Molestation News

by Mishnah 9 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • Mishnah
    Mishnah

    No, it's not about JWs. The Catholics are still tops when it comes to this digusting practice. By the way, about two years ago I was in a congregation where a molester, former elder, was publicly reproved and turned over to the police. He just got out of jail after serving about a year and a half sentence. So regardless of what policy the Society may encourage, not all congregations shield molesters from police. Now, to the Catholics:

    Mahony Won't Say if Police Got Priests' Names
    By LARRY B. STAMMER and RICHARD WINTON

    Cardinal Roger M. Mahony's office refused to say Monday whether he has given authorities the names of as many as a dozen priests alleged to have sexually abused children.

    Mahony dismissed the priests in private meetings in the last two weeks over allegations of abuse from as long as a decade ago, church sources said. The dismissals come as the Roman Catholic Church in the United States is again reeling from disclosures of sexual abuse by priests in Dallas, Boston, Philadelphia and St. Louis.

    Mahony's spokesman, Tod Tamberg, said the cardinal stands by his Feb. 21 pastoral statement, agreeing to abide by a California law mandating that priests, counselors, nurses and teachers report sexual abuse of minors to police. "He's a mandated reporter as well," Tamberg said of Mahony, archbishop of the nation's largest Roman Catholic diocese.

    But as of Monday, the Los Angeles Police Department, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, as well as sheriff's departments in Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, said they had received no such referrals from the Los Angeles archdiocese, which covers the three counties.

    Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley said Monday that the reporting law is clear.

    "Under the penal code there is a duty to report within 36 hours of a specific incident of molestation. Among the reporters are clergy, except in the case of penitential communications [confidential confessions]," he said. "Priests are definitely mandated reporters unless it is a confessional."

    Failure to report such crimes is a misdemeanor.

    "There is no clergy exception," Cooley said. "If and when police agencies do a thorough and appropriate investigation, those cases will be prosecuted like any other."

    The head of Cooley's sex crimes unit said it has no open cases stemming from church referrals.

    The law took effect in 1987 in the wake of the McMartin preschool scandal. Its reporting requirements apply to any cases of abuse that church officials became aware of after the law took effect. It is unclear, however, whether the alleged incidents of abuse involving the priests occurred before or after that time.

    Tamberg would not say whether the names of the recently dismissed priests had been given to local police. "I've been told what I can say," he said. "I have no information on priest personnel matters."

    Attorneys for the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles have previously acknowledged that church officials received six child molestation complaints in the last five years, including four involving adults complaining of past misconduct.

    Overall, there were about 50 cases of sexual misbehavior reported to the archdiocese in the last five years, diocesan attorney John P. McNicholas of Los Angeles wrote in a letter to an expert witness in a case late last year. Not all of the cases were believed to involve children.

    Church sources said the priests recently dismissed by Mahony for allegations of sexual abuse of minors had received psychological counseling and were believed to have been rehabilitated. The archdiocese declined Monday to confirm or deny the dismissals.

    One church source, however, said generous severance pay was offered to the departing priests. Any of the priests living in parish rectories or other church facilities were asked to move out, the source said.

    Left unanswered was why Mahony was taking action now. The archdiocese's sexual abuse policy dates to 1988. It says the church will "never deal with a problem of sexual abuse on the part of a priest or deacon by simply moving him to another ministerial assignment."

    Tamberg said Mahony was committed to obeying the law and protecting the children of the nation's largest Catholic archdiocese. In view of renewed reports of child sexual abuse across the nation, Tamberg said, Mahony felt compelled last month to issue a pastoral message.

    "[The pastoral letter] was motivated by the cardinal's pastoral concern for Catholic faithful in the archdiocese, that they know we have comprehensive policies and procedures, that we review them regularly and that they are protecting their kids from sexual misconduct from anyone that ministers in the archdiocese, either clergy or laity," Tamberg said.

