What really matters to the elders- Podcast 9 Judicial Hearing

by Hobo Ken 70 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  boyzone

  Matt still has occasion to speak to his mum, and we have had glimpses of the Nan we knew, but on the whole the relationship is no longer a natural one and is strained. It leaves you feeling drained as you feel you have to always be on your best behaviour, be pleasant, be civil, be conciously aware of coming across as normal and happy to dispel any searching in them to find a fulfillment of any personal prophecies they'e made concerning you, so they can't turn round and say "I told you so".

  You perfectly describe my relationship with my dad. Draining.
• 

  besty

  Good commentary Dozy - I would wish anyone good luck that wishes to mount a defence based on inadmissible evidence in a starchamber :-)

  The problem with trying to keep a relationship going with hardline JW's who have made a vow of loyalty to Brooklyn diktats Jehovah (women seem particularly susceptible to this - runs for cover) is that the elephant in the room is so huge that there is no room for the people. Like Diana said "There were three of us in the marriage and it was a bit crowded."
• 

  gailh

  Spot on with every point, Dozy, as you'll discover when the appeal hearing is released.

  It amazes me that the Witnesses take such offense at our position of trying to expose the grave human rights violations that are sanctioned by the very Organisation that's appealing to the UN and other groups to have their rights defended.

  Long may our fight continue.
• 

  passwordprotected

  Sorry, Gail was logged in (yes, she now has an account, all will become clear) when I posted the above.
• 

  passwordprotected

  The problem with trying to keep a relationship going with hardline JW's who have made a vow of loyalty to Brooklyn diktats Jehovah (women seem particularly susceptible to this - runs for cover) is that the elephant in the room is so huge that there is no room for the people. Like Diana said "There were three of us in the marriage and it was a bit crowded."

  Also, the problem in the relationship isn't actually the person who has left or the person who is still a JW, it's the blooming organisation that dictates every facet of their life. The people are fine, it's the rules of the organisation that ruins things. But it's not like you're allowed to point that out or anything, because one of their rules is never to speak to or listen to you.
• 

  iknowall558

  brilliant comments dozy -- I feel like printing off your post and sticking it through the kingdom hall letter box.......!
• 

  AnnOMaly

  The elder had visited you on shepherding calls and was using the information that he elicited in these conversations in an effort to DF you. Surely it is unethical to visit someone in an effort to help them and then a few months later refer over and over to this conversation. Yet the WTS in pedophile cases time & again has claimed that discussions in "pastoral visits" were private and claimed "clergy privilege" and therefore could not be used as evidence in a court of law.

  Your brother repeated private information made on one-on-one conversations that he had with you. Only one witness was present. ...

  ... It was completely unethical , on these testimonies alone , to DF you

  Dozy, the one-on-one discussions during 'pastoral visits' used as 'evidence' against him was another one of the reasons I was so irritated. Surely, they were 'off the record' conversations. They didn't have squat, but they DFed him anyway. The whole process was wrong, all wrong.
• 

  besty

  Someone posted on my JC thread something that made a lot of sense.

  The Judicial Committe is not there primarily to establish guilt or innocence - that has been established with prior investigations, witness statements etc

  The JC meets with the accused to establish whether they have a repentant attitude.

  Rule Number 1 - We make the rules.

  Rule Number 2 - Any questions - see Rule Number 1

  No JC I can conceive of would sit there thinking "Well we seem to have an apostate here, but he is right - our evidence is inadmissable. So its not a fair cop - we'll have to let him off." Not likely......

  Remember you are dealing with people who strongly believe they are acting with a direct remit from a magick man in the sky who tells them things, not a normal judiciary.
• 

  AnnOMaly

  The Judicial Committe is not there primarily to establish guilt or innocence - that has been established with prior investigations, witness statements etc

  The JC meets with the accused to establish whether they have a repentant attitude.

  Ah ha! So the JC is like being in a court for sentencing purposes only? There has been no court beforehand to establish the truth or otherwise of an accusation. The 'damning evidence' has been collected during the investigative process and the accused has been presumed guilty. Her/His sentence depends on whether s/he is sorry for the the alleged 'crime' that may or may not have been committed.

  So long as everything is fair and above board.

  (Going on vacation, so won't respond for a while.)
• 

  scotsman

  It's late and I'm razzled and probably shouldn't be posting....

  Ethical?? why on earth would one expect a JC to be ethical? I'm unsure that "ethical" would even appear on their CDRom. Besty's rules #1&2 are exactly the case and while some JWs might hope for some empathy if faced with a JC, anyone who has expressed thoughts contrary to the WT knows they're for the high jump. It's their game and that's why I didn't play it.