soon he will be filming from a barrel
Raymond Frantz made me do it...
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars
by Newly Enlightened 11530 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
Toblerone5
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
Who wrote the statement LMsA posted on page 789 because I can't read it. Can anyone post a link please?
It was a comment placed under the Tibor interview video on YouTube. I'll split it into three parts
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
Who wrote the statement LMsA posted on page 789 because I can't read it. Can anyone post a link please?
That looks horrible on my smartphone. Here's the copy and paste from that comment, which has since been deleted. So no link.
You and now Tibor are quick to dismiss any critical comments regarding you and the circumstances surrounding your trip to Thailand as coming from judgmental “JW Mindset” minds. But isn’t that what you are doing now? You made a mistake by leaving our wife and deceiving your supporters by ditching a planned UK meetup with you in favor of going to SE Asia and in your words “dating” a sex worker. People became critical of you, even angry. You’ve judged them as if they had no right to feel deceived or disappointed in you. Why is that? Likewise people made a mistake to assume you were behind a green screen. You and Tibor are now judging them for committing a comparatively minor offense when compared to your Thailand deception and I’ve already heard the words “conspiracy theorists” and nutcases thrown about. For someone who obviously prides himself as giving “acts of kindness” as you and Tibor repeatedly touched upon in this video, these words ring rather hollow. If it is just as you and Tibor have expressed, and your critics are victims of having a JW mindset, shouldn’t your “kindness” also extend to avoiding using these words to slander them? How are you helping them to beat the claimed JW mindset they have? You can’t have it both ways. You can’t boast about how helpful your videos are to exJWs while at the same time labeling most of them in harsh terms and quite publicly. It seems you are purposely omitting a lot of events when you speak of your troubles in the past year which are very important contextually speaking. I say you are purposely doing this because the facts don’t support your assertions. How would you go about explaining your three page long threat letter saying you were going to spend the next 40 years of your life going after Kim Silvio (who was in the opening credits of the Selters video both you and Tibor were so proud of) or until your dying breath? For someone who is all about “kindness” in this video, your vengeful comments in that letter prove quite the opposite. What about the lawsuit you've initiated in the Sisak Municipal Court which is evidently so frivolous that the court has refused your request to serve the people who’ve been named and slandered as “criminal defendants”? All you need to do is quit falsely referring to them as “criminal defendants” and that would go some way into backing up your claims of kindness. I see what you are doing and it is not going to work. If people can remember the Selters video and other works you are so proud of, they can and will also remember your behavior last year. There are also many people, including over half your Patrons who have dropped their support of you who are and will be here to remind them. You are preying upon the vulnerable again for financial support. The same people haven’t a clue what you’ve really been up to, your vile behavior and threats. It is from this pool of potential supporters that you are trying to manipulate into thinking that you are the innocent victim in all of this and hopefully influence them. It is interesting that you say you cannot watch the Selters video. May I ask, is it because Kim Silvio was involved in that project or that Ben Foard has dropped his support of you and your channel due to your actions that you cannot watch it? Or is it both? The video exists and as you say you are glad it exists. Doesn’t it bother you that the central subject of that video is now a critic of yours (and thus has the “JW Mindset”) whom you have blocked on social media and that one of your main collaborators in the same video is now regularly bashed by you publicly as a criminal? Would those two facts alone make you re-think your assessment of the video, or are you intent on ignoring everything that is not convenient to you? You or your mods will hide this comment I am sure, but my question is genuine and I think a heartfelt answer from you, free from insults or accusations would go some way towards backing your comments up about your videos being an altruistic endeavor of some kind. I remain skeptical. I hope you don’t judge me for that.
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
Did he say per week or per month? If it’s per week I call bullshit as rents are not that expensive in Zagreb - if it’s per month
Here's the FB comment:
It has to be monthly as that lines up with the average rent of the centre of Zagreb.
-
KIMSILVIO
It has to be monthly as that lines up with the average rent of the centre of Zagreb
I wonder how many people assumed it was weekly? I certainly did…I certainly didn’t give it proper thought to how little that cost actually is…..he is either accidentally or deliberately good at portraying an image that isn’t real.
-
lloydevansparody
Croatia adopted the Euro from just last month. So it could 450 Kuna instead which is around $65. It could also be weekly in that case we are talking of nearly $280.
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
Lloyd's JC story is very inconsistent. I just got sent this:
In (1) he related that both of them liked two of the elders assigned to the JC and didn't want to spoil any relations in case they wake up and for this reason he didn't want to record the JC. There are two sources of this account - one was from his JW Survey Article and the other from his book. In the book he refers to one of the elders (the coordinator who called him to set up the JC) as Marko, but in the JWS article he calls him Bob. They both speak poor English and are obviously the same person. But in the JWS article the two other elders who eventually made up the committee are unfamiliar to him:
I stepped inside and was greeted by Bob. I entered the auditorium and two other elders greeted me in perfect English, neither of whom I recognized.
In both his book account and his JWS article, he also relates that he refused to have two particular local elders on the JC:
I told Marko that I refused to allow the two elders who had hounded my wife and I to have any part in the meeting.
The JWS article provides more details and the only aliases:
I explained to Bob that I seriously disliked two of our elders, and I didn’t want either of them involved in my judicial committee. One elder, Tom, had pulled my wife into the backroom at a meeting without me being present, and interrogated her about me and our private life. The other, Dean, had used information he gleaned from inviting us round for dinner to theorize, entirely mistakenly, about our motives for becoming inactive.
So from what I can gather there are five elders all directly or indirectly involved in his JC:
Bob/Marko - A "likable" man who spoke poor English. The Sisak BOE coordinator. On the JC.
Tom - An elder who interrogated Dijana, by the article's account was about their "personal life", the book called him an enforcer who had questions about Lloyd's wrongdoing in the UK. He also stated he felt Lloyd treated his wife as a rag to clean the floor. Excluded from the JC.
More on Tom from the book:
he was an enforcer—more clued-in regarding organizational procedure and intent on laying down the law. On learning of my sudden inactivity, he was apparently frustrated that his fellow elders had not given me more of a roasting regarding my motives. In his mind, it seemed, I had escaped too easily and there were questions that needed answering. Was there some hidden sin that required further discipline? Might this sin be the reason why I was distancing myself from the congregation? Things came to a head when, at the end of one meeting (at which I was not present) the Enforcer pulled Dijana to one side and quizzed her in a backroom as to the reasons for my inactivity. It was explained that I must be involved in some wrongdoing requiring the intervention of the elders. The Enforcer then set about trying to extract information from Dijana by telling her (in Croatian): “I know Lloyd treats you like a rag for cleaning the floor.”
Dean - Accused Lloyd of running a scam where he paid JWs little for translation work and was only attending in order to maintain that relationship. Excluded from the JC. More on Dean:
The other had speculated that I was running an exploitative business scam based on the passing mention that I occasionally gave work to freelance translators who were Witnesses.)
Marko/Bob agreed that Tom and Dean were not to be on the JC due to personal animosity between them and Lloyd.
Dean/Dejan - Lloyd also called him "Dean" in the article, though was clear this was a different Dean and he was unfamiliar with him. They were both named Dejan in real life evidently. On the JC.
Marko joked that this was not the same Dejan I had specified, so he assumed it was okay to invite him. I said this was fine by me.
Davor - Croatian Branch Rep. On the JC.
So, here's the rub. Lloyd spoke of two elders who were on the JC that they liked. They supposedly decided BEFORE the JC that he wasn't recording it due to this factor. But other than Bob/Marko, Lloyd didn't know who would be on the JC. And it was only Bob/Marko they were familiar with. Davor was an elder from Zagreb and Davor was from the branch office. He didn't know either of them prior to the JC.
Lloyd also spoke of two local Sisak elders that he didn't like. One questioned his business practices within the congregation and the other one had more serious concerns about what Lloyd really did in the UK. For this they were purposely excluded. What exactly did Tom know?
Footnote 317 in The Reluctant Apostate reveals even more background of why the JC was being held, other than he was behind an apostate website:
I was later told by someone still inside the organization and in contact with my former elders in the UK that there was more behind my judicial committee than this, but I suppose this will have to remain a mystery for now.
