Translation of Hildebrando's commentary on the 'model judicial committee' video.
(Apologies, in advance, for any errors of translation or typography.)
Part One:
As a starting point, it must be clear that if the Organisation is at the point of producing a “How to conduct Judicial Committees... for Dummies ” video, then the oral and written instructions on the topic have proven to be insufficient – and need to be supplemented with this kind of material. This means that the elders are NOT following these procedures. For example, assigning readings to the brother who has confessed – I never saw this done. The same for the model meeting, where the entire body of elders meet to assemble the [judicial] committee. Generally, it is the Service Committee (and, more frequently, the Coordinator of the Body of Elders) that decides which elders will serve on the committee, and who will serve as chairman. It is rare indeed that the COBE asks for candidates for judicial committee service and chairmanship, and that he submits the candidates names to a vote. What happens, instead, is that he designates elders for the instance. There are many elders who never participate in these decisions, and who learn of a disfellowshipping at the same time as the publishers: when it is announced. In reality, these kinds of decisions are made behind closed doors, such that friends and relatives of the “sinner” are designated to handle such cases – frequently resulting in 'acquittals'. All of this is done with the approval of Circuit Overseers, who believe that congregations operate more smoothly (without the frequent and lengthy elders' meetings) with 1 or 2 dominant elders.
Clearly, the Organisation is looking to counter the tremendous power held by the Service Committees and, in particular, the COBE, who is here shown only presiding over the meeting to name Judicial Committee members – without participating in it – since the other elders do not elect him. Further, one elder is excluded from the selection without great difficulty, because he is too close to the “sinner's” family. This is far from reality, since this kind of issue produces a lot of dissension amongst elders; sometimes to the point where some elders are on the side of forming a judicial committee, while other elders – for sentimental, familial or economic reasons – are not! No wonder this COBE (in the video) is thankful to serve on such an ideally harmonious body of elders.
The Organisation is also trying to prevent Judicial Committees from concluding in too many acquittals. There are elders who look for any way to avoid judicial action... and those are the ones calling the shots today. A cursory glance at the case, give an acquittal [i.e., a non-disfellowshipping action]. However, the video directs that attention be paid to such minute details as placing phone calls from the Kingdom Hall, so that no one can overhear; or, arriving a half-hour before the appointment with the wrongdoer, in order to prepare for the hearing.
Now, looking at the issues beyond those procedural, the Organisation wants elders to be more canny in their dealings. No accusations, no recriminations, no catching in falsehoods: they must always “play the fool,” even when they are being lied to. But, beyond the artificial “kindness,” I noticed how they interpret the old rule of thumb, “No one ever commits a sin only once.” Now the elders are not going to say this to the “sinner” right away; rather, they pretend to be stupid, so the person believes that he has fooled the elders, and is unconcerned about relating a consistent version of his story. Then, once inconsistencies in story have been revealed, he is ready to be disfellowshipped. “One time?” “Only 1 week ago?” “A pregnancy is not perceived that quickly...” “ So, 2 months? With that hussy?” “Two or 3 times... a week!” (It could be “a day”...) On the other hand, this Committee shows exemplary kindness to the sinner: they do not ask what kind of sexual relations were engaged in (as many elders usually do). Unnatural sex could be another aggravating factor!