    Mahony's full message is on the archdiocese's Web site: www.la-archdiocese.org/english/

    Catholic bishops in the United States have been dealing with these controversies for years. But the magnitude of new disclosures has sent a tremor through the national church, prompting bishops across the country to dismiss sexual predators while seeking to reassure the faithful.

    Recently, Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston disclosed to police the names of 80 priests who had been accused of abusing children over the last 40 years. The revelation followed a child molestation trial in which a defrocked priest, John J. Geoghan, was convicted. He is also awaiting trial in at least two other cases.

    Last year the Los Angeles and Orange dioceses paid $5.2 million to settle molestation allegations by a former high school student against a priest. The court settlement requires the dioceses to fire priests known to be molesters.

    In Dallas in 1997, a jury awarded $119 million to 11 men who were allegedly molested when they were altar boys. The case later was settled out of court for $23 million.

    Bishops and other church officials have said their primary concern is for their parishioners. Money is also at stake. Cases of child sexual abuse have cost the church hundreds of millions of dollars.

    While their first concern has been to prevent sexual abuse, bishops have also sought ways of helping fallen priests, including therapy. Despite some successes, bishops are reluctant to return priests to any work involving children. More recently, they are asking priests to leave the priesthood. Still, some sexual abuse survivors say the church has not done enough.

    David Clohessy of the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests said police, prosecutors and judges are beginning to treat the church with less deference than in the past.

    Copyright 2002 Los Angeles Times

  • silentlambs
    silentlambs

    You wrote,

    The Catholics are still tops when it comes to this digusting practice.

    I think that is a matter of perspective. While the Catholics may be "tops" with the protecting of priests, JW's certainly take the "tops" when using WT policy to protect all members of the congregation who may molest children.

    You wrote,

    By the way, about two years ago I was in a congregation where a molester, former elder, was publicly reproved and turned over to the police. He just got out of jail after serving about a year and a half sentence.

    Lets see, a grown man molests a child and he gets public reproof? Should not Child molestation at least be a disfellowshipping offense?
    How do you measure repentance with a person who destroys a child's life? The child is punished for life but the pedophile gets some "restrictions." If the full truth of the matter be known, it was the parents who turned the man in while defying the local body of elders. Why do I say this? If a brother is repentant as the judicial committee determined, then why should he be punished further? If the parents turned him into the police were they not showing they did not accept the judgement of the elders as being good enough? Why would you want to prosecute a fellow brother who is repentant?

    The questions above have been asked on many occasions when parents were in the position you described in your local congregation. I have known of cases where brothers were removed from their positions for not following "theocratic direction" and reporting the "repentant" child molester to the police.

    Another point was he got 1 1/2 years? In many cases bothers and sisters who press charges are coerced into asking the judge for a lighter sentence to show the spirit of brotherly love for the "repentant" pedophile. It appears this may have been the case here. The sentence seem awful light for a child molester.

    You wrote,

    So regardless of what policy the Society may encourage, not all congregations shield molesters from police.

    When this man gets out of prision he will got out in field service in your congregation. Will you be able to discuss with the family what happened and how you can best safeguard your children? If you asked an elder, what do you think he will say about the matter? Will the molester be authorized to start bible studies? What if children are in the home? Will children be allowed to work in his car group? Will elders actually monitor his conduct with children 24 hours a day? If it gets too uncomfortable what happens when he moves to a new congregation, will they be informed of this man's problem?

    You see the point? While it is good the man was reported, this man is still shielded and protected by Jehovah's Witnesses. It will continue until wt policy is changed.

  • sf
    sf

    "The Catholics are still tops when it comes to this digusting practice."

    I'm sure you'll agree this is not a "contest".

    "Tops" maybe, for now, perhaps.

    If the news media would report the stories that are only on the net re: the WATCHTOWER PEDOPHILIA PARADISE the way they plaster every other churches krap, I'd venture to say they'd be right behind the Catholic churches cases.

    Seems they keep these stories out of local papers, to protect their community from chaos that would surely abound.

    Dateline will blow this lid and their day will come.

