There was no violence or alcholism in the clan. There was a history of mental illness. Berta's sister Carrie spent most of her life in a mental hospital. Her brother George also spent time in mental hospital from time to time. My mother's cousin Jack's son spent time in one as well. My own mother spent time in a mental hospital. It first happend whan I was ten, and continued about every five years until I was 25. She got on lithium at that time and never had another episode. Regarding Berta, I don't think that she had any signs of mental illness or child abuse. Well, if you consider her being the only daughter that had to be spanked because of her rebelious nature, then perhaps.
Rutherford Exposed: The Story of Berta and Bonnie
by Farkel 747 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
Farkel
Earnest,
Thank you for your comments and obvious ?inside knowledge? of some of the players in those days. Do you mind sharing any of your sources for this information? If you want, you can PM me about them. I will keep any confidentiality you require.
Let?s examine some of your comments:
: On the other hand, it is easy to criticise the dead and those who might defend him are unlikely to be found on this forum.
It cuts both ways. It is also very easy to DEFEND the dead, since eyewitnesses to the contrary are mostly all dead themselves.
: I have some doubts that she was as young as 16, which Farkel suggests based on an article in the San Diego Union (February 18, 1942).
Yet, further down in your comments, you used the very same article to support Rutherford?s ?fatherly? feelings about Bonnie: her statement in that article that she was like an adopted daughter to him. This is called ?special pleading!? Furthermore, in that article, she didn?t just claim that she had known Rutherford, but that she had been with him ?continuously? since she was sixteen. What possible reason would the writing of that article have to lie?
: In the census of 1930 it gives her age as 31 which would have made her 24 when she came to Bethel.
Bonnie came to Bethel in the FALL of 1923, so depending upon when her birthday occurred, she could have been 23, but that?s not really important. But this now begs the question, how could she have been Rutherford?s ?constant? companion since she was 16 years old, when it was seven years later she actually came to live at Bethel? Hmmmmmmmmm.
: I think this far more likely as she was invited (by William Van Amburgh, secretary-treasurer of the WTS) to Bethel as a stenographer and would have needed some experience for this.
No one has ever questioned whether Bonnie Boyd had experience for her job. We?ve shown that Berta Peale was NOT experienced for her job.
: so it is not surprising he needed more than one stenographer.
No, it is not surprising.
: Whether or not Haslet and Bonnie had a "relationship" is pure speculation but I think they probably did, human nature being what it is.
Perhaps we shall never know. If it is true that Bonnie ?slept around with half of Bethel? (an obvious exaggeration) in the 1950?s, one might be inclined that her loose conduct didn?t start just at that time.
: There was also another stenographer, Bessie Twaroschk, but she only worked there when needed. Haslet left in 1930, or shortly after, and Bonnie was then appointed to the post of secretary. She would have now been in her early thirties and have worked with Rutherford on a daily basis for the previous seven or eight years so I do not consider this appointment, or her acting as signatory for the deed to Beth-Sarim at about the same time, as suggestive that she "had something" on Rutherford.
You know I never made the declaration she ?had? something on Rutherford, but rather phrased it as a question. Furthermore, I asked that question in the context of her being allowed to break the Bethel rules by coming to Bethel while still married. That question had nothing to do with her being allowed to sign the Beth Sarim deed.
: I do think he showed her favoritism and was fond of her, but my impression is that she was more of a daughter to him than a mistress. She described herself as his "adopted daughter" after his death, and even while alive addressed him as "Pappy".
That?s what Knorr was also called at Bethel. Are you sure she called Rutherford the same thing?
: So what I have tried to establish is that Bonnie was needed as a stenographer, and as she was later the only one responsible for writing up the Watchtower
articles she was apparently good at her job.
Agreed.
: This does not mean there was no opportunity for an illicit relationship but Rutherford could have ensured more privacy if that was his design.
Rutherford was ?God? at Bethel. He could have ensured any kind of privacy he desired, but of course, that fact doesn?t prove a thing.
: Now I think that Rutherford engineered this little romance, as he saw Heath as a plum catch for his "adopted daughter". Why am I so sure. Because Heath was already married when Rutherford invited him to Bethel! And then he takes the two of them on a two month summer cruise to Europe where they get acquainted. Heath married Bonnie in Las Vegas a week after his divorce was granted. These are the actions of a doting father, not of anyone with a romantic or sexual interest in Bonnie.
If true, let?s look at this ?doting father and spiritual leader of an entire religion? in light of what you just said.
Rutherford was looking for a ?plum catch? for Bonnie. He found such a catch who was STILL MARRIED at invited him to Bethel to introduce them. He took this MARRIED MAN and Bonnie on an 8 week summer cruise so they could get ?acquainted.? Heath got a ?quickie? Las Vegas divorce and a week later married Bonnie.
What ?father? with any morals would hook up his daughter with a married man, and then arrange for all the circumstances that could lead to her marrying him?
I call that a ?scumbag? father.
: Whether Berta Peale (aka Verna Peale) can be dismissed quite so clearly I'm not sure but I'll give it a try?.
: ?a new housekeeper was required for the seventh floor and Bonnie asked Rutherford to invite Berta as she was not only a personal friend (of ten years, and a JW for 20 years) but was also a dietician. Whether or not she was qualified, she had done dietician work in Ohio.
How do you know this, when even Berta?s own family didn?t know this?
: So, the principal reason she was invited to Bethel was as a housekeeper, on Bonnie's recommendation. It seems that once she was working in Bethel she continued with her dietician work and also acted as a nurse. Was she really needed in that capacity ?
(You then go on to discuss Rutherford?s failing health.)
: Rutherford had not been a well man since his incarceration in 1918, and his lungs had been so affected that he had not been able to speak out in the open since 1922.
Why would speaking ?out in the open? be more difficult than speaking indoors? I don?t understand.
: By August, 1934 he needed a personal nurse/dietician to assist with his diet and health. The personal nurse in 1934 was Matthew Howlett (aka Malcolm Howlett) who had known Rutherford for the last twenty years. He had studied medicine in England and done some postgraduate courses in the United States. In July 1938 he left Bethel to do zone work (circuit work) in Cleveland, Ohio and that was when Berta arrived and took over as dietician. In August 1939 Howlett returned to Bethel and resumed as nurse/dietician to Rutherford until his death. So this clarifies why Berta was working as dietician to Rutherford although he already had a personal nurse/dietician, and it also shows she was living on the seventh floor (as well as Rutherford and the secretarial staff) as she was housekeeper for that floor. I would also suggest that this was for Bonnie's benefit, to have her long-time friend on the same floor. By the time Berta came to Bethel Rutherford was 68 and three-and-a-half years later he would be dead (from uraemia). He had required medical attention for the last four years.
These comments raise more questions than they answer. For example Howlett had studied medicine and done postgraduate work. Berta was a high school dropout and factory work. Rutherford was so ?ill?, he needed TWO nurses/dieticians to take care of him. Yet the most qualified of the two (Howlett) was sent off to do Zone work for a year, leaving only Berta to tend to the Judge. Also, when Rutherford went on his long European trips every year and when he spent is winters in Beth Sarim, it was always Berta who went with him, not Howlett. Do you see the problems here?
: It is not impossible that there was an affair between them but I suggest that Rutherford's age and state of health as well as his constant involvement with books, Watchtower articles and legal work makes it unlikely.
If a man can stand up for an hour and give hundreds and hundreds of talks over the years, he could most certainly lay down and do what men do with women. As far as his being engulfed in book writing, don?t forget he had plenty of free time to get drunk on a regular basis. If he could make time for that, why do you think he couldn?t make time for a little sexual relief?
: How, then, do I explain Berta's confession to the elders ? Shit, I've just realised something. I assumed she didn't know Rutherford before 1938 but in her "confession" to the elders she told them she had a relationship over a 15-year period.
I stated in the opening post in this thread that Berta had told her family that she met Rutherford in the early to mid-1930?s when she and Bonnie went to Europe where she first met him. Even assuming she met Rutherford in 1931 (it was more likely around 1935) that would only allow for a 10 year relationship with him, not 15. So the only possibilities are that she met Rutherford more than 15 years before his death, or the elder in Long Beach either was mistaken or exaggerated the length of the affair. It's also possible that Berta, then in her 70's over-stated the length of the affair. But whether it was 1 week or a dozen years, it still made Rutherford an adulterer.
