Governing Body Member Stephan Lett Lies On JW.TV

by Finkelstein 78 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  flipper

  O.K. To show that Stephen Lett is lying through his teeth about the GB protecting young minor Jehovah's Witnesses and Richard Ashe is lying through his teeth to avoid WT liability here is a direct quote from a letter from the WT Society to all bodies of elders dated Oct. 1st, 2012 regarding directions of informing parents of minor children about specific child molesters in their midst. They talk a good talk but this is NOT applied -

  " If the branch office determines that an individual will be considered a predator , parents with minor children WILL NEED TO BE WARNED of the danger that exists so that they can protect their children. " It continues, " At the same time that parents are warned about an individual it would be appropriate for the elders to inform the individual that parents in the congregation will be discreetly informed. "

  This does not happen. Jehovah's Witness parents are NOT being informed that potential predators or child molesters are in their midst- thus these felony crimes keep getting committed against unsuspecting children as their parents are NOT informed of who is a pedophile or child molester in congregations ! Parents and children could and probably ARE sitting in seats right next to child molesters and they wouldn't even know.

  So the WT Society is doing a piss poor job of following their own guidelines and is NOT showing any sense of responsibility towards children in congregations by purposely keeping JW parents out of the loop by not informing them of WHO in these congregations is a child molester. So the child abuse problem will continue to fester until the WT Society assumes responsibility. They can talk a good talk like Lett did, but like Richard Ashe states, " elders aren't responsible for the physical welfare of children, just the spiritual welfare. " Looks like Richard's not on the same page as Lett is he ? Might it be a case of divide and conquer time between WT legal and the GB ? Whatever it is- call it what it is- criminal negligence
• 

  DATA-DOG

  When they say "The Branch" will decide who is a threat, that means," Local BOE, STFU!"

  The problem, again, is the "special relationship" that exists between the Corporation/Organization and the followers. The BOE obey the ORG's directives ( decrees according to my C.O ) because they come from GOD. If you don't obey, your life is affected severely when you are removed or possibly DF'd and black-balled. The ultimate threat is death at the hands of the glorified GB, remember that they believe they will help Jesus execute people at the BIG A.

  The Branch is to blame for the failure to pursue criminals.

  BRANCH = GB + LEGAL

  DD
• 

  EdenOne

  A major part of the issue here is that the Branch calls upon itself the task of determining who is a sexual predator. Notice that they differentiate between a 'molester' and a 'predator'. Positive, preemptive action will only be taken regarding a "predator", but since it's up to the Branch to decide when a 'molester' must be also considered a 'predator', the local BOE has its hands tied because the GB directives say so. In the meantime, a molester [or a predator taking advantage of the Branch's lack of expertise on the subject] has a green pass to reoffend because no special vigilance was required in the congregation. And all the GB cares about is to blame the victims and the whistleblowers - because, above all, they care for the Organization's "good name". Sick bastards.

  Eden
• 

  _Morpheus

  Before i post this, i want to be clear one critical point: the policy regarding child abuse is abhorrent and dead wrong. Im not making any excuses for it...

  now i will make an excuse .... The one aspect that is rational, IMHO, is the statment that there is a differance between a predator and someone who is technically a pedophile.

  Case in point: locally there is a growing spanish population. Its not uncommon for an 18 year old to be involved with a 16-17 year old, usally an older boy, younger girl (but not always). Technically the older party is a pedophile... But is (s)he a predator...? I dont see it that way. There may be a matter of 6 months age differance, maybe a year. Its happened and that person, legally, was a pedo. The parents of the girl called the police and the elders had to report him to legal. Legal didnt classify him as a predator although he was delt with judicially as was the girl... My point is i actually agree with the distinction between two kids doing what horny teenagers do (even though one crossed the imaginary 18year old line) and a 50 year old guy preying on an 8 year old.

