What Some Loyal JW's Are Saying About The Oakland Case.

by Bangalore 63 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  kurtbethel

  Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good...
• 

  Bells

  I think it's interesting that the loyal witnesses are backing up their heavenly organisation and defending them by saying that it wasn't the organisation that molested her, it was one 'imperfect' person.

  We know there have been many cases where elders (whether they are elders at the time of the crime or had previously been elders before being moved to a 'lower' position and hushed up.) have abused children.

  However - in today's 'daily text' - it states: The “gifts in men” also include members of Branch Committees, traveling overseers, and congregation elders—all of whom have been appointed by holy spirit. (Acts 20:28)

  So - the holy spirit is appointing people that have it within themselves to commit a terrible crime against a defensless child!? I mean - there's 'imperfect human' and then there's that! So either the Holy Spirit doesn't think that molesting children is that big a deal - OR the holy spirit isn't really directing the organisation as they are not really God's channel on earth...???
• 

  Leeca

  Their lack of education shines on through. What a lot of sickening dribble. Wonder when 'new light' will happen with their child protection policies. Hope i didn't sound that stupid when i was a JW. But then i had 'higher education', i managed to complete year 11. Had more education since then. Feel like a 'braniac' compared to some JW's.
• 

  EmptyInside

  I'd like to ask them,if someone confessed to the elders about molesting a child,and they were not disfellowshipped. If they had a young child,wouldn't they like to be informed about this matter,to keep their child safe from this person?

  I also was thinking about how if a crime was committed by the kingdom hall by non-Witnesses. I'm sure someone at the hall would call the police,or would they call the branch first and see what their legal responsibilities were. I'm sure they would think that not calling the police would be ridiculous. But,how much more so,when an innocent child in their midst has been hurt,even by another Witness.

  In my experience,some Witnesses don't want to think the organization can do anything wrong. Blame the apostates about 1975,blame them about not handling child abuse cases well.

  Around here though,some may believe it more. There was a case where a Witness molested his daughters and other little girls at the hall. This took place over a couple decades at least. Do you think people,including the elders heard of this case,you bet they did. He finally was dealt with,thirty years later,after he molested at least 40 children we know about. I know elders that knew about this,but since they married in the family,they kept quiet. I have no idea if the publishers know about his past in his new congregation about a couple hours from here,not sure what hall he goes to anyway. Hope he's squirming about this case.

  I always wanted to believe this was an isolated,botched case by congregation elders,but now I know better. Some don't want to believe this happens at all in the organization.
• 

  Aussie Oz

  Interestingly, the Watchtower don't need to put a spin on this...

  the rank and file have been well trained and are doing it for them.

  I shudder to think that i once thought as they do,

  Oz
• 

  MidwichCuckoo

  Is 'vince-1' a JWN'er? I'm impressed by his post on those comments.
• 

  irondork

  These comments coming from the rank and file in defence of thier "mother" is not entirely surprising. However, when it comes time for the WTS to speak on the matter (before or after the appeals process) I hope, for the sake of all the children who will continue in their forced entrappment, the WTS takes a more humble approach on this and at least tries to make the pedophile/reporting/child protection situation better. I have no doubt the WTS and everyone associated with it abhors child abuse as much as they say they do. To date, though, they have been unable to put a responsible policy in place that reflects that sentiment due to (1) a lack of claimed spiritual guidance and (2) they keep tripping over their old-school ways of running that filthy corpoation.

  If they would just humbly acknowldge their error and fix it, that would be a good thing. The down side is, it might make the organization look a little shinier and attractive for awhile.

  An acceptable price to pay for the children.
• 

  Bobjohnrob

  Is this case about protecting children or gaining high money payouts?

  Evidence one from paper write up, "he currently resides in Oakland" from the papers. Why is this a civil case and not a criminal one?

  Evidence 2 from paper write up, "they knew he couldn't pay the money" They knew that he had to be linked to another source to gain large money payouts because he couldn't pay them.

  So on this evidence what has this case proved?

  The child molester is free and won't have to pay a penny!

  The religion he was part of will have to make the large money payout. Even though he hasn't had a criminal conviction and at the time (1994) had only had a misdemeaner to his name which got him a fine and not even put him on the sex offender register. The police did not consider him a risk.

  I really question the motives involved of going through civil courts for money and leaving the offender free and easy in Oakland.

  Why was this not put through the criminal courts?
• 

  finally awake

  There *is* a criminal investigation in process. However, it is likely that due to the statute of limitations the offender can no longer be prosecuted for what he did to a 9 YEAR OLD CHILD. I would also point out that the victim did *not* ask for a huge payout - the dollar amount she requested was only $1,440.00. The jury decided she was entitled to the larger sum, because normal people realize that covering up child abuse is a horrible, disgusting thing to do that brings much more reproach on an organization than immediate reporting to the police ever would.
• 

  Bobjohnrob

  I am fairly sure there isn't any statute of limitations on pedophile cases. And it is common practice in civil cases to set a token money amount which then suggests a bigger payout by the courts later. (the 144,000 amount used is a one that is a common marker of cases done by certain persons against the Jehovah's witnesses)

  It is also common practice, (which was used in this case) to link a poor offender with a rich organisation to guarantee big money payouts in civil courts. There is no point in just taking a poor man to civil courts, any amount awarded is irrelevant if he is incapable of paying it.

  So why is the money more important than putting this sex offender in prison?

  Also crinminal cases generally come first, as a criminal conviction adds weight to a civil case. The only reason to do it the other way around is if you know your case does not have enough proof to get a criminal conviction. Which suggests a lot of questions on motivations and agenda's of those involved.

  If this offender is guilty of this offence then he absolutely belongs in prison! And I can see no excuse that can justify going for money and leaving him free to abuse again rather than moving heaven and earth to get him criminally convicted in a criminal court right away. One month would be too long.