by AndersonsInfo 44 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
Satan is attacking Jehovah's people. Satan is making lies look true. Satan is trying to confuse us. Apostates are trying to pull us away from the Organization. We always knew government would turn on our religion.
Pick any one of those above repsonses and that's what will happen if JWs see this in the media. They are conditioned well by their leadership. Negative comments about JWs, whether they are true or not, are to be treated like poison.
http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/jehovah_s_witness_denies_sex_charges_1_1020203
Im sorry but dont know how to put a link on here, but saw this today. Its funny because the JW facebook page that put this link to their site also put up about the catholic pope and the SNAP link, you should see the comments about that compared to this..apparrantly Jehovah will always prevail against those twisting things, yet the catholics...well im sure you all know what comments are made. What is funny is that the SNAP feed is about 3 above this one.....the most cognitive disonent comments i have ever seen!!!
Im sorry i dont want to hijack this feed, and thank you for this information as always your posts give me hope
Happyexjw
I would think that the proper govt. authorities would pay much attention to the flaunting of their child protection laws. My theory is that they not enforcing it b/c of the religious angle. Tons of laws are on the books but not enforced. NYC has marijuana laws. My prof said they stopped prosecuting people decades ago when the judge, both sets of lawyers, and the juries were partaking between breaks. Child protection should have a high priority. It is not similar to soft drugs or prostitution. The publicity against the govt for nonenforcement would be staggering.
It strikes me as odd that Australian journalists comparable to the New York Times, New Yorker, etc. are not paying more attention to this case. The legal press should be reporting it. So many different angles and competing concerns are involved. It makes good press. Hard questions are posed.
Case Number: B12083527
Acting Prosecutor: Mr Steven Unthank
Accused: GOVERNING BODY OF JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES
The accused failed to appear and was not represented by legal counsel.
Results: Mr Steven Unthank made application to the Magistrate that the case be transferred to the summary stream.
Next Court hearing date: 11 October 2011
Hearing Type: Committal Mention
We have discussed a bail hearing above. There are other types of hearings in the course of a criminal court case:
Filing Hearing
The first court hearing in a case where a person is charged with indictable offences which must go to trial in a higher court. It is usually a very short hearing where the prosecution advise when the brief of evidence will be served on the defendant or their lawyer.
Committal Mention
The defendant must state whether they will plead guilty or not guilty at this hearing. He or she must also state which witnesses they wish to call at the committal hearing for cross examination, and in broad terms the type of questions the witness will be asked.
Committal Hearing
Prosecution witnesses are called to tender their statements and are cross examined to test the strength of witness evidence and the prosecution case. If the Magistrate considers that there is sufficient evidence, the case is sent for trial before a Judge and jury after the committal hearing.
Plea Hearing
After a defendant has decided to plead guilty to a charge or charges, a Judge or Magistrate hears a summary of the offence together with a plea from the defendant’s lawyer. In the plea the lawyer argues why the lightest sentence should be imposed, referring to a person’s positive contribution in the community, hard work, good family background, psychologist’s report etc.
Mention
This is a date when a case can only proceed if the defendant pleads guilty. If he or she wishes to challenge any of the charges or allegations, they should transfer the case to a later date (‘adjourn’ the case) for a contest mention.
Contest Mention
This is an interim hearing or negotiation hearing. Witnesses do not attend court at this hearing. The police officer who laid the charge (‘informant’), a police prosecutor representing the informant, the defendant and their lawyer need to attend this hearing. If the defendant is prepared to plead guilty to any of the charges, or the police are prepared to withdraw some or all of the charges, the case can be finalized on this date. If the case cannot be resolved into a plea hearing, it is adjourned off for a contested hearing. The witnesses required for that final hearing are discussed, and how long that hearing will take.
Contested Hearing
This is a final hearing in a Magistrates Court case when all witnesses attend and give their evidence. Those witnesses are cross examined by the defendant or his or her lawyer. At the end of the hearing, the Magistrate decides whether they are satisfied of the defendant’s guilt ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.
Situated in the Melbourne CBD our company specialises in Criminal Law (Paul is an Accredited criminal law specialist.)
: Mr Steven Unthank made application to the Magistrate that the case be transferred to the summary stream.
"Summary Stream"
I don`t see that definition in types of court hearings,can you clarify that please sizemik ? or anybody for that matter
maybe I`m a bit thick
Regardless: thanks for the update.It`s great news that it is proceeding
smiddy
If your client has been summonsed or remanded to appear at a mention hearing, this means that their case is in the summary stream. The police prosecute all matters in the summary stream. There are dedicated prosecution units within Victoria Police allocated to each Magistrates' Court. These officers have undertaken prosecution training and generally have a greater understanding of court processes, and the law of evidence, and sentencing, than other police officers.
Source: Criminal (Magistrates Court) (VIC) - Step-by-Step Legal Practice Guide and Precedents
Author: By Lawyers For Lawyers
BARBARA - Thanks so much for posting this . Appreciate your hard work.
And a thanks to SIZEMIK for posting information about the upcoming Oct. 11 hearing.
I agree with FRANKLIN MASSEY- If the WT society responds to it's JW rank & file members at all ( which may not even occur as they like keeping them in the dark ) it will be spun to them that Satan is attacking the organization and using the political and legal powers of Australia to accomplish an outbreak of persecution towards Witnesses. Then Samuel Herd or some other high up WT representative will come on network T.V. or the WT website and say that " We honor all laws of the land and detest child abuse. If you look at our congregations over the hundred plus years - only 11 elders have been charged with child abuse . We do everything we can to protect children in our organization ". Same old excuses will be used to cover up their responsibilities
Flipper, I have never heard that "11 elder" argument. Do they really think they have proof that only a small amount of elders have participated in child abuse within the Watchtower? Do they have any facts to back this assertion up?
-Sab
SABASTIOUS- If you check the WT society's own website in which they made a reply to the media concerning the 16 child abuse out of court settlements they paid out to victims in 2007 - the WT society mentions this exact number in their statement to the media defending how they have tried protecting children in the organization. I might have to dig in my archives if you can't find it anywhere. Perhaps I can find the link and post it for you
For SABASTIOUS - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLAC9kS_EqM