    Sincerely, sKally:

    If man was supposedly created in gods image, then.....holy krap...we're all doomed.-sKallyWagger

  • Mishnah
    Mishnah

    Silentlambs wrote,

    I think that is a matter of perspective. While the Catholics may be "tops" with the protecting of priests, JW's certainly take the "tops" when using WT policy to protect all members of the congregation who may molest children.

    What? Of course JWs take the tops when it comes to their own practice. Who else is there to compare in terms of "using WT policy to protect all members of the congregation"? That's like saying the Catholics are the tops in terms of using Catholic methods of sheilding priests from the police. I hope you are not using this kind of reasoning in your otherwise well-meaning efforts, Bill.

    Silentlambs then wrote,

    "Lets see, a grown man molests a child and he gets public reproof?"

    Pretty sad, isn't it? Of course, you left off the accompanying fact that they turned him in to the police. I thought that's what you wanted, Bill? If the man evidenced remorse then reproof is given, but they did not let that keep them from turning him in. Try to be more balanced in your perspective, and don't leave off previously stated facts when you take issue with select points.

    Silentlambs continued,

    "Should not Child molestation at least be a disfellowshipping offense?"

    What does the New Testament say, Bill? If you want to set up your own standards then fine. If we are going by what the Bible says then do not ask me for my opinion but present what the Bible says and then ask me about it.

    Silentlambs continued,

    "How do you measure repentance with a person who destroys a child's life?"

    By letting Jesus and Jehovah handle the 'measuring.' I don't think I am qualified to "measure" someone's repentence. Apparently, you feel you are so qualified. I think not.

    Bill continued,

    "The child is punished for life but the pedophile gets some 'restrictions.'"

    Any punishment in this system of things will not be just. THAT is why we leave matters in Jehovah's and Jesus' hands and simply do the best we can with what the Bible says and what the law of the land requires.

    Bill wrote,

    "If the full truth of the matter be known, it was the parents who turned the man in while defying the local body of elders. Why do I say this? If a brother is repentant as the judicial committee determined, then why should he be punished further? If the parents turned him into the police were they not showing they did not accept the judgement of the elders as being good enough? Why would you want to prosecute a fellow brother who is repentant? "

    Because that is the law in California, Bill, or have you already forgotten? You are in error: The brothers turned him. I know the situation, you do not. Yet you speak as if you do, revealing your unreasonableness.

    Bill continued,

    "The questions above have been asked on many occasions when parents were in the position you described in your local congregation. I have known of cases where brothers were removed from their positions for not following "theocratic direction" and reporting the "repentant" child molester to the police."

    What does that have to do with what I posted? I did not speak in reference to how all bodies of elders handle matters. Your response on this point shows you are really thinking clearly but are prepared to make snap-judgments about others and not allow any positive aspect of the organization to remain. That is unbalanced, unreasonable, and unnecessary. You should know better.

    Bill continued,

    "Another point was he got 1 1/2 years? In many cases bothers and sisters who press charges are coerced into asking the judge for a lighter sentence to show the spirit of brotherly love for the "repentant" pedophile. It appears this may have been the case here. The sentence seem awful light for a child molester."

    Not really. The state of California jails, the appeals process, time off for good behavior, and lighter sentences for first-time offenders all likely contributed to the early release. But, again, you blew right past all of those and looked only any negative aspects involving the Witnesses. I am surprized at your level of unreasonableness.

    Bill continued,

    "When this man gets out of prision he will got out in field service in your congregation."

    He is not in my congregation, and you do not know what his future in the org will be. Yet you speak dogmatically, like an unreasonable man.

    "Will you be able to discuss with the family what happened and how you can best safeguard your children?"

    I don't know what could put me in that situation.

    "If you asked an elder, what do you think he will say about the matter?"

    About what, specifically? Elders may have many different responses, yet you act as if only one exists. Again, you are not thinking reasonably.

