Has anyone read this article..

by earthtone 85 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  looking_glass

  Jay - even if they cancelled it, it would not matter because their legal fees are based on in-house counsel so it is money that does not really get paid out anyways. My guess is that Canada's frivolous law suit standard is a strict standard and if you fail to meet the requirements your law suit fails and you are required to pay the other side's fees. So most likely it was not just for this specific case that fees were award, but a custom and practice of the court. My further guess is that is Canada has a frivolous law suit requirement, every case is judged against that standard and any case that is deemed insufficient on merit is considered "frivolous". That being the case, it is too narrow of a standard to sit back and say "ah, see this case was without merit and should not have gone forward". But rather that there was not enough evidence to warrant a civil action. Which truthfully in many of the sexual abuse cases there is not enough evidence because the predator is not stupid they are not going to have witnesses to the crime. And the WTBTS is not stupid, they know how to say things to their members w/o coming out in writing and saying it.

  I am not a basher of JWs, but there is one real big glaring problem w/i their religion and it is the fact that child abusers are allowed to continue unharmed and unchecked. I have had several arguments w/ old time friends who are elders about this issue and they HAVE been told to "handle" it in-house, so as to not bring reproach. They have been told to not take it to the police and to discourage the victim and their family from taking it to the police. These men were not lying to me. These men were telling me honestly how they were to handle the matter internally. They honestly believe it was Jah's will to keep it quiet. The problem with this is once a pedophile, always a pedophile. And it is not just limited to kids in the hall, it happens to these men's neighbor's kids and any child they can get their hands on.

  It is like the Warren Jeffs clan, they honestly believe that what they are doing and how they are living their life is the right way with god and everyone else is wrong. It is the same w/ JWs.
• 

  parakeet

  TW:
  ***We have to wonder if it is concern for the abused victims that motivates Bowen's organization or their obvious agenda to discredit the WTS that motivates and consumes them.***
  
  YOU are the one who is trampling on the victim in your zeal to discredit Silent Lambs. YOU are the one who has no concern for the abused victims. And I don't need to "wonder" about it; you convict yourself with your words. Your consuming hatred for exJWs and Silent Lambs is evident in every line.
  
  The WTS discredited itself with its ham-handed methods of handling child abuse and again by attempting to silence the victim with hush money. Any person with compassion, exJW or not, would be repulsed by these actions. Bringing such horrors to the light of day is an act of courage.
  
  Your attempts to exonerate the WTS of its guilt serve only to further the abuse of the victim and alienate people of decency.
• 

  thirdwitness

  Did you take note of the Judge's ruling? Contrary to what some have said above JWs do not tell anyone they should not go to a therapists nor do they tell they not to go to the police. The judge ruled and said: The defendants did not instruct the plaintiff not to get medical help. She chose not to seek professional help herself against the advice of the elders and Mr. Mott-Trille. The defendants did not instruct the plaintiff that her father's abuse should not be reported. On the contrary, the defendants directed Mr. Palmer (the abuser) to report himself to the C.A.S. and then followed up directly to ensure he had done so.

  Why must people resort to lies to try to discredit JWs? The policy of JWs is never tell anyone they cannot go to the police and never discourage them from going to the police.
• 

  itsallgoodnow

  The policy IS JWs do not discourage people from going to the police. But what WAS the policy when the incident happened? And what was the policy of that particular group of elders? Sometimes there is a disconnect when it comes to official policy vs reality. What is important is this particular case. Official policy has been forced to change as a result of similar cases against the WTS as it should. If I became aware of abuse or witnessed abuse of any sort, I wouldn't hesitate to call the police. A few years ago, I might have thought reporting it to the elders would be enough, but I know the elders may or may not handle it in the appropriate, legal way.
• 

  thirdwitness

  "There was, however, psychological harm to the plaintiff as a result of the December 29, 1989 meeting. She was in a very vulnerable state at the time as she had just begun to deal with the effects of her father?s abuse. I accept the evidence of the various experts, including Dr. Awad, that this confrontation made things worse for the plaintiff."

  Hey 3rd, just out of curiosity, what happened? I'm not arguing your post, I am just curious. Essentially what happened is that one elder did not follow the WT policy. He should have never brought her before her father. The judge ruled that basically because the WT policy was not followed correctly that Vicki Boer was traumatized 5000 dollars worth of trauma. Just goes to show how good the WT policy is because if the WT policy would have been followed to the letter she would not have even been awarded the 5000. But the 5000 dollars had nothing to do with JWs promoting child abuse in the congregations or allowing child abuse or harboring child abusers. And as it turned out it was a 137,000 dollar victory for JWs. You can sue me all day and claim victory all you like if I recieve that kind of money for 'losing'.
• 

  thirdwitness

  But what WAS the policy when the incident happened?

  You tell me. Here's what the judge said: The defendants did not instruct the plaintiff not to get medical help. She chose not to seek professional help herself against the advice of the elders and Mr. Mott-Trille. The defendants did not instruct the plaintiff that her father's abuse should not be reported. On the contrary, the defendants directed Mr. Palmer (the abuser) to report himself to the C.A.S. and then followed up directly to ensure he had done so.
• 

  thirdwitness

  Is the victim told not to go to the police?The policy of JWs states: In addition to making a report to the branch office, the elders may be required by law to report evenuncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations to the authorities. If so, we expect the elders to comply. Additionally, the victim may wish to report the matter to the authorities, and it is his or her absolute right to do so.
  You have no doubt seen the apostates false claims that a person can be disfellowshipped for going to the authorities with child abuse allegations. Clearly, this is not the case at all. Some opposers claim that if there are not two witnesses to the molesting then the WT policy is that it should not be reported to the authorities. But did you notice the phrase above: 'even uncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations'. Yes, it is anyone's absolute right to report even uncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations to the authorities, even if there are not two witnesses.
  
  In fact, a previous letter to the elders said "all in the Christian congregation would want to consider their personal and moral responsibility to alert the appropriate authorities in cases where there has been committed or there exists a risk that there might be committed a serious criminal offence of this type..."
• 

  parakeet

  TW:
  When I was suffering from depression, I was TOLD by JWs, including elders, that it would not be a good idea to go to a therapist. I was TOLD that psychiatrists were a bad idea, that they would only harm me. Not one JW from my cong offered me any help to get through that terrible time. I finally did go to therapists, and they saved my life.
  I know of several JWs who "refused" psychiatric help because they were advised by elders not to persue it, and they suffered as a result. All of us here know the WTS' "official policy," but it is not practiced. You can mouth the words all you want, but in actual JW practice, they don't mean a thing.
• 

  monkeyshine

  In fact, a previous letter to the elders said "all in the Christian congregation would want to consider their personal and moral responsibility to alert the appropriate authorities in cases where there has been committed or there exists a risk that there might be committed a serious criminal offence of this type..."

  The policy of JWs states: In addition to making a report to the branch office, the elders may be required by law to report even uncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations to the authorities. If so, we expect the elders to comply. Additionally, the victim may wish to report the matter to the authorities, and it is his or her absolute right to do so.

  Hey 3rd, one more thing. Well, two things. First, in response to my first question, what was it exactly that happened in that meeting?

  Second, when were these 2 things written?(quoted above)

  Thanks
• 

  jwfacts

  Wow, aren't JW lawyers volunteers?

  Excellent point JWdaughter. On entering Bethel you sign a contract that you are a volunteer, and can not sue at a later time for wages. The WTS must have structured things specifically so that the lawyers are not considered volunteers, in order to be able to recoup costs from the other party. Considering how the WTS works, this would likely be on paper only.