Australia Evidence List is public and contains Elders Book

by Skidmarks 27 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  Skidmarks

  There is so much information on the website of the hearing. You can find the full transcripts of each day there as PDF.

  But also the evidence list is very interresting. It contains many confidential letters from congregations but also from the HQ to branch offices.

  The full list can be seen here: http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/exhibits/636f01a5-50db-4b59-a35e-a24ae07fb0ad/case-study-29,-july-2015,-sydney

  Even the secret elders book "Shephard the Flock of God" is available for download there complete with annotations: http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/downloadfile.ashx?guid=f49184a4-87b0-4eac-be09-74e0e7a26834&type=exhibit&filename=WAT.0003.001.0001&fileextension=pdf
• 

  skin

  Thanks for that link...
• 

  jwleaks

  Jesus once prophesied: "There is nothing hidden that will not become manifest, neither anything carefully concealed that will never become known and never come into the open." - Luke 8:17

  JWLEAKS.ORG

  
  
• 

  88JM

  That elders book makes me wonder:

  They submitted the new version of the flock book as evidence, but when most of these abuses took place would they not still be under the old flock book? Therefore, shouldn't they be referencing the old one? Or is it more about looking at current policy?
• 

  Tornintwo

  Wow, there are so many confidential letters on there from NY to Australia etc, instructions to service committees, flowcharts on handling a use accusations.

  ive just read a few and one thing is very clear, their emphasis is on maintaining confidentiality and avoiding reporting to authorities if at all possible, only if reporting is mandatory do they then instruct elders to make a report to the authorities. It is all about what they have to do by law and can avoid if at all possible using ecclesiastical privilege etc, nothing about how the victim may need support In taking a matter like that to the authorities.

  Also, several times it mentions that elders are the ones to establish if there is any truth in the accusation. Hopefully the commission will establish that they're woefully inadequate to make that judgement.

  the GB must be horrified that all these docs are now in the public domain.
• 

  Skidmarks

  The old version of the book is also in the evidence list: http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/downloadfile.ashx?guid=19fec647-7a5f-4e62-9709-edd4bbde1b59&type=exhibit&filename=WAT.0013.002.0001&fileextension=pdf

  They indeed look at the rules at the time of the incident. They even check not only the publication date of the book but also when the elders of that particular congregation received the new book.

  This flow chart on how the handle a child abuse case is also interestting: http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/downloadfile.ashx?guid=b3be30d3-e2ed-45bc-ba83-8e0a4f1661bc&type=exhibit&filename=WAT.0012.001.0013&fileextension=pdf
• 

  fastJehu

  @ Skidmarks

  Thanks a lot for the links
  
• 

  Witness My Fury

  Bloody awesome!
• 

  Skidmarks

  The transcripts also has some gems in them:

  Max Horley:

  Q. Your understanding of the origin of this one-witness rule is that passage in Deuteronomy that I looked atearlier; is that right?
  A. Going on the information there, it would be one of the references, yes.
  Q. We'll ask other people this in due course, obviously from the branch office, but in your understanding, does the church have the flexibility to move from that, to say, "Well, that may have been the case back then, but in the
  modern world we recognise that the two-witnesses rule is a problem and we will not apply it anymore." Does the church have the flexibility to do that?
  A. Not to my knowledge.
  Q. Because it's written in the scripture?
  A. That's what we base our teachings on mainly, yes.
  Q. But that same passage that I read you says that the accused [sic] must essentially throw the first stone to kill the accused. I take it you don't do that?
  A. No, obviously not.
  Q. So what's the distinction? Why flexibility on the one and not on the other?
  A. Again, I'd take my advice from the branch on how we would proceed with a situation like that today. At the time we followed the procedures that we had in place, and I haven't had a modern or more modern example of how to proceed in that situation. But looking at what the publication says there, we would follow those directions after the advice of the branch.

  About destroying evidence

  Q. Did you take any notes?
  A. No, I didn't.
  Q. Can you help us --
  A. I may have done at the time, I'm sorry, but --
  Q. You may have done?
  A. I may have.
  Q. Where are they now?
  A. They would have been destroyed.
  Q. Why?
  A. We don't like to have any notes outside of what's kept on file in the congregation.
  Q. Why don't you like to have notes of a serious allegation?
  A. There are brief notes kept in the file, but all other notes are destroyed.
  Q. Why is that?
  A. I guess it's because we don't want them to fall into the wrong hands and other people to find them and they go through them.
  Q. What are the "wrong hands"?
  A. Well, we don't want our wives knowing what our stuff - what sort of things we are dealing with; we don't want other people in the congregation coming across that information.
  Q. So you want to keep it secret to the elders; is that what it amounts to?
  A. I don't know about "secret", but we want to try and limit the amount of people that have to have a look at that information, yes.
  Q. And why is it that you want to limit the people who will have access to the information?
  A. Just to protect them, I guess. We don't --
  Q. Protect who?
  A. Protect the person that's involved in it and the rest of the congregation, so that they don't have to know these - I don't know, it's just - it's the protocol that we've had and so we've just followed that information, yes.
  Q. And would you do the same thing today if someone came and reported to you a serious allegation of sexual assault? Would you destroy any notes?
  A. Yes, that's our practice.

  "I was just following protocol...."
  
  

  
  
• 

  Muddy Waters

  This is so astonishingly GREAT!! I am so proud of Austrailia, the little land down under is doing such a complete, efficient, professional exposure and inquiry into the inner workings, practices and secrecies of the WT cult! And doing so with complete compassion and regard to those who have been abused by the WT's system, doctrine, and policies.