As for the reasons why the Branch Rep had to be there, the reasons given were twofold:
He also agreed that, because I am English with a weak command of Croatian, the meeting would be held in English to the extent possible. It was for this reason, apparently, that an elder from the Branch Office in Zagreb would be attending. I later learned that the branch representative was also invited at least partly due to the fact that Sisak elders had no experience in dealing with apostasy, so they needed some guidance from higher up the chain.
This is demonstrably false. Both Davor and Dejan spoke perfect English. Dejan could have translated without the Branch Rep present. Part of the JC was held in Croatian anyway per Lloyd's account, including the opening prayer. The second assertation is suspicious. The elder's handbook has rules for handling everything, including apostasy. Sending a Branch Rep in due to local elders supposedly not having any experience in apostasy takes a huge stretch of the imagination to believe.
He just can't keep his story straight and seems to have a lot to hide.
JW Watch article: My 21st Century Apostasy Trial - JW Watch
-
lloydevansparody
Excellent work LMsA
Yes the all JC story does not make any sense. We know that apostasy trials require certain pre conditions. One individual cannot be disfellowshipped for apostasy in a single JC. Apostasy trials are very complex and in any case the individual must get the chance to change their mind. These steps are missing in LE's story. The idea that Tom had more important concerns about Lloyd's behaviour in the UK has always baffled me. Why? I mean if he was being trialled for apostasy why bother with the stuff he did in the UK. Porn? Online sex chats? I laugh.
Let's assume for a moment that he was being judged for two sins: apostasy and porneia. As an example. What sin the elder would prioritise over? Apostasy or porneia? If the JC has less experienced elders within, then these men could decide to give emphasis on the porneia bit. It is simple, easy to deal with and most common. Apostasy is far too complex. The elders must take days or weeks to prepare. I attended one once with 13 elders. Some would ask the CO for advice. In any case they know that the JC would not be able to deliberate immediately. Some elders are shockingly too unprepared to be able to deal with apostasy. Would a Bethel rep be a necessity? Not in the slightest. Perhaps a CO or a DO (at that time they were still in force) but a Bethel rep never. There are English speaking congregations in Croatia I am certain they would be the first choice in case of a language barrier.
No I am certain mr Evans wasn't disfellowshipped for apostasy. His story does not make any sense. Perhaps he could have eventually after the 1st and 2nd admonition but that day there was another sin on the plate, a sin Tom was really concerned about even more concerned than the apostasy (if ever).
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
No I am certain mr Evans wasn't disfellowshipped for apostasy.
It was a DA. He resigned in a letter. I don't have any reason to doubt that part of Lloyd's version of events. Glad you mentioned that though. It is important to remember context going in. He was a British expat who had lost privileges in the UK and fled immediately to relatively impoverished (especially where the in-laws lived) Croatia. They knew he had done something due to the lost privileges and the fact he was moving to a village outside Sisak of all places where he had intentionally isolated himself geographically, culturally and linguistically. He had to have raised more than a few eyebrows.
But they had to have known a DA was coming. He had been inactive for 2 years or so and had even met with them and told them: I am not going to the KH or field service because I have doubts about the organisation. He had already influenced someone they knew as the young local pioneer sister to go inactive. He had an apostate website up and had outted himself publicly. They weren't stupid. There was no chance he'd be willing to listen to their counsel and repent.
So why bother with the Branch Rep? It was unlikely to have been a complex JC. Only way it would have been as you stated was if he had denied JWSurvey (his pic was right there) and told them he still wanted to be a JW. In that case, they would have ended that JC and reassembled for another one. Then other elders would be called from round Croatia who had experience with apostasy and better English fluency.
-
lloydevansparody
But they had to have known a DA was coming. He had already influenced the young local pioneer sister to go inactive. He had an apostate website up and had outted himself publicly. They weren't stupid. There was no chance he'd be willing to listen to their counsel and repent.
I get that. But still the procedure for the 2 admonitions would apply. I am sorry but again the elders couldn't deploy a JC without speaking with him first. I mean what sort of elders would go against the official procedure knowing that a "Bethel rep" would be there? Who would?
Possible that they tried to contact him but he always refuted to meet until it was no longer possible and a DA was on the plate. But he never mentions this