Sharing on a judicial committee

by zev 18 Replies latest jw friends

  • zev
    zev

    in this day and age of tightening watchtower policy, it is good to reflect on spiritual food at the proper time.

    here is your meal.

    eat in in good health.

    in all seriousness, please read carefully this few paragraphs on judicial committies.

    quite different from what happens in the "real" world huh?

    ----

    "Pay Attention to Yourselves and to All the Flock "

    UNIT 5 (b)

    Sharing
    on a Judicial Committee

    Handling Judicial Cases

    Do not send an individual any kind of correspondence that directly accuses him of specific wrongdoing.

    It is best for two elders to speak with the individual and
    invite him to meet with the Judicial committee.

    Suitable arrangements should be made as to the time
    and place of the hearing.

    State what the person's course of action is supposed to
    have been.

    If it is necessary to send a written invitation, you should
    simply state what the individual's course is alleged to have
    been, the time and place of the hearing, and how the
    person can contact the chairman if the arrangements are
    inconvenient for him.

    If the accused wishes to bring witnesses who can speak in his defense regarding the matter, he may do so.

    However, observers are not permitted.

    No tape-recording devices are allowed.

    If the accused repeatedly fails to come to the hearing, the committee will proceed with the hearing but will not

    110

    make a decision until evidence and any testimony by witnesses are considered.

    The committee should not take action against a person
    unless the evidence clearly proves this necessary.

    Failure to appear before the committee is not in itself
    proof of guilt.

    What kind of evidence is acceptable?
    There must be two or three eyewitnesses, not just persons
    repeating what they have heard; no action can be taken if
    there is only one witness. (Deut. 19:15;John 8:17)

    Confession (admission of wrongdoing), either written or
    oral, may be accepted as conclusive proof without other
    corroborating evidence. (Josh. 7:19)

    Strong circumstantial evidence, such as pregnancy or evi-
    dence (testified to by at least two witnesses) that the
    accused stayed all night in the same house with a person of
    the opposite sex (or in the same house with a known
    homosexual) under improper circumstances, is acceptable.

    The testimony of youths may be considered; it is up to
    the elders to determine if the testimony has the ring of
    truth.

    The testimony of unbelievers may also be considered, but
    it must be carefully weighed.

    If there are two or three witnesses to the same kind of
    wrongdoing but each one is witness to a separate incident,
    their testimony can be considered.

    Such evidence may be used to establish guilt, but it is
    preferable to have two witnesses to the same occurrence
    of wrongdoing.

    Edited by - zev on 22 November 2002 17:23:42

  • refiners fire
    refiners fire

    "No tape-recording devices are allowed."

    bummer.

  • Reborn2002
    Reborn2002

    The Watchtower Society makes up the rules as they go along so as long as those rules serve their own selfish wishes.

    They make, break, bend, and change the rules as they see fit.

    For example:

    If the accused repeatedly fails to come to the hearing, the committee will proceed with the hearing but will not

    110

    make a decision until evidence and any testimony by witnesses are considered.

    The committee should not take action against a person
    unless the evidence clearly proves this necessary.

    Failure to appear before the committee is not in itself
    proof of guilt.

    So much for the individuals df'ed or da'ed in absentia huh?

    Or how about these gems?

    ========================================================

    There must be two or three eyewitnesses, not just persons
    repeating what they have heard; no action can be taken if
    there is only one witness. (Deut. 19:15;John 8:17)

    Confession (admission of wrongdoing), either written or
    oral, may be accepted as conclusive proof without other
    corroborating evidence. (Josh. 7:19)

    Strong circumstantial evidence, such as pregnancy or evi-
    dence (testified to by at least two witnesses) that the
    accused stayed all night in the same house with a person of
    the opposite sex (or in the same house with a known
    homosexual) under improper circumstances, is acceptable.

    The testimony of youths may be considered; it is up to
    the elders to determine if the testimony has the ring of
    truth.

    The testimony of unbelievers may also be considered, but
    it must be carefully weighed.