: We know that Bonnie had been friends with her for ten years before she was invited to Bethel. That makes a period of fifteen years between the time Bonnie first knew her and Rutherford's death. I was just about to rest my case but have to admit that I think the jury must still be out on this one.
There are a lot of loose ends, Earnest. I feel like a paleantologist digging for dinosaur bones!
Farkel -
Lady Lee
larc
because of her rebelious nature
She had a rebellious nature? And then gets involved with a dictator? tyrant? and many of the other things that have been said about him. What doesn't fit here?
And I wasn't referring to physical violence as much as perhaps control.
Not that I want to doig around in your family's psychological problems... well I do lol ... but did they all suffer from the same disorder - perhaps a family predisposition to depression or something else? That seems to me to be a lot of people in the hospital from one family.
and yes I like to pick the brains of people to understand why they make the choices they do.
**********
as for the relationship with Bonnie
- is it possible that she got pregnant by Rutherford and he refused to marry here hence the quickie wedding?
- or perhaps she wanted the wedding and he refused so she took up with the first one who came along?
- or perhaps he had already started up with Berta and Bonnie grabbed the first guy who came along?
Just trying to make things make sense
-
Lady Lee
One more possibility here
- Did Bonnie set things up between Berta and Rutherford so she (Bonnie) could be free to marry someone else?
-
Athanasius
Interesting post, Earnest. But while the others who posted on this thread have identified the source of their information, you have kept silent. Were you an eyewitness to some of the events you describe or are you repeating disinformation supplied by the WTS?
Great post Fark. Keep up the good work.
-
Earnest
Thank you for your comments and obvious ?inside knowledge? of some of the players in those days. Do you mind sharing any of your sources for this information?
At the beginning of my post I said that "testimony under oath in the case of Olin Moyle vs JFR, 1940-1943 puts many of these 'circumstances' in context". In fact, all the information that has not already been provided on this thread I gathered from the court transcript of the above case. I have no "inside knowledge" that is not publicly available and never personally knew anyone remotely involved. I am quite happy to provide the details of the sworn testimony on which I based any of the facts I presented either on the board or by pm.
Larc said :
With regard to the detail, you made a mistake regarding Berta, which does lower your credability. You state that she was a dietician before coming to Bethel. There is no evidence of this whatsoever.
Larc, I based this on sworn testimony given by Bonnie Boyd Heath under cross-examination by Mr Bruchhausen, Moyle's attorney (p.1381 of the court transcript) :
Q. When did Mrs Peal first come to Bethel ?
A. 1938
Q. She is the dietician that you referred to ?
A. Yes, and my personal friend.
Q. Where did she come from ? A. Ohio
Q. Had she been a dietician out there ? A. Oh, yes.
Q. Working with whom ? A. She wasn't working.
Q. How long before that had she been a dietician ? A. I couldn't tell you, sir.
Q. Had you visited her out there ? A. Yes.
Q. Mr. Rutherford, also ? A. No, I don't think he knew of her before she came to Bethel.
Farkel said :
Earnest : I have some doubts that she was as young as 16, which Farkel suggests based on an article in the San Diego Union (February 18, 1942).
Farkel : Yet, further down in your comments, you used the very same article to support Rutherford?s ?fatherly? feelings about Bonnie: her statement in that article that she was like an adopted daughter to him. This is called ?special pleading!? Furthermore, in that article, she didn?t just claim that she had known Rutherford, but that she had been with him ?continuously? since she was sixteen. What possible reason would the writing of that article have to lie?
Earnest : In the census of 1930 it gives her age as 31 which would have made her 24 when she came to Bethel.
Farkel : Bonnie came to Bethel in the FALL of 1923, so depending upon when her birthday occurred, she could have been 23, but that?s not really important. But this now begs the question, how could she have been Rutherford?s ?constant? companion since she was 16 years old, when it was seven years later she actually came to live at Bethel? Hmmmmmmmmm.Farkel, I had no reason to doubt the article which you cited until Leolaia provided the census information which records her age as 31 in 1930. This means one of three things : either the San Diego Union had her age wrong, or the census had her age wrong, or she was "continuously" with Rutherford for eight years before she came to Bethel in 1923. I have no proof either way but 23/24 seemed to me to be more likely giving her time to acquire some experience in stenography before Van Amburgh invited her to Bethel as his stenographer.
Earnest : I do not consider this appointment, or her acting as signatory for the deed to Beth-Sarim at about the same time, as suggestive that she "had something" on Rutherford.
Farkel : You know I never made the declaration she ?had? something on Rutherford, but rather phrased it as a question. Furthermore, I asked that question in the context of her being allowed to break the Bethel rules by coming to Bethel while still married. That question had nothing to do with her being allowed to sign the Beth Sarim deed.Yes, you are right, Farkel, your comment was to do with allowing her to stay on at Bethel after marriage and not her appointment as secretary. Apologies, I did not mean to misrepresent you. In fact, in her testimony in the court case she claims it was not unusual for such marriages to be allowed (pp.1374-1375) :
Q. Could you give us the instances of some of the other brethren who have lived at Bethel who have become married, if you know ? A. Yes, there have been many that married that came to Bethel.
Q. And remained there ? A. And remained.
Q. Would you please name the persons who have resided at Bethel who have gotten married and received permission from the President to remain there ? A. Yes, there was Mr. and Mrs. Schmidt.
Q. What year was that ? A. That was in 1938, I believe. And Mr. and Mrs. Howlett. Mr. and Mrs. Wise. Mr. and Mrs. Low.
The Court: Can you state the name of any girl that was permitted to remain after having been married ?
The Witness: Mrs. Twaroschk, the girl that was in our office, married.
Q. And she was permitted to remain ? A. Yes.
Farkel asked :
Earnest : She described herself as his "adopted daughter" after his death, and even while alive addressed him as "Pappy".
Farkel : That?s what Knorr was also called at Bethel. Are you sure she called Rutherford the same thing?Under cross-examination by Mr. Bruchhausen she is recounting Moyle's behaviour in the courtroom at the time of the Madison Square Garden trial :
Q. Did you ever tell Mr. Rutherford about that ? A. Yes.
Q. When ? A. After the trial.
Q. But you reported to him as to what transpired in the courtroom to some extent, when you called up at noontime ? A. I called up and I said, "Pappy, there is something wrong. They put Bill on the stand first." And he asked me why that was and I said, "I don't know, but that is what happened."
Matthew Howlett also testifies that he addressed Rutherford as 'Pap', and spells it out for an incredulous attorney (p.1174).
Farkel said :
Heath got a ?quickie? Las Vegas divorce and a week later married Bonnie.
What ?father? with any morals would hook up his daughter with a married man, and then arrange for all the circumstances that could lead to her marrying him?
I call that a ?scumbag? father.Agreed. The only mitigating factor is that we don't know what the grounds for the divorce were but the fact it was probably a Las Vegas divorce makes it unlikely there were redeeming factors. However, I do think that it supports the view that Rutherford had no romantic interest in Bonnie.
Earnest : Whether or not she was qualified, she had done dietician work in Ohio.
Farkel : How do you know this, when even Berta?s own family didn?t know this?See my response to Larc at the top of this post.
Earnest : Rutherford had not been a well man since his incarceration in 1918, and his lungs had been so affected that he had not been able to speak out in the open since 1922.
Farkel : Why would speaking ?out in the open? be more difficult than speaking indoors? I don?t understand.The context of the testimony implied that in the open he would only use his voice, but that indoors he would use amplification. I wasn't certain of the meaning myself but that makes the most sense to me.
Farkel said :
These comments raise more questions than they answer. For example Howlett had studied medicine and done postgraduate work. Berta was a high school dropout and factory work. Rutherford was so ?ill?, he needed TWO nurses/dieticians to take care of him. Yet the most qualified of the two (Howlett) was sent off to do Zone work for a year, leaving only Berta to tend to the Judge.
Berta only arrived in 1938, probably quite early in the year because Bonnie and Heath had married in January. Howlett went to do Zone work in July of that year. I have previously pointed out that Berta was initially invited to replace Bonnie's mum as housekeeper on the seventh floor, and so I don't find it questionable that she assisted Howlett and then continued as dietician in his absence. If you know you are going to be away it makes sense to prepare someone to take over your duties.
