What is a "known child molester?"

by truthsetsonefree 5 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  truthsetsonefree

  Referring to the press release mentioned at http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/112393/1.ashx, it should be noted that WT is a corporation, with attorneys looking to cover themselves and their employer. It is noteworthy then to consider what WT defines as a 'known child molester' as it is one classified as such who cannot hold a responsible position in the congregation.

  Letter to Elders March 14, 1997: "Who is a known child molester? The January 1, 1997, Watchtower article "Let Us Abhor What Is Wicked" mentions on page 29 that a man "known to have been a child molester" would not qualify for privileges in the congregation. An individual "known" to be a former child molester has reference to the perception of that one in the community and in the Christian congregation. In the eyes of the congregation, a man known to have been a child molester is not "free from accusation" and "irreprehensible," nor does he have "a fine testimony from those on the outside." (1 Tim. 3:1-7, 10; 5:22; Titus 1:7) In view of his past, people in the community would not respect him, and the brothers might even stumble over his appointment."

  With regard to dealing with the media, at the 2005 Kingdom Ministry School, elders were given a statement to be read verbatim to any inquiring reporters:

  "The spiritual and physical welfare of Jehovah's Witnesses is of paramount concern to the elders who have been appointed to shepherd the flock. The elders extend this shepherding confidentially. Confidential shepherding makes it easier for those who seek the elders help to do so without worrying that what they say will be divulged later. Consequently, we do not comment on whether elders either currently or previously met to assist any member of the congregation."

  So what all this means is that if a victim comes forward, and no one else knows about it, it is possible for an accused individual NOT to be considered "known." It is the public knowledge and the knowledge of the congregation at large (not just the elders) that determines whether this person is barred from office. That leaves a lot of wiggle room for confidentiality and congregation switching to protect a child molester.
• 

  rebel8

  bttt
• 

  outnfree

  It is the public knowledge and the knowledge of the congregation at large (not just the elders) that determines whether this person is barred from office. That leaves a lot of wiggle room for confidentiality and congregation switching to protect a child molester.

  BINGO!

  I understand that there is a list at silentlambs now of congregations where child molesters have been known to abuse.

  out
• 

  Dr Jekyll

  See RichieRiches topic "I'm back" for more details of how elders are to handle known paedophiles, including the notes mate in the flock book which dealt with destroying records of known paedophiles if they obtained a responsible position in the congregation.
• 

  Apostate Kate

  So what all this means is that if a victim comes forward, and no one else knows about it, it is possible for an accused individual NOT to be considered "known." It is the public knowledge and the knowledge of the congregation at large (not just the elders) that determines whether this person is barred from office. That leaves a lot of wiggle room for confidentiality and congregation switching to protect a child molester.

  This is what has been going on. Without the two witnesses there is no crime in the first place. All one needs to do is deny it, no witnesses, no crime, not known.
• 

  FairMind

  The term "known Child Molester" has confused me too. I've always thought of it meaning someone who is prone to molest children. This explanation of "known" helps me to understand what happened to a brother in a congregation I used to attend. This brother was involved in a situation where a young 12-year-old girl climbed into bed with him while he was drunk. The girl did this out of all innocence but the brother wound up putting his hands on her. There was no actual sexual contact or fondling however. The brother confessed his sin to the elders and they took no action against him. Later the police fond out about the incident and the brother was arrested and charged with a misdemeanor crime. He confessed his guilt and mentioned he was a JW. He wound up paying a fine and served some probation time. When the elders in our congregation found out he had confessed and also mentioned to the police that he was a JW he was blackballed. They told him his changed-status was due to him being a "known child molester". I always felt that this brother got a raw deal from the elders. He was not in my opinion a "known child molester ", he was a man who had made a serious mistake and honestly admitted it and as far as I know never repeated it.