    =================================================================

    So.. no action taken if there is only one witness? I guess child molestors make sure they have sex with a child in front of someone.

    The testimony of youths can be considered, but they are viewed as less important or less honest than adults. Too bad for little Mary or Bobby who just had a penis shoved in their mouth.

    Unbelievers testimony may be considered? What about the tens or hundreds or thousands who are part of the silentlambs effort? A large number of voices are crying out in unison that something is terribly wrong with WT policy. To the WT, those voices mean nothing, even if they speak the truth.

    Just my 2c

    Edited by - Reborn2002 on 22 November 2002 17:15:36

  • CornerStone
    CornerStone

    Tape recorders = impartial witness

    Only biased witnesses and judges allowed in a kingdum stall.

    CornerStone

  • refiners fire
    refiners fire

    ..."Strong circumstantial evidence, such as pregnancy or evi-
    dence (testified to by at least two witnesses) that the
    accused stayed all night in the same house with a person of
    the opposite sex (or in the same house with a known
    homosexual) under improper circumstances, is acceptable".

    Thats how they got me, two dubbies living over the road saw that my girlfriend was sleeping over at my flat, only two bedrooms, a guy sleeping in the other one. Therefore she must be sleeping with me.

    (damn yellow, how do I get rid of it???)

  • Truth2Me
    Truth2Me

    Hummmmm Interesting.......I've never heard of anyone in the world attending a judicial hearing.........now how would that go.......

    Witness witness to "crime" : "I need you to testify at a judicial hearing that you saw Sister Sweetheart speak with Brother Badguy."

    Worldly witness to "crime" : "What?"

    Witness witness to "crime": "Well see her speaking to brother Badguy is a flagrant display of disrespect for Jehovah's laws for how to treat disfellowshipped ones....and you and I were the only witnesses to it and so I need you to come to the KH and testify against her."

    Worldly witness to "crime" : "What the heck! What kind of crazy religion are you in."

    heehee, that's why we never see folks on the outside at judicial hearings as "witnesses" against the accused.

    Truth2Me

  • Jade
    Jade

    I wonder how I was df'd without going to the meeting?

  • Francois
    Francois

    No tape recorders are allowed? OH YEAH? Who the hell died and left these bastards in charge? I insisted that all meetings with me be in my own home. I had one of those mini-cassette recorders in my hand and by the look on my face I dared those ass-holes to say one word about it. They didn't.

    Then, to prove my point, I waltzed into the KH, after having not been there for over two years with my young son under one arm and my tape recorder in my other hand and sat down in the middle of the front row. I turned the recorder on and pointed it at the speaker who just happened to be the elder whose credentials and credibility as an elder I had challenged.

    No one said a word. Not then. Not later.

    You see, the organization is so damned certain that they've trained a flock full of unintelligent, spineless, jellyfish-like, milquetoasts that they don't have the slightest idea what to do when they are confronted with someone who refuses to play by their self-serving rules.

    The real key is this: They depend for their power on having at their mercy a person who is terrified of being disfellowshipped. That fear gives them perfect control over the people who come before them. It allows them to make the rules, like "no tape recorders." When the person who condescends to talk to them doesn't give a big fat rat's ass about being disfellowshipped, then THAT PERSON can make the rules. And the JC members are so out of touch with how to deal with that kind of person, they're very likely to foul up and violate that person's civil rights, and then it's time for a visit to the nearest United States District Court for a little chat before a judge and jury about how much money the WTBTS owes you for violating your rights.

    Neat, huh? So neat, in fact, I'm thinking about joining up again and going through that entire drill one more time.

  • Surreptitious
    Surreptitious

    Only problem with that Francois, is you'd have to shave!!! or.....maybe not...

    You know, I guess I should start using these smiley things. Regular old punctuation doesn't seem to work anymore....

  • refiners fire
    refiners fire

    Does the accused hear, live, the testimony of those accusing him? Or does he go into the committee meeting blind?

    (Cant remember here, long time ago.)

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit