Letter from elders to WT about Jonathan Kendrick and the WT response (page 2)

Cacky

Can you publish the larger sized ones but so they appear in full. I can't follow them.

Thank you.

schnare

Cacky, there is a scroller on the bottom that moves left to right, so that you can read it fully.

For those that can't see the whole letter because of the size, go up all the way to the right hand corner of the JWN page, as if you were logging in. Just under your username there should be a box with two arrows pointing left and right.

Click on that and it will expand the JWN thread to widescreen view.

If you want to do undo widescreen view, click the box with two lines going up and down.

It worked for me.

CoC

Crisis of Conscience

I wanted to add, with these letters, I just can't see how the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society is trying to weasel their way out of this court case.

They are providing direction and saying what to do based on a book they published!

Thanks for posting wolfman85!

CoC

ldrnomo

It sounds like the Watchtower Society feels all that is needed in a case like this is a good talking to (a spiritual pill) and a smack on the ass (removal as a MS) child abusers have a problem that needs to be addressed more strongly then this. The man needed help and all they gave him were a few scriptures and a slap on the hand. So sad for the children's lives affected by this nut job.

diamondiiz

It's odd that there is no wts letterhead on the reply.

From what I see, the letters from elders to wts implied that the wife and daughter were not very good spiritually thus they would like to sweep this thing under a rug if they could but may have to deal with this because the daughter told someone. Poor MS brother married to almost a worldly.

While touching breast may not seem as that big of a deal and in most cases it would be unclean conduct, the problem here is that the girl was 15 and the way he came to her room and touched her suggests that if that was his first time, he had a problem and should have sought help. Otherwise he may have done this in the past, and what his action suggests is that he may have been testing the waters as it were - had the girl said nothing to her mother, he may have gone further than just touching her breasts at some future period.

The wts response (again odd there is no wts letterhead on it) appears to equate his actions with fondling an adult female. Since this was in '93 and not '73 I think their response was totally wrong, it's silly to suggest that was a "minor uncleanness" since it has taken place with a minor child which actions suggest the man may be a pedophile, or has inclination to abuse a minor in the future. They have not suggested anything meaningful nor have they given proper advise how to deal with this. I don't know what the secular laws were at the time in CA, but had this been a proactive organization with very "aggressive policies" regarding child abuse this letter would have been written totally differently.

But again, the child and mother were inactive so obviously there was no need for a jc but had she been active and he was any other religion the advice may have been different, but then again, they don't have a problem with wives being abused for years since it may lead to the husband becoming a dub who knows what the letter would look like.

JW GoneBad

J.R. Brown wrote on June 20, 2012 on the JW Media Web site in the last paragraph:

'The fact that Jehovah’s Witnesses abhor child abuse and strive to protect children from such acts is well-known.'

Yah, right protecting JW children from child molestation is such a high priority! Why in the hell did WT take nearly 3 (three) F**KING weeks to respond to the Fremont Elders' first letter (from Nov 15, 1993 to Dec 3 1993)?

Chemical Emotions

Oh, that evil non-jw daughter, she was promiscuos with TWO boys, the little slut! Obviously her loving father had to take precautions to keep her from doing such a horrible thing by keeping her home so much, where she can't whore around. And she'd be safe at home, too. Of course.

But now the little bitch is using this minor, totally un-truamatic little incident to get what she wants! THAT'S what we should be disgusted with, not the poor father.Theres no possible way she's doing it becauseshe's acting out because she's scared and angry and/or is trying to excersize some control over things in her own way to comfort herself, no way. Also there's no way that these things she wants are legitimate requests, like a little freedom and space from her father. Nope.

And she is now bringing reproach on Jehovah's name by telling someone about it.

Luckily, God will punish her with a terrifying, everlasting death soon.

Crisis of Conscience

diamondiiz does bring up a valid point that went totally over my head. Where is the Watchtower letterhead?

I know it may not matter to some people, but it is something that always seems to be in the Society's letters, and thus adds to the validity.

maisha

I hate to say this but are these genuine letters?.

The type print is nothing special and easily created.

Letter from elders to WT about Jonathan Kendrick and the WT response

Share this