by Country Girl 67 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
"I don't intend to minimize my offense, however, plaintiff implies that abuse took place from 1988 through 1992 when, in fact, there were only two instances of sexual contact," Kelley's court response states.
In other words, he only did it twice, so it doesn't count! Interesting defense. These people really do think they're invisible.
Thanks Countrygirl,
ANYTHING you hear about this I would love to keep up with. Do you have any way of knowing the attorney's involved?
Steve
CG -
Great find! Thank you for posting this!
My thoughts on reading this were "if the Kingdom Halls didn't have anything to hide, why wouldn't they simply produce the documents to exhonerate themselves"? Of course, we all know the reason, but I would hope that any active Witnesses who saw that story had those thoughts, too.
In fact, when I read over the link Blondie contributed which took place in a private school that was run by a church in "Christendom" (below), I just KNOW if active JW elders saw this story (about a teacher who had been reported to the Principal for sexual abuse, and THEN the Principal denied knowing about it during police interviews), they would all want this Principal strung up! Yet at the same time, they wouldn't see themselves in the story!
Some of the alleged acts committed by Morton ''were witnessed by school teachers during field trips that took place during the school's summer session,'' according to the arrest report.
At least some of those teachers reported the incident to Cowan [the Principal], Ruggiero said.
Cowan was interviewed twice by detectives and both times ''denied any knowledge of sexual abuse,'' said the report.
''She definitely had knowledge, and that's a big concern,'' Ruggiero said
This blew my mind, too:
plaintiff implies that abuse took place from 1988 through 1992 when, in fact, there were only two instances of sexual contact,"
Yeah, right - that would be two instances too many! - and two more instances than the WT reported to the authorities!
I kind of had to chuckle at this:
In court documents, Kelley said he completed 10 years in a sex offender program and has finished 10 years of shock probation.
What in the heck is "shock probation"?! Or - do I really want to know the answer to that?!!
growedup
Oh boy, where do I start?
"In court records filed Tuesday, the Dumas and Amarillo congregations claim that producing various documents sought by the plaintiff would violate their constitutional rights."
OK, would that be the constitution you wouldn't lift a finger to help preserve or protect?
The consitution of a government you have said is controlled by Satan the Devil? is *THAT* the constitution you are talking about?
Too bad US doesn't have the guts to remove "religious status" from all the cults, after extensively studying all groups to decide who is a cult and who isn't. They (JWs) could pull out of France, but I doubt they can pull out of US and servive as a group. I mean, what are they going to do, be the Watchtower Society of Brandon Manitoba? :)
New light . . . The elders are clergy. Yawn . . . . .
Very interesting developments for God's "chosen people"!
Gary wrote: New light . . . The elders are clergy. Yawn . . .
Yes - clergy, but do not forget they are "untrained".
. . . untrained . . . unpaid . . . .uninspired . . . unbelievable . . . .
The motion says a court order compelling the church to produce some documents would violate the church's constitutional right to freely practice its faith.
OMG,
Is pedophile their "Faith" ?
Rape our kids is their FAITH and they have to be "freely practice" this Faith
jwsons
Here's their traditional defense:
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Published on Saturday, May 23, 1998 Page: 8A ©1998 Guy Gannett Communications
Church has no control over its members.
It is not my practice to litigate a matter outside of the courtroom, but as an attorney involved in representing the interests of Jehovah's Witnesses, I must respond to the false allegations that sexual abuse was perpetrated by an elder, contained in Mr. Vegh's article of May 12.
Jehovah's Witnesses believe they have a responsibility before God to protect the children in the congregation.
The Watchtower Society has stated its official position in the Jan. 1, 1997, ``Watchtower.'' ``For the protection of our children, a man known to have been a child molester does not qualify for a responsible position in the congregation.''
The perpetrator at no time held a leadership position in the church - not before the wrongdoing, not at the time of the wrongdoing, not after the wrongdoing. The May 12 article is wrong when it says he ``regained his leadership post as an elder.'' He was a next-door neighbor of the plaintiff and a fellow parishioner. The plaintiff is seeking to hold the church responsible for activities that took place in a private setting, between neighbors.
Clearly, the personal activities of church members are outside of the control of the church.
The plaintiff's counsel seeks to strip a church of the sanctity and complete confidentiality of the confession and impose upon it liability for the wrongdoing of its members.
When all the facts have been developed, in a court of law rather than the court of public opinion, it will be clear that the Watchtower Society and church elders did all that was possible to safeguard the plaintiff.
Paul D. Polidoro
Patterson, N.Y. http://www.jesus-witnesses.com/elderabuse.htm
Un-friggin believable!
