by jwleaks 28 Replies latest jw friends
Makes me wonder if sometimes the GB have occasionally been specifically and deliberately not told some things (for whatever reason).
It wouldn’t be difficult…
…after all, they’re surrounded by folks who are never really allowed to disagree with them.
It’s not much of a stretch to think that some of the less-scrupulous (or naive) types might be tempted to use that as a pretext to simply refrain from telling them certain details, even if only to give them “plausible deniability”.
“…so basically, the fox was put in charge of the henhouse, but not permitted to scrub his own name, so he essentially weaponized the two-witness rule to keep his own alleged acts under wraps, resulting in the problem becoming widespread, institutionalized, and unfixable under the current system…”
This would not have been overly difficult, BTW.
A lot of the stories we’ve heard here have detailed just how severely fucked-up some of the SCA-related JCs have actually been…
…ten bucks says the loyalists put in charge of the “investigations” would dutifully obey any marching orders, not just because they’d knee-jerkly defend the Org against any threat, real or imagined…
…but go way beyond what was necessary or decent, simply because the vast majority of ‘em, as loyalists, wouldn’t want to consider just how deep that rabbit hole went, and were fucking terrified of just how bad it might actually be.
I never realised that the Redress Scheme applied to abuse victims who were under 18 years of age.
However, it only applies to victims who were under JW institutional care, custody, supervision, control or authority. Examples given are Kingdom Halls- cleaning, meetings, hall maintenance. At a formal congregation bookstudy meeting held in a private home, receiving assistance under the child witnesses mentoring programs for fatherless boys or spiritual orphans, building construction activities, child minding services, volunteering at conventions, as a student enrolled in the theocratic ministry school, field service whilst in the care of another congregant and a few others.
This is going to limit the amount of claims drastically if most of the abuse has been by other JWs, including Elders/MS's who committed the abuse outside JW settings (such as in private homes, cars, parks etc.)
I never realised that the Redress Scheme applied to abuse victims who were under 18 years of age.
Under 18 years of age at the time they were abused, i.e. a child. The scheme is compensation for victims of child sexual abuse only.
JW Leaks I understood it was in regards to child sexual abuse but I didn't expect the line to be drawn for victims 17 and under, I thought it would have been younger than that, under 16 years of age to coincide with the age of consent. But it appears that the age is different when it comes to criminal activity.
I understand. It comes down to interpreting the laws in Australia, including working with children laws and the context of what is an institution.
For example, I appeared before parliament in Australia last year as a witness and gave evidence in relation to the National Redress Scheme application form questions.
To illustrate (the following paragraphs not being legal advice): a 19 year old male (or older) is allowed to ask a 16 or 17 year old female out on a date. Or vice versa. In most circumstances this is allowed. In fact repeated requests are allowed.
However, consider the following: if the male was a ministerial servant and he had a working with children card (as mandated by law) then it would restrict his ability to ask such a female (in the congregation) out on a date as he has legislated and congregational authority over her. If they did ‘date’ and ‘sexual sins’ followed, then the JW religion could be liable and subject to a Redress Scheme claim up to $150,000. There could be more to the events but that is not considered in this summation.
The governing body were offered help to navigate all of these potential problems but chose to ignore the help, and now the corporation will most likely financially suffer from their stubborness.
Very informative video Steven. Thanks!
Vidiot: ten bucks says the loyalists put in charge of the “investigations” would dutifully obey any marching orders, not just because they’d knee-jerkly defend the Org against any threat, real or imagined
That is what is described in the Australian Royal Commission document that summarized the JW portion (Case Study 29). Elders who dealt with two specific cases ignored or suppressed their instincts and followed the WTS guidelines to the letter. I think it was part blind obedience and part not wanting to deal with a nasty subject. But it meant that they put victims through additional trauma while they minimized the harm done to the perpetrators... even when they admitted to multiple occasions of abuse with multiple victims!
The lapses in memory were obviously meant to protect themselves and the organization. Even in the case where one elder's detailed notes were found (and read back to them), they maintained that they could not recall certain events or messages. Which makes it seem as if they didn't think a CSA case was important enough to remember! They preferred to come across as extremely insensitive idiots than to admit that the whole system was set up to railroad victims and protect child rapists.
TonusOH - “…They preferred to come across as extremely insensitive idiots than to admit that the whole system was set up to railroad victims and protect child rapists.”
Well, I suppose that’s one way to fall on one’s sword. 😒
Ted was on the list. He had a lifelong hatred for another GB member who was responsible for kicking him out of the Australian branch many years prior for his transgression.
Their animosity for one another was thick whenever they were together in public as I recall. I learned why later. Surprisingly many others knew.
Now we even know what Ted did. It just proves that Bethel can never keep a secret forever, except from the police.
