Interesting Commentary in New Statesman Article About Candace Conti

by DT 26 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  cedars

  No, the sentence is even more tangled now!! (sigh)

  This meant that when Conti's abuser from the 1990s, Jonathan Kendrick, was convicted in 2004 of molesting another girl, the elders at the North Fremont Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses did nothing to prevent him coming into contact with other kids at the church.

  I thought she'd figured it out, sadly not.

  The issue is that Jonathan Kendrick abused two girls in his congregation BEFORE he began abusing Candace. One was his own step-daughter, the other was a non-relative. It is THESE incidents of abuse that the elders kept confidential. As far as I know, Kendrick was in another congregation altogether by 2004. The 2004 conviction is only of interest because it was this conviction that led to him being on the sex offenders register, but by that time the Fremont elders were in the rear view mirror and he'd moved on to pastures new.

  I might try sending Caroline an email.

  Cedars
• 

  cedars

  Okay, I've emailed with the following suggestions...

  This meant that when Conti's abuser from the 1990s, Jonathan Kendrick, was convicted in 2004 of molesting another girl, the elders at the North Fremont Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses did nothing to prevent him coming into contact with other kids at the church.

  Should read:

  This meant that when Conti's abuser, Jonathan Kendrick, abused two other young congregation members including his own step-daughter, the elders at the North Fremont Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses did nothing to prevent him coming into contact with other kids at the church. Kendrick later entered the Sex Offenders Register for a conviction in 2004.

  And

  Had the secrecy around Kendrick’s 2004 conviction not been put in place, that might have been a semi-valid point – demonising a whole faith and community because of individual incidents is absolutely not what this is about.

  Should read:

  Had the secrecy surrounding Kendrick's previous two victims not been put in place, that might have been a semi-valid point – demonising a whole faith and community because of individual incidents is absolutely not what this is about.

  We'll see if it gets fixed so that everything's accurate. This is a fantastic article, and I want it to be flawless factually.

  Cedars
• 

  darthfader

  You go Cedars! I applaud your efforts!
• 

  DT

  Thanks Cedars for helping to get the errors corrected. It's a great article. I would hate to see the Witnesses complain about preventable factual errors.
• 

  cedars

  I've just realised, she may well have left the office for the day (unless she's on a late shift).

  I'll keep tabs on the article tomorrow morning, and if nothing's changed by lunchtime I'll try phoning her again.

  I'd really like to see this fixed because, as everyone's noting, this article makes some important points from a non-JW perspective.

  Cedars
• 

  00DAD

  Hadn't Kendricks been a Ministerial Servant BEFORE he molested Candace Conti? And wasn't he "removed" as an MS due to molesting ANOTHER CHILD BEFORE he abused Candace Conti?
• 

  cedars

  00DAD

  That's correct.

  Cedars