    "Will the molester be authorized to start bible studies? What if children are in the home? Will children be allowed to work in his car group? Will elders actually monitor his conduct with children 24 hours a day? If it gets too uncomfortable what happens when he moves to a new congregation, will they be informed of this man's problem? "

    Bill, has such a man committed the unforgivable sin? Are you suggesting that persons who are guilty of molestation have no forgiveness on the ransom of Christ? What is your biblical basis for not permitting such a person to ever have an active relationship with Christ and his people in the ministry?

    Bill continued,

    "You see the point?"

    Yes, but I don't think that you do.

    "While it is good the man was reported, this man is still shielded and protected by Jehovah's Witnesses. It will continue until wt policy is changed."

    No, you have created hypothetical situations for this man with no biblical basis.

    Mishnah

  • Mishnah
    Mishnah

    sKally,

    Can you reference just one story where a Catholic priest turned in another Catholic priest to the police for molestation?

    I have not seen any policy advanced by the WTS on this issue that is against any biblical command.

    Mishnah

  • chezza
    chezza

    I too agree the watchtower society needs to look at its stand here, this very thing happened in my family, my brother in law molested my niece and during the investigation it came out that others had it happen to them many years earlier in the congregation, but when the elders were approached by the family they denied having any knowledge of the abuse, had the elders been protecting the flock they would have made sure that the family of this peodophile knew about what he had done, i lost my marriage over this and so did my sister, how many more lives will be screwed because of the watchtowers protecting this animals.

  • metatron
    metatron

    Am I to understand that some people think that child molestation
    is not to be thought of as a df'ing offense in the Bible?

    Ever heard of 'loose conduct'? It has been defined as wanton,
    shameful, or scandalous behavior. It would involve conduct that
    is condemned or considered repellent in common society.

    Is anyone so twisted in their sick loyalty to this cult that
    they would agree that "streaking" naked IS loose conduct
    but molesting a child isn't ?

    metatron

  • MoeJoJoJo
    MoeJoJoJo

    Mishnah,
    Here is what the Bible says:
    1 Corinthians 5:11-"But now I am writing you to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man."

    READ VS. 1 OF THE SAME CHAPTER AND YOU'LL SEE THE TYPE OF FORNICATION PAUL IS REFERRING TO
    1 Corinthians 5:1-"Actually fornication is reported among you, and such fornication as is not even among the nations, THAT A WIFE A CERTAIN MAN HAS OF HIS FATHER."

    INCEST!

    MY UNDERSTANDING OF THESE VERSES, IS THAT ANYONE WHO COMMITS THE TYPE OF FORNICATION MENTIONED SHOULD BE PUT OUT OF THE CONGREGATION. ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO MOLEST INNOCENT CHILDREN WHETHER THEY ARE THEIR OWN CHILDREN(OR RELATIVE)OR NOT.

  • waiting
    waiting

    On the point of being convicted of "child molestation." A person could be a rapist, an exposer of self, a toucher, a user of digital penetration, or one who "gets off" by having the child sit in their lap. All are child molestors - not all are guilty of incest or of rape. All kinds.

    And - I agree - if convicted, all are guilty of at least loose conduct.

    Now, if a person can be df'd for smoking a cigarette or joining the YMCA - and they have been in South Carolina......wouldn't it make sense that child molesters should share the same type of concern?

    Now, if a person can be df'd, even after being repentant, because the situation "got known" around the congregation and to worldly people and the congregation had to protect it's cleanly reputation.....wouldn't it make sense that jailed child molesters should share the same concern for jw reputation?

    Surely. But apparently not.

    waiting

  • dungbeetle
    dungbeetle

    Mishnah:

    1) Name names.

    2) You said he was turned over to police, but BY WHO? The victim?

    J.R.Brown came right out and stated on public televison that child molesters will be shielded by the congregation. He has said it numerous times. It is also publicised through the Watchtower magazine. This is public knowledge.

    So I don't know what your point is. Watchtower publicly brags about their shielding policy. Go talk to J.R.Brown. Tell him I said hello.

    In 1975 a crack team of publishers was sentenced to death by a judicial commiteee. They promptly escaped from the cult and now live life on the run. If you have a problem ... and if you can find them ... maybe you can contact the A--postate Team"

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit