Two witness rule: who cares?

by _Morpheus 58 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Heydog

  Hi Cofty,

  I edited my post between the time I saved it and you commented on it. I removed the part of ministerial servants because they don't handle any cases like this.

  I agree with you on the issue of dealing with malevolent individuals in the congregation. Paul mentioned Diotrephes and those individuals are still around today (I dealt with one, hence the reason I'm not an elder today - but that's for a different post).

  But if the elders follow instructions and act quickly to get the children safely out of the environment, its about as good as can be expected in this day and age. Sadly, anywhere there are children, (schools, daycare, boy/girl scouts, babysitters, etc.) we run the risk that a pedophile will take advantage of the situation and use it as an opportunity to be near children and abuse them. So everyone, whether they be elders, priests in the catholic church, Boy or Girl scout leaders, teachers, etc. have to be alert to these abusers and take quick action.
• 

  cofty

  Heydog. The WT policy and procedures on child protection don't work in practice in far too many cases.

  The Australian Royal Commission proved that much beyond all doubt. It was beyond embarrassing. I'm afraid that, like many well-intenioned JWs, you have a naive perspective that confuses theory and practice. Literally thousands of victims — many of them abused by abusers who were known to be such by elders — can testify to the fact that it does not work. The organisation has paid out countless millions in compensation and hush money in recent years in a vain effort to cover over past failings.

  You lived in a state with mandatory reporting laws. In many states and many countries this is not the case. The first directive of WT policy is ‘don’t bring reproach on Jehovah’s name’. This has consistently trumped child-welfare.

  You looked for ways to get around the two-witness rule — well done. Frequently the organisation has used the rule as a way to protect its reputation.

  The Watchtower’s record in protecting children and in dealing with cases of abuse is no better than the Roman Catholic Church. In recent years the Vatican has been forced to take steps to acknowledge their past failings, apologise to victims and change their ways — The Watchtower remains defiant.

  If local elders are doing better now than past generations that is despite the leadership of the Governing Body.
• 

  _Morpheus

  Heydog. The WT policy and procedures on child protection don't work in practice in far too many cases

  What a simplistic view. No policy will ever work better than the individuals who are implementing it... but of course cofty knows all. He read a book about it :)

  see, i can play too!

  @pete, the op was in response to something posted on another thread. Its a bit “on the nose” only because its a continuation of another discussion. I did not want to derail or be accused of derailing the other topic.

  I remain interested on why people are interested in changing the esoteric rules of a small religion that will not change the end result of child abuse instead of pushing for the bigger and meaningful change of ensuring that all abuse is reported.

  Also, everything hey dog said is correct, as far as current policy goes. To address a pointless question from a few pages ago, yes i have sat as an elder on a case like this. Yes we called the police. I made sure of it. I still dont see what this has to do with addressing real change.
  
  
• 

  Simon

  The last comment I'll make is the toughest. What if the alleged abuser really is innocent? There are rare occasions when the victim made up the story for whatever reason. 1. Those are very rare instances, few children make up stuff like that.

  That's why it's important that things be dealt with by those with the appropriate training so that something isn't escalated into something that it isn't without the child being given a way out (for the rare chance that it is an invention) or having a description of a story or other 'facts' put into their head - possibly by someone with the best of intentions but untrained (e.g. asking "did he [...] ?" instead of non leading questions)
• 

  _Morpheus

  A part of my point here as well is that in complaining about the so called two witness rule, the ex jw community is actually validating the orgs right to have a say in this. There is only a need to change rules when they matter.

  They dont. They have zero input, say so or influance, period. I dont care what their rules are. As i have noted a dozen times already, its irrelevant. They can say they need zero witnesses and believe every allegation, it changes nothing. The allegations belong in the hands of law enforcement, period.
• 

  Nathan Natas

  Heydog said, in part,

  "...once a person is determined to be a child molester (even if they never get disfellowshipped for it), they can NEVER serve in any capacity at the Kingdom Hall."

  I'm going to challenge that. In the past the WTB&TS has clearly stated that after a period of time such a brother CAN serve, and that theory has been proven in practice; it has happened.

  I left in the mid-late 1970s and I was only an MS and pioneer when I did, so there is a gulf of time and "hands-on experience" between us. I was in the Middle Village, Queens, New York City congregation, and my terminal issue was a serial pedophile we had in our congregation who was one of the "6-month wonders" we had back then prior to Armageddon coming in 1975. Remember that? I hear that today Armageddon is ALMOST as close as it was in 1974! Anyway, I learned of this because one of the Elders on the committee that investigated this ABOMINATION was disgusted that the other elders (they are all dead now) wanted to protect Jehovah's name by doing NOTHING. This Elder and I were close friends and he came to me in anguish over what "justice" he had seen. He was shattered. I shattered too. He stayed, I left.

  A while after this, Brother Serial Pedophile decided to marry a sister in another congregation who had two small children (her husband left her when she became a JW). The Elders never felt they ought to go to this sister and warn her about what she was marrying. They were married in a Kingdom Hall.

  If I need to, I'l try to find references that support my argument.

  Welcome aboard, I hope you stick around, Heydog!
• 

  Nathan Natas

  _Morpheus expanded,

  "A part of my point here as well is that in complaining about the so called two witness rule, the ex jw community is actually validating the orgs right to have a say in this... They dont...I dont care what their rules are. As i have noted a dozen times already, its irrelevant... The allegations belong in the hands of law enforcement, period."

  I ABSOLUTELY AGREE!
• 

  Finkelstein

  Heydog says ........

  2. Call the branch to get the latest instructions. Laws change all the time in this

  regard so they want the elders to be up to date on their particular locations laws.

  3. call the police and follow the reporting laws, which do not require 2 witnesses, etc.

  The point being if the WTS lawyers find out there is no reporting laws where the incident took place, they will just say there is no need for the involving elders to report the incident to local law authorities, therefore handle the situation as you would as any other sexaul misconduct activity.

  ........ this is where the real problem starts to arise.
  
• 

  Pete Zahut

  
  @pete, the op was in response to something posted on another thread. Its a bit “on the nose” only because its a continuation of another discussion. I did not want to derail or be accused of derailing the other topic.

  "Yes we called the police. I made sure of it. I still don't see what this has to do with addressing real change".

  Because the 2 witness rule is "all of a piece" "part and parcel" of a multifaceted issue and it has served as a place to start addressing the problem.
  For a people (JW's) who are willing to let themselves or their little children die in a modern hospital for want of a pint of blood based on a skewed interpretation of an ancient text, the seemingly minor two witness rule could and often did influence their decision to go to the authorities when needed. We all know it's a ridiculous rule that should be ignored but evidently it all too often wasn't ignored, in congregations all over the world.
  

  Many JW's aren't even aware that there is/was a child abuse problem in their organization let alone know about the use of the 2 witness rule in such cases. Any attention drawn to it is well worth the effort.
  
• 

  Heydog

  @Nathan Natas

  just to clarify on pedophiles serving again, that’s recent in the last 15 years or so. I wasn’t referring to anything that occurred before the late 80’s or early 90’s. Plus, in the last 10 years or so, anyone appointed for the first time as to respond to a form of the question ‘have you ever engaged in child molestation?’ True, they could lie and say “no”. But anyone could lie in whatever child service job they apply for.

  Or they could move, pretend to want a study, then come back into the truth in order to prey on the children, but again, any organization could be a victim of someone like that.

  As as far as reporting, I’m no expert nor a lawyer, but I suspect just about every western nation has some type of reporting law. There’s few societies that would allow that type of behavior. In fact look up “mandated reporter” on Wikipedia which supports that.

  Your comment saying that if no such law exists means the WT lawyers wouldn’t encourage reporting it, implies they condone or encourage this behavior, which is an unfair slam against them. Like I said, child abuse is a deviant behavior, so as bad a rap lawyers get (weak lawyer joke :). ). They still don’t like child abuse.

  Back to Morpheus point, 2 witness rule doesn’t matter. If someone molest your child, and you know about it, report it! It doesn’t matter how many witnesses there are or whether some misinformed or misguided elder says not too, it’s still your responsibility to say something to the legal authorities. In the end, the misguided elder will get corrected.

  Thats sad about the sister. She deserved to know he was a serial pedophile. The safeguards I mentioned in my original post are meant to address that. But it could also be that they told her about him and she married him anyway, unless you were on the body or present during the conversation, it would be tough to say, as they would have treated it confidentially.

  one last thing that’s tough to write about. Pedophiles are people too, God still loves them (he hates the sin), as long as they can control themselves and not act on their impulses, they can attend meetings and serve Jehovah. If it’s known to the elders, they’ll put restrictions on them where they won’t ever be alone with children like going door to door by themselves or being with other people’s children. If these pedophiles are truly seeking to serve god and make changes in their life, they’ll be welcomed (cautiously of course), if not, they won’t be welcomed in the Kingdom Hall.

  Thanks for the welcome.