And when you say "Rest assured the Society will pull out all the stops to win that case", my intense hope is that doing so will cause them to fall flat on their face and their feeble underhandedness will be exposed to the world.

    Thank you for making me feel better.

  • Ray Skyhorse
    Ray Skyhorse

    ONE MORE THING I WOULD LIKE TO SEE: I'd like to see state legislatures adopt a no-gag rule in child abuse cases regarding the terms of settlement. I think the settlement terms of a lawsuit should always be a matter of public record whenever child abuse/molestation is alleged. I think legislatures do a disservice to the public by allowing plaintiffs and defendants to enter into private agreements when child abuse is alleged. Letting child molesters and institutions hide behind a gag rule in child abuse cases only promotes further molestations. The victim may be financially compensated but it does nothing to promote public safety. One the contrary, it promotes abuse.

    One caveat I would add is that victims should be allowed to file as John or Jane Doe if they are still minors. This would encourage children to come forward and report the abuse without fear of embarrasment.

    Also,

    [q]
    Michael3000 said:

    ...the chances of the WT having a phone line or web site for reporting child molestation are slim to none[/q]

    I couldn't disagree more. A mainstream church is now being forced into it. What's to prevent that from happening to a mainstream cult?

    HadEnough said:

    [q]...I wonder what the WTS would do with the info gathered on a 1-800 number and/or a website. Would they not still try to keep this info "secret" and try to protect their image?

    I will be interesting to see if that is implemented in the Catholic Church and if it works.[/q]

    A very good point. It is going to be interesting to see how they work this out. It would be good if a neutral third party were part of this agreement to monitor compliance.

    Peace,

    Ray Skyhorse

  • Michael3000
    Michael3000

    **I couldn't disagree more. A mainstream church is now being forced into it. What's to prevent that from happening to a mainstream cult?**

    I did not say it could NEVER happen; just that the chances are slim that the WT would be willing to do so. They very well may be pressured to have such a provision, either on their web site, or in ads on the back of their magazines - but be assured that much kicking and screaming will occur before that happens. The WT has a history of being slow to react when it comes to any action that could be percieved as an admission of guilt on their part.

    --Michael

    "Any day spent NOT knocking on doors is a good day!"

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit