Here is the "official" Watchtower reason for not giving an interview to Panorama:
http://www.jw-media.org/releases/default.htm?content=bbc020509.pdf
Watchtower Fax to Panorama
by Nemesis 11 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
Xander
When a second credible allegation by a different person is lodged against the same individual, the elders are authorized by the Scriptures to handle the case.
After all that. STILL....
-
dungbeetle
Original via fax
May 9, 2002
Betsan Powys
BBC Panorama
Dear Ms. Powys:
This is in response to your fax of April 30, 2002, in which you advise us that BBC-TV is
preparing a program on the way Jehovahs Witnesses handle child abuse matters. You have kindly
offered us the opportunity to be interviewed on-camera; however, we must respectfully decline.
We are not opposed to giving interviews in general; however, it is likely that among those
whose views will be expressed on your broadcast will be some persons who are Jehovahs Witnesses.
In our view, it would be neither proper nor Scriptural for us to place ourselves in what might turn out
to be an adversarial position with our Christian brothers and sisters in a public setting. (1 Corinthians
6:1-8; Ephesians 4:2) We trust that you will understand our position in this regard.
Although unable to participate in an interview, we are certainly willing to comment on the
questions that you raised in your fax. We note that these center almost exclusively on the nature of the
records that we keep on alleged child abusers. You tell us that it is vital that we answer your questions
on our record-keeping procedures because of the "very serious nature of the allegations made to the
programme," although you do not specify what the allegations are. First of all, however, please allow
us to comment on the way that child abuse accusations are handled by Jehovahs Witnesses. We
realize that you did not ask us to touch on this aspect; nevertheless, it is essential that we comment on
it to provide an appropriate, frank answer.
In the United States, when any one of Jehovahs Witnesses is accused of an act of child abuse,
the local elders are expected to investigate. The procedure is as follows. Two elders meet separately
with the accused and the accuser to see what each says on the matter. If the accused denies the charge,
the two elders may arrange for him to have the opportunity to confront the accuser in their presence. If
during that meeting the accused still denies the charges and there are no others who can substantiate
them, the elders cannot take action within the congregation at that time. Why not? As a Bible-based
organization, we must adhere to what the Scriptures say, namely, "No single witness should rise up
against a man respecting any error or any sin . . . at the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three
witnesses the matter should stand good." (Deuteronomy 19:15) Jesus reaffirmed this principle as
recorded at Matthew 18:15-17.
When the branch office receives an allegation of child abuse, a check of the records might
reveal that similar, uncorroborated allegations were lodged against the same person in the past, perhaps
when he was living in another part of the country. When a second credible allegation by a different
person is lodged against the same individual, the elders are authorized by the Scriptures to handle the
case.
Betsan Powys
May 9, 2002
Page 2
However, even if the elders cannot take congregational action, they are expected to report the
allegation to the branch office of Jehovahs Witnesses in their country, if local privacy laws permit.
Again, privacy laws permitting, a record is made at the branch office that the individual has been
accused of child abuse. Each branch office of Jehovahs Witnesses keeps its own records, if that is
allowed by local jurisdiction. In the United States we do not have records of child abusers who live in
other lands. If privacy laws do not allow such records to be kept, the elders do whatever is permitted
within the law to see to it that children are protected. The aim is to balance the right to privacy of the
individual with the overriding need to protect the safety of children. 1 Timothy 5:19.
In addition to making a report to the branch office of Jehovahs Witnesses, the elders may be
required by law to report even uncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations to the authorities. If so,
we expect the elders to comply. Additionally, the victim may wish to report the matter to the
authorities, and it is his or her absolute right to do so. In the United States, reporting requirements vary
from state to state. It can be quite a challenge to keep abreast of the reporting requirements, but our
Legal Department makes every effort to do so.
If, when confronted, the accused confesses that he is guilty of child abuse, the elders take
appropriate action. If he is not repentant, he will not be permitted to remain a member of the
congregation. Even if he is repentant--is cut to the heart, and is thus resolutely determined to avoid
such conduct in the future--what was stated in the January 1, 1997, issue of The Watchtower applies.
The article said: "For the protection of our children, a man known to have been a child molester does
not qualify for a responsible position in the congregation. Moreover, he cannot be a pioneer [full-time
missionary of Jehovahs Witnesses] or serve in any other special, full-time service." (1 Timothy 3:2, 7-
10) We take such action because we are concerned with maintaining Bible standards and protecting
our children. Everyone in our organization is expected to meet the same requirements, namely, to be
clean physically, mentally, morally, and spiritually. 2 Corinthians 7:1; Ephesians 4:17-19;
1 Thessalonians 2:4.
In a few instances, individuals guilty of an act of child abuse have been appointed to positions
within the congregation if their conduct has been otherwise exemplary for decades. All of the
circumstances would need to be considered carefully. Suppose, for example, that a long time ago a 16-
year-old boy had sexual relations with a consenting 15-year-old girl. Depending upon the U.S.
jurisdictions where he lived when this happened, elders are required to report this as an incident of
child abuse. Let us say that twenty years have passed. The child abuse reporting law may have
changed; he may even have married the girl! Both have been living exemplary lives and they are
respected. In such a rare case, the man could possibly be appointed to a responsible position within the
congregation.
Our procedures have been refined over time. Our policy over the past several years has been
that at least twenty years must have passed before an individual who committed an act of child abuse
could even be considered for appointment to a responsible position in the congregation, if ever. The
Bible teaches that individuals can repent of their sins and "turn to God by doing works that befit
repentance," and we accept what the Bible says. (Acts 26:20) Still, the safety of our children is of the
utmost importance, so we realize that the local elders must be very careful when recommending
individuals who may have been guilty of an act of child abuse in the distant past.
You have been told that here in the United States we have compiled a list of 23,720 names of
child abusers. That is false. First of all, the total number of names in our records is considerably lower
Betsan Powys
May 9, 2002
Page 3
than that. In addition, it is not meaningful to focus on the number of names we have in our records.
This is because our figures include the names of many persons who have only been accused of child
abuse whereas the charges have not been substantiated. We keep these records to document our
compliance with what the law requires in many U.S. jurisdictions. Also included on our list are
allegations made on the basis of so-called "repressed memories," the validity of which many
authorities challenge. Then there are the names of persons who have been accused of abusing children
before becoming Jehovahs Witnesses as well as individuals who have never been baptized Witnesses
but whose names we are obliged to keep because of their association with the Witnesses. (An example
of this would be a non-Witness father or step-father who is accused by his Witness children or stepchildren
of abusing them.) To be safe, we also list the names of persons who may or may not be
considered as child abusers, depending upon the jurisdiction where they live (for example, that 16-
year-old boy who had sexual relations with the consenting 15-year-old girl). The name of an individual
who was guilty of voyeurism or involved with child pornography, as further examples, would also be
included on the list. And, to be sure, the list also includes names of persons who are actually guilty of
child abuse. We do not apologize for keeping such records here in the United States. Apart from being
legally needed, they have been very helpful to us in our efforts to protect the flock from harm. (Isaiah
32:2) Christian parents can rightly feel secure in the knowledge that such efforts are made to screen out
possible child abusers from appointment to responsible positions within the congregation.
Ms. Powys, please do not conclude that we believe that our system is perfect. No human
organization is perfect. But we do believe that we have a strong, Bible-based policy on child abuse.
Anyone in a responsible position who is guilty of child abuse would be removed from his
responsibilities without hesitation. We certainly would not knowingly transfer him to serve elsewhere.
Child abuse is abhorrent to us. Even one abused child is one too many. At least since 1981, our
journals,
The Watchtower and Awake! , have featured articles to educate both Witnesses and the public
regarding the importance and need to protect children from child abuse. Among others, there was the
article "Let Us Abhor What Is Wicked!" published in the January 1, 1997, issue of
The Watchtower ;
"Help For the Victims of Incest" in the October 1, 1983,
Watchtower ; "Your Child Is in Danger!",
"How Can We Protect Our Children?", and "Prevention in the Home," all in the October 8, 1993,
Awake!
, as well as "Child Molesting Every Mothers Nightmare" in the January 22, 1985, Awake!Over the years, as we have noted areas where our policies could be strengthened, we have followed
through. We are continuing to refine them.
We trust that you will find the information in this letter to be helpful. As you will note, we have
responded to the broad issues you raise rather than providing specific answers to your detailed list of
questions. We note that you sent a similar list of questions to our offices in London. We understand
they are answering your questions in accordance with their procedures and adherence to British law.
With every good wish, I am,
Very truly yours,
-
Xander
Oh, gods, read this:
However, even if the elders cannot take congregational action, they are expected to report the allegation to the branch office of Jehovahs Witnesses in their country, if local privacy laws permit.
In addition to making a report to the branch office of Jehovahs Witnesses, the elders may be required by law to report even uncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations to the authorities.
That's right. If you have a pedo YOU'D BETTER TELL US - but, we won't do anything about it. You *might* want to report it the police. You know, maybe. If you feel like it. BUT YOU'D BETTER NOT FORGET TO TELL US so we can get right on ignoring it.
Out of curiosity, I don't have it to look up, but isn't this the same letter sent to Dateline?
Did they learn nothing?
-
Xander
In addition, it is not meaningful to focus on the number of names we have in our records.
This is because our figures include the names of many persons who have only been accused of child abuse whereas the charges have not been substantiated.
And we all know how THAT process works.
