by jwleaks 347 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
RO: What is the answer that you gave, that you don't care about the grey areas.
There is no grey area in my response.
The Royal Commission is investigating institutions to examine how the institution responds to child sex abuse. How the WT responds to the viewing of child abuse material falls within the commission's mandate.
Again my point was you have to look at the totality of the policy or the totality of the law. The policy that Watchtower has stated is that they will report if there is a child that is still in danger and as been constantly been stated here, child pornography keeps victimizing the child. Again I use the example of Alaska where there are two sepeate statutes one is the statute on child pornography where it does not mandate anyone to report that someone else is in posession, has made or is distributing child pornography, does that mean that no one is mandated to report that, if you just look at that one law, then yes. But a single law is not in a vaccum, you have to look at it in the context of all the other laws, the other law is that if a processor of film or other visual forms of media sees child pornography they are mandated to report that.
So in similar fashion, yes the Watchtower policy does not state that those that watch Child Pornography must be reported to the police in that section, you have to look at the full policy together. It does state that if either the elder or the branch feel that the child is still in danager, then they are to report the matter.
So in similar fashion, yes the Watchtower policy does not state that those that watch Child Pornography must be reported to the police in that section, you have to look at the full policy together. It does state that if either the elder or the branch feel that the child is still in danager, then they are to report the matter.
I don't think the policy does state this does it? I think all we have have is some words to the ARC. I may be wrong, but I don't think this has made it into any official policy yet?
RO: So in similar fashion, yes the Watchtower policy does not state that those that watch Child Pornography must be reported to the police in that section, you have to look at the full policy together.
Bullshit.
The WT has stated that viewing child pornography is not considered child abuse. That statement precludes anything else that the document states. If they will not acknowledge that salient point, that the viewer is engaging in the abuse of a child, the viewing of child abuse material falls flat in the water and never gets out of the gate.
From
Child Safeguarding Policy of Jehovah's Witnesses in Australia:
Page 2 Point 9 Dated 7 March 2017
If congregation elders learn of a case of child abuse in which a child may still be at risk of harm, they will ensure that a report to the police or other appropriate authorities is made immediately.
From
Protecting Minors from Abuse
Page 2 Point 6Dated August 1, 2016
To ensure that elders comply with child-abuse reporting laws, two elders should immediately call the Legal Department for legal advice when the elders learn of an accusation of child abuse. (Rom. 13:1-4) A call should be made even when both persons involved are minors.
And Watchtower current policy is not limited to just those that are members of the elders congregation.
From
Protecting Minors from Abuse
Page 2 Point 6 Dated August 1, 2016
• The alleged abuse occurred many years ago.
• The alleged abuse is based on the testimony of only one witness.
• The alleged abuse is believed to be a repressed memory.
• The alleged abuse involved perpetrators or victims who are deceased.
• The alleged abuse is believed to have already been reported to the secular authorities.
• The alleged perpetrator or victim is not a member of your congregation.
• The alleged perpetrator is a non-Witness associating with the congregation.
• The alleged abuse occurred before the alleged perpetrator or victim was baptized.
• The alleged victim is now an adult.
• The alleged abuse occurred in the past, and it is unclear whether your congregation elders ever called the Legal Department for direction.
Also Orphan Crow you neglected to state where is that policy on child pornography coming from. It is under section 11 Child Sexual Abuse from a Scriptual Standpoint.
Also from the letter to bodies of elders Protecting Minors from Abuse Page 1 section 2. Depending on the circumstances of the case, it may include involvement with child pornography or “sexting” with a minor. “Sexting” describes the sending of sexually explicit mes-sages or images electronically.
Do you have a link for those documents RO please?
The WT has stated that viewing child pornography is not considered child abuse.
And whether or not that is true, it may be criminal conduct governed by mandatory reporting compelling wt to report.
How wt handles immorality is church business unless Australian law regulates wt policy.
It would be documents
Letter from Watchtower Australia to All Bodies of Elders regarding Protecting Minors from Abuse
Child Safeguard Policy of Jehovah's Witnesses in Australia
I should have posted the full point 2. the point is to give a definition of what is sexual child abuse.
2. Child abuse includes the sexual or physical abuse of a minor. It would also include the extreme neglect of a minor by her parent. Child sexual abuse is a perversion and generally includes sexual intercourse with a minor; oral or anal sex with a minor; fondling the genitals, breasts, or buttocks of a minor; voyeurism of a minor; indecent exposure to a minor; or soliciting a minor for sexual conduct. Depending on the circumstances of the case, it may include involvement with child pornography or “sexting” with a minor. “Sexting” describes the sending of sexually explicit messages or images electronically