Farkel : Also, when Rutherford went on his long European trips every year and when he spent is winters in Beth Sarim, it was always Berta who went with him, not Howlett. Do you see the problems here?
It seems that Howlett went to California as well. Bonnie testifies that when Rutherford went to California for the winter he was joined by Bonnie, her mother, Mr. Keller, Mrs. Peal, Mr. Diderian, Mr. Howlett and others (p.1381). However, on the European trip in 1939 Bonnie only mentions herself and her husband (Mr. Heath), as well as Mr. Knorr and Mrs. Peal (p.1382). This is possibly because the European trips were only six to eight weeks while winters in California were from November to May.
Earnest :It is not impossible that there was an affair between them but I suggest that Rutherford's age and state of health as well as his constant involvement with books, Watchtower articles and legal work makes it unlikely.
Farkel :If a man can stand up for an hour and give hundreds and hundreds of talks over the years, he could most certainly lay down and do what men do with women. As far as his being engulfed in book writing, don?t forget he had plenty of free time to get drunk on a regular basis. If he could make time for that, why do you think he couldn?t make time for a little sexual relief?Sure, it could have happened. I'm simply presenting the case for the defence. But I agree that nothing short of castration will be reason enough to deter those who choose to indulge in a little sexual relief.
Farkel said :
I stated in the opening post in this thread that Berta had told her family that she met Rutherford in the early to mid-1930?s when she and Bonnie went to Europe where she first met him.
This is still a puzzle to me. When Berta came to Bethel in 1938 Bonnie had already known her for ten years (p.1382). At the time they met (1928) Bonnie had already been working with Rutherford as stenographer for five years, travelling abroad with him each year. There seems good reason to believe Rutherford had known Berta for some time before coming to Bethel in 1938, even if only as a friend of Bonnie. And yet Bonnie testifies under oath that she didn't think Rutherford knew of Berta before she came to Bethel (p.1381, quoted in my response to Larc above).
All grist for the mill, eh.
Earnest
-
Farkel
Yeah, Earnest,
"All grist for the mill!" The search for facts is indeed a fun adventure!
I will get the transcript from the whole Olin Moyle case. It's already been offered to me by a friend. I find this part about Berta Peale really fun:
: Q. Had she been a dietician out there ? A. Oh, yes.
: Q. Working with whom ? A. She wasn't working.
: Q. How long before that had she been a dietician ? A. I couldn't tell you, sir.
This is what they call "evidence" that Berta was a dietician! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA1
"Yes, she was a dietician."
"She REALLY was a dietician?"
"Oh, yes."
"For who?"
"Don't know. She was unemployed but she was REALLY a dietician."
"What's her experience in that field?"
"I haven't a clue."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
That is the biggest pile of bullshit ever to be presented in a Court of Law.
It is Watchtowerism at its finest hour of lies and deceit!
Farkel -
Farkel
An afterthought, Earnest,
I've always wanted to take on the Service Department, mono a mono. It would be the highlight of my opposing-a-Cult career. I know for a fact I could demolish their arguments and leave them with their "puds" in their hands. (It's a term from the Jurassic era where I grew up.)
So, Earnest: if you are playing for those boys, get their best member to do a tete-'d-tete with me. I love to play. I suspect they are cowards. They are cowards, but I offer this challenge nonetheless. Cowards don't play. They HIDE.
Hide and watch the cowards. They won't come forth and defend their faith. They are COWARDS!
Farkel, of the "no cowardice in this boy CLASS" -
cyberguy
Earnest,
If you want to take your arguments further, PM-me, and I might be able to get you in contact with one of the elders that met with Berta (actually the only living elder). I won?t guarantee he?ll talk with you, but you?ll have to call at a very specific time because he?s still considered an active JW. I suppose my friend could have greatly inflated the time. However, we?re almost dealing with ancient history at best at this time; the actual witnesses are long dead! True? Anyway, it?s incredible, perhaps profound, that we have even this much fragmented information surfacing!
Best wishes,
Cyberguy
-
Farkel
cyberbuy,
Will do! It sounds like a great adventure!
Farkel