The laws are not necessary a reflection of moral standards that have always existed (study the Inquisition) and laws change over time. Through the coarse of crime and punishment, a person is allowed rights to verying degrees. No rights would mean a perpetrator should be locked up forever, shot or subjected to torture and mutilation which is what happens to some of these people in prison.
Morality is what the law of justice strives for. It does not always hit the mark, but this is it's underlying purpose. It sounds to me like you are making an argument for the perpetrator of Jehovah's Witness congregation that the secular punishment is too severe. This would connect with your question: "What if by our standards, we feel that a certain matter is, “uncorroborated or unsubstantiated?"
Your organization feels qualified to determine whether or not a perpatrator's crimes are substantial and now you are saying the secular punishment is too severe. This is protecting the abuser. The Watchtower protects abusers because it's a "good ole boys" club and anyone who goes through their process of repentance is aquitted of their sins even if they go against the law of the land. This is against the Bible as well as the law of the land and is being actioned against by the jury of the Candace Conti case. The reason why the jury has awarded punitive damages is because of the gross negligence of this "good ole boys" club who protect their members to the point of covering up criminal activity. They will protect their closet full of skeletons to the very end. Defending the Watchtower is akin to defending Charles Manson. Both were egomaniacs that thought they could bring about the end of the world as per the Book of Revelation. Both are mindless doomsayers and have blood on their hands.
As a doctrine of some faiths, clergy must maintain the confidentiality of pastoral communications. Mandatory reporting statutes in some States specify the circumstances under which a communication is "privileged" or allowed to remain confidential. Privileged communications may be exempt from the requirement to report suspected abuse or neglect. The privilege of maintaining this confidentiality under State law must be provided by statute. Most States do provide the privilege, typically in rules of evidence or civil procedure. If the issue of privilege is not addressed in the reporting laws, it does not mean that privilege is not granted; it may be granted in other parts of State statutes.
Once again I reference to 1 Tim 3 and it's qualifications for people who the common man can confess to. Using a legal loophole to allow criminal behavior to continue unabated is immoral and unlawful. Theological confession has been abused by the weak minded since it's inception in the Catholic Church. That's why it's SO important for the people who hold these positions of responsibility to be tested and found to be upstanding citizens in their communitites. Within a Kingdom Hall the only people's opinion that matters is the congregation members and the pyramid leadership structure. The community that the Elders reside within are not even known by anyone but the congregation because JW's don't have non JW friends. There is no chance for anyone in their community to assess them and therefore they are not adequate community leaders. This is why they don't see the glarring immorality of going to a legal outfit first when hearing about a crime involving a child. Men of moral stature are required to hold positions where they will recieve confession. This is not the case with the JW's and it's the core reason why they are in over their heads with these cover up operations.
In the end this group of company men have chosen to follow their blind faith of other men rather than assert themselves as protectors of children.
-Sab
...OUTLAW