CANADIAN COURT CASE ON CHILD ABUSE

by hawkaw 34 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  hawkaw

  

  This is to alert all folks in Canada and the United States that a civil court case will be going to trial on September 8, 2002 in the greater Toronto area.

  Again this case is a civil case and NOT a criminal case.

  The case involves one Vicki Boer who now resides in Eastern Canada. Apparently she accuses her father of molestation back in the 1980s and apparently accuses the elders of not doing anything about it and not reporting the abuse once they, the elders, were notified about the abuse as per the Watchtower's doctrine. S ection 72 of the Ontario Child and Family Services Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.11 ( a copy can be viewed here - http://192.75.156.68/DBLaws/Statutes/English/90c11_e.htm ) requires elders and other clergy to report the abuse.

  The abuse apparently occurred in the Shelburne, Ontario area - kinda of west northwest of Toronto.

  I believe (I'm going from memory) those named in the suit as defendants are the elders, the congregation in Shelburne and the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Canada.

  This case has gone through all the pre-trial motions and is about 2 years old.

  More news will be coming on this case with respect to court locations and times for court trial for any of those who are willing to support Vicki.

  For the record, I have had the pleasure of meeting Vicki in Kingston with her husband. Both are extremely strong people who have a lot of guts taking on this corporation.

  I can't tell you folks how important this case can be if she wins. The Watchtower knows this too. And as Mad Apostate (aka Angry XJW) told you - its a big if.

  This case is light years ahead of the Berry lawsuit with resect to time. The lawyer for Ms. Boer is one Mr. Charles Mark of the Greater Toronto Area. Mr. Mark has had some experience in dealing with the Witnesses on other matters.

  hawk

  p.s. - yes, the news media knows about this case too and are getting invited to the trial

  Edited by - hawkaw on 1 August 2002 14:23:50
• 

  dungbeetle

  hugs to Vicki and her husband and Mr. Mark...and Hawkaw and yes even MadApostate...

  and to silentlambs everywhere..

  ROAR LAMBS ROAR !!!

  ...but I don't LIVE in the Toronto area <sniff> <sob>

  Edited by - dungbeetle on 1 August 2002 21:50:0
• 

  expatbrit

  Thanks for the update Hawkaw. Please keep us up-to-date as and when you can.

  For general interest, this is from the government of Ontario: http://www.gov.on.ca/CSS/page/brochure/repchildab.html

  Ongoing duty to report CFSA s.72(2) The duty to report is an ongoing obligation. If a person has made a previous report about a child, and has additional reasonable grounds to suspect that a child is or may be in need of protection, that person must make a further report to a children's aid society.

  Persons must report directly CFSA s.72(3) The person who has the reasonable grounds to suspect that a child is or may be in need of protection must make the report directly to a children's aid society. The person must not rely on anyone else to report on his or her behalf.

  What are "reasonable grounds to suspect"? You do not need to be sure that a child is or may be in need of protection to make a report to a children's aid society. "Reasonable grounds" are what an average person, given his or her training, background and experience, exercising normal and honest judgement, would suspect.

  Special responsibilities of professionals and officials, and penalty for failure to report CFSA s.72(4), (6.2) Professional persons and officials have the same duty as any member of the public to report a suspicion that a child is in need of protection. The Act recognizes, however, that persons working closely with children have a special awareness of the signs of child abuse and neglect, and a particular responsibility to report their suspicions, and so makes it an offence to fail to report.

  Any professional or official who fails to report a suspicion that a child is or may be in need of protection, where the information on which that suspicion is based was obtained in the course of his or her professional or official duties, is liable on conviction to a fine of up to $1,000.

  Professionals affected CFSA s.72(5) Persons who perform professional or official duties with respect to children include the following:

  • health care professionals, including physicians, nurses, dentists, pharmacists and psychologists;

  • teachers, and school principals;

  • social workers and family counsellors;

  • priests, rabbis and other members of the clergy;

  • operators or employees of day nurseries;

  • youth and recreation workers (not volunteers);

  • peace officers and coroners;

  • solicitors;

  • service providers and employees of service providers; and

  • any other person who performs professional or official duties with respect to a child.

  This list sets out examples only. If your work involves children but is not listed above, you may still be considered to be a professional for purposes of the duty to report. If you are not sure whether you may be considered to be a professional for purposes of the duty to report, you should contact your local children's aid society, professional association or regulatory body.

  Professional confidentiality CFSA s.72(7),(8) The professional's duty to report overrides the provisions of any other provincial statute, specifically, those provisions that would otherwise prohibit disclosure by the professional or official.

  That is, the professional must report that a child is or may be in need of protection even when the information is supposed to be confidential or privileged. (The only exception for "privileged" information is in the relationship between a solicitor and a client.)
• 

  morrisamb

  Tell Vicki Boer that my heart goes out to her and I'll be praying for her!
• 

  hawkaw

  Donald,

  Cricle the 8th of Sept. on your calendar and come on down to the "big smoke" and you can tell her personally.

  hawk
• 

  sunshineToo

  Thanks so much for the post, hawkaw!

  Was Vicki's father found guilty of molestation at the court of law or did he confess to the elders? And is this the first Canadian silentlamb case so far?
• 

  hawkaw

  This is the first civil court case I am aware of.

  There have been criminal cases such as the ones out in BC and Newfoundland.

  The father was not charged under the Criminal Code of Canada and I do not know if he confesssed or not.

  hawk
• 

  Dia

  What a wonderful set of laws and guidelines. We should have them in the US!

  Good luck to all!
• 

  morrisamb

  Of course, if this case is the first of its kind in Canada, YOU KNOW it's going to get a lot of attention both from the press and inside the Witnesses. The first thing they'll probably say is we shouldn't be taking our "brothers" to court. Unfortunately this ideology protects predators and reabuses victims.
• 

  exploer

  Its great that the watchtower is being put down a couple of pegs. They think that they are better than anyone else and only they have the truth, they have 1/2 of the truth and 1/2 of lies. The only thing about this information is that it is not getting out farther than the anglosaxin community it needs to get out to the spanish speaking community. If needed I can help translate to spanish. answer me back.