Again,
-
Xander
Ms. Powys, please do not conclude that we believe that our system is perfect.
OUR SYSTEM!?!?! OUR SYSTEM?!!?
What gives you the right to have your own system!?!? You're a religion, not a friggin government!!!
-
dungbeetle
talk about talking out of two sides of their mouth:
If privacy laws do not allow such records to be kept, the elders do whatever is permitted
within the law to see to it that children are protected
1) So if records ARE allowed to be kept, they will not help the children?
2) They just said "we need two witnesses to report an abuser" but the just said that that they will do whatever is permitted within the law to see to it that children are protected!!! Hello!!! which is it, two witnesses, or whatever the law will let us do!!!! Wake up brains!!!!
3) ALL fifty sates allow ANYONE to make an abuse report without criminal/civil sanctions. So do it, elders!!!
4) If he is repentant, he will not be expelled. NEVER MIND IF HE IS TREATMENT OR NOT!!!
Edited by - dungbeetle on 14 July 2002 19:11:2
-
ItsJustlittleoldme
Out of curiosity, I don't have it to look up, but isn't this the same letter sent to Dateline?
Ya know, I was reading the letter, and the feeling was, I read this somewhere before..
A few things changed, but nothing of substance:
A.) We abhore pedophealia
1.) Don't even mention that word within our congregation, especially if you are accusing one of 'gods' people..!!!
2.) Pedophealia? We don't have that in god's organization.. Only Christendom suffers from such gross sins!
B.) We protect the flock via bible principles
1.) You must tell us everything of what happened little girl
2.) we will ask in a polite manner the accused if indeed he did it
3.) He said NO, you (11 year old girl) must now come with us and state in front of this man what he did to you
4.) He still said NO!
a.) We are sorry, and thank you for your time in helping us resolve this matter, brother
b.) Little girl, He did nothing, and you are guilty of spreading false witness within the congregation.. A very serious offense!
c.) Little girl's parents get counseled on how the IMAGE of Jehovah's people is everything, and NOTHING can be proven by Jehovah's standards.. You are welcome to report this if you want, but we remind you that NOTHING can be proven within God's organization, and spreading false witness is punishable by DF, not to mention the reproach YOU would bring upon Jehovah's name by bringing in secular authorities.. After all, we are god's people.. What can secular authorities prove that we cannot?
C.) We don't allow any convicted pedophile to serve in any capacity within the congregation
1.) All he can do is go door-to-door.. He can molest worldly people all he wants, but he cannot have any authority within our organization
2.) There is an escape clause; If we determine through very rare circumstances that he is OK, we can appoint him
a.) this is a CYA clause.. Just in case you find the few MS/Elders in our midst's that have a record and are still people in 'authority', we can 'show' that he is indeed an upstanding citizen, and make up the 'rare instance' rule as we go along (since we didn't tell you what it was yet)
D.) We keep records to protect our 'flock'
1.) We keep records on everyone, it just so happens that we may record (or may not, probably not) accusations of pedophealia.
2.) This has NOTHING to do with protecting the flock, this has to do with
a.) Who is putting in the most hours every month (You know, Jehovah is gonna wanna review these records)
b.) who are the trouble makers, and have any semblence of independant thought -- we need to reprogram these ones, or remove them quickly
c.) We even keep records on non-witnesses just for the fun of it!!! Hahaha, do something about it!!! Privacy laws - we laugh in your face!
E. ) Did I mention we follow the bible?
1.) We interpret the bible to be what we want it to be, whenever we need it to say whatever we need it to say, we twist a scripture to apply
a.) example: 2 classes of Christians
b.) example: 1914 -- oops, sorry, bad example, based on a secular date which we mangled... circular logic!!!
c.) see example b
d.) FYI: we don't need 2 witnesses to accuse someone outside of the organization of any wrong doing; they are of satan, and don't deserve 2 witnesses to anything
F.) Have a nice day
1.) Can't wait for you to die a horrible death in the Tribluation!
-
Dutchie
If the number of pedophiles on record in the organization is considerable less than the 23,720 claimed, then why not just announce the actual number and be done with it? The reason is that the number is probably more or less accurate and that is why J.R. Brown spent so much time elaborating on how the numbers were compiled!
Edited by - Dutchie on 14 July 2002 19:28:9
-
silentlambs
The fax sent to Betsan Powys of the BBC offered non-answers to specific questions asked. As you will n ote the 23,720 figure is denied in the USA . I never specifically stated it was a USA ONLY figure. It appears once again misinformation is being used to shade the facts of this matter along with other comments. The 23, 720 figure includes a series of countires that take in about half the total figure of JW's worldwide.
Will you comment on that WT? Would that be meaningful?
silentlambs
Edited by - silentlambs on 14 July 2002 19:35:5