  There needs to be some mechanism to distinguish, some common sense grounds to differentiate between the two cases and i support that common sense standard, which is what that church principle addresses. I also think every parent has the right and the responsiblity to call the police long before the local cult gets involved which is where i differ greatly from the church on this, but as to any action the church feels is nessary, a common sense differentiation between a predator and two hormonal teenagers is only logical.
• 

  sir82

  There needs to be some mechanism to distinguish, some common sense grounds to differentiate between the two cases

  Agreed. And WTS Service Department flunkies with little-to-no real life experience, and likely nothing more than a high school education, are NOT QUALIFIED to make that distinction.
  
• 

  Finkelstein

  EdenOne summarizes the situation correctly.

  The internal core socialization of the WTS from the top down is about how their organization is pure and righteous, from the expressed doctrines, to the set and established behavioral guidelines..

  Its extraneously pretentious but this is how the WTS tries to distinguish itself from other Christian based religions.

  We are Jehovah's solemnly chosen organization and most JWs really do believe that.
  

  Its also where the self assuming arrogance stems from the majority of indoctrinated JWS.
  

  Every JWs is expected to follow through with that expressive intent as to uphold that perceived image of the organization.
  

  So " Mustn't bring reproach onto Jehovah's organization " carries through on many levels.

  The ending result of all of this is .......

  
  
• 

  _Morpheus

  And sir, i whole heartedly agree and said as much. i also concluded by stating that the common sense principle is in regard to action the CHURCH feels is nessary. Clearly the glaring flaw in this mess is that they feel the church preempts the law which wrong on every level. The two should be forever seperate and i said in my post and will say again parents are obligated to report abuse to the police before any local cult considerations, although they damn well should tell the local cult officials as well on the chance they will do something responsible.
• 

  flipper

  I agree with the points about it being ridiculous that the " branch " or WT headquarters determines WHO is a predator. Or who is even a serial child molester. The point I was making in my post from the 2012 WT letter to elders is that the WT Society leaders are not even following through on their own written directions to warn the parents in congregations about who is a predator or molester ! The GB is dropping the ball and not insisting that elders inform parents . Because of the legal ramifications, too much talk, too many loose lips talking about child abuse cases and people involved then voila ! - you have a firestorm of child abuse lawsuits BECOMING KNOWN among the congregation as well as the financial fallout- and THAT is what WT leaders want to avoid. Thus to the GB it's " silence is golden " about talking too much about the child abuse lawsuits . As Lett tried to accomplish just chalk it up to " apostates " speaking " lies " allegedly about the GB and turn the tables on where the blame should be laid.

  When in actuality the blame needs to be laid squarely on the GB and WT leaders shoulders for NOT protecting and informing parents with minor children about pedophiles, predators, or child molesters in their midst. That is where the ball of responsibility is being dropped in an extreme way. And Richard Ashe is saying WT Society doesn't have that responsibility. It's being irresponsible at it's worst
• 

  Finkelstein

  Flipper
  

  The hush hush policy which the WTS has been operating upon for a long time, could actualy be used and exploited by people such as Jonathan Kendrick to re-offend because its assumed in the congregation that he is safe based on the fact that he was reinstated.

  When he moved over to another congregation he got the OK good to go label over himself which he exploited to seek out another victim, which happened to be Candace Conti.

  Its been mentioned on this thread previously but I think its worthy to reiterate that the JWS elders do not have the expertise to psychologically evaluate individuals who are mentally encased with particular sociological behavior, either do the lawyers who work for the WTS. Thats why it important for the betterment of society to have professionally trained people deal with these people. Perceiving this behavior as just another sinful sexual misconduct and placing a temporary DF label on these people is incredibly stupid and irresponsible. The courts in the State of California have found this to be true as well.
  
• 

  BluesBrother

  "Oneness of the spirit means............ We reject false stories. Apostate driven LIES that Jehovah's organization is permissive toward paedophiles.... Ridiculous !! "

  So says Lett.. If this were Pinocchio , his nose would visibly grow longer !

  As has been said, the Courts do not share your view