Average Numbers of Victims per Molester (rev)

by Amazing 16 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • Amazing
    Amazing

    I added a post below to JanH, number 15, to address some realistic numbers. Some have had difficulty in accepting the number of victims per pedophile I have used, i.e. 300+. I based this on what an attorney who prosecutes such cases against molesters told me. I have heard people say and have read varying sites which offer different numbers, some as low as 75 victims, some about 110 to 120. Maybe the following will help.

    The attorney version: When I quoted the number 117 from an official web site to the attorney I visited, he was quick to correct me with the number 300+. When a criminal case is prosecuted, or if a civil suit, the number of victims is critical to determining the level of punishment, jail term, or monetary damage awards.

    Both the prosecution and defence are eager to nail down the number that the accused is actually guilty of. The prosecution seeks to find all victims so that help can be given to those victims, and to establish the number of counts in the indictment. The defence seeks to mitigate or eliminate this allegation to help their clients get lower or no jail terms, or no monetary damages.

    Let's say that the prosecution is successful in establishing that a molester had 50 victims, with each victim being identified and proven. This is the number that will be used in the conviction for jail and/or monetary damages set by the Jury or Judge, depending on the procedures used.

    Why then would the average of 300+ be used? It helps prosecutors and especially Plantiff attorneys to set before the Jury the concept that if the average is 300+ victims, then it is possible that the accused victimized the 50 cited in the complaint. It establishes credibility. And if the accused is guilty of a far higher number than 50, lets say 100, 200, or more, then such a study becomes even more critical to establish credibility.

    What would the defence do about this information?: The defence will seek to discredit a number like 300+ and will cite conflicting studies, or attempt to discredit the information that supports the 300+ average. Why? They want to establish that these numbers must be seriously inflated, especially if they are trying to show that their client, the accused, could not have victimized 50 or more people.

    Is the number 300+ upheld?: It must be for this attorney to successfully use it in court as part of his expert testimony. It must be based on information that the defence cannot discredit. And, when jurors and judges see this evidence establishing that the average is 300+, they are not as likely to discredit the 50 counts against the accused as impossible. So this helps eliminate that one single, but important, aspect of 'reasonable doubt' that the defence is trying to create.

    Do I believe it?: I too find the number 300+ hard to fathom. I do not claim that this is the actual average, but it is a number that at least has been reasonably tested and supported in the courts. Also, some of the molesters that I saw as a JW were guilty of victimizing so many victims that the number 300 was within range.

    Correlation: Using the number of 300+ with the POLL results places the JW victim averages within range of the national averages of victims to molesters. This is by no means proof, but it is interesting to understand that there is a correlation, and thus suggestive that the number may be feasible.

    Could it be in error?: Yes. I want to be wrong on this. It would be much better that this number is seriously inflated and in error. I much prefer it that there are fewer victims than more. I would prefer that instead of 1,521,325 potential victims, that the number were down to 1/10th, or 152,132 thus meaning that there are only 30 victims per molester. Better yet, lets bring this down to 15,213 with only 3 victims per molester. Even at this level, the numbers are staggering and can lead to some serious litigation. Better yet, lets take this number to 'zero' victims, and lets all be in error.

    I would rather eat all my words, than to have any victims. It would be very refreshing to come onto this forum, and admit total 100% error, and bow my head in shame for these posts than to have even one victim.

    SOME FACTS THAT MUST BE CONSIDERED: The 183 JW molesters identified on my POLL of 89 respondents - providing everyone was honest, and I believe they are - means that a minimum of 183 JW victims are out there. 183 JW children who will be harmed for life, because the Watch Tower religion concealed the 'private' discipline of these criminals, or they conceealed the 'nature' of the sin if 'Public Reproof' was used. And they did not warn the JWs of the danger, nor took any community responsibility to turn the molester over to the authorities.

    What do you believe?: Do you believe that there are only 183 JW molesters in the USA? Do you believe that they only molested 1 victim each? Do you believe that all JW molesters are caught and identified? Do you believe that many JW molesters are accused, but because of lack of two (2) witnesses to the crime they are never disciplined? Do you believe that this issue may involve some serious numbers?

    What I have not told you: I have been a conduit for finding victims and directing them with some additional information as to certain actions they may wish to take. I also participate on private forums where many have spoken up about being molested by JWs. I have had phone calls with a number of these. The numbers, I might suggest, are a little more than disturbing, and the consequences to the victims is far more harmful than I expected. I have been exposed to this issue a long time, and see a serious ground-swell of victims emerging. The arrogant and plain "mean" attitude of so many JW Elders and congregations and family toward the victims is absolutely incredible!

    Someone, or better stated, a large group of people in the JW religion, from molesters to Elders all the way up to the leadership need to go to jail. Attorney's may need to get disbarred. Assets need to be seized, sold, and given to victims ... a lot of assets, and a lot of victims. - Amazing

  • waiting
    waiting

    Hey Amazing,

    You make good points - always. I think I was on the high end of the spectrum for knowing personal occasions of baptised jw child molesters. But I come from an odd childhood and motherhood - therefore I tend to know odd people.

    I have first hand *experience* from at least 6 or more child molesters who were not jw's also. I think just like some molesters will molest more than others, victims will become victims more often.

    We tend to marry into what we know - so did our parents, their parents, which sets in a strong pattern of behaviour. We tend to be friends, or associate with those we understand, particularily if we've been hurt or are unsure of ourselves. I've read that's why children of alcoholics tend to marry the same, again and again - but they can't see and/or stop their actions. It's what they know.

    CiPolo has a thread on why it's so hard to change beliefs - very good click in there. You're trying to change some persons beliefs - some people don't want to believe this happens as often as it does, makes them uncomfortable to realize that there are so many child molesters.

    Makes victims as common as non-victims. Nothing new, just the way it is. The difference is - you're helping to bring it out in the open, which makes people uncomfortable.

    Btw, I wasn't trying to argue with you - just get my mind around the figures you presented. You've done a fine job. Thank you.

    waiting

  • Pork Chop
    Pork Chop

    Sorry, the fact that some attorney uses this number in court proves nothing. You can get expert witnesses that wills say about whatever you want. Been in court, know how that works. Have heard some real nonsense from experts.

    Why not ask the ones that participated in this survey how many knew a molester that had more than ten victims or even five?

  • DreamMaster
    DreamMaster

    Geesh Pork Chop!!!

    Excuse me if I'm mistaken but are you defending these monsters?

    You're probably not but it sure sounds that way. I don't mean to be rude but I wish people on this board( that means everyone ) would put more thought into what they type and the way they type it. Sometimes it's difficult to really understand what a person is trying to say because they're too lazy to type what they really want to say. Then there are others who babble on saying the same thing over and over never really conveying a valid point. I'm not bashing just a thought.

    Amazing, keep up the good work. You wont be forgotten!

    "Audio and Video is Undeniable" and without them we'll never nail those bastards!

  • Lindy
    Lindy

    Dreammaster,
    I am having a hard time figuring out why you would say to Pork Chop what you said from what he wrote. I quess how you read something can be interpreted from where you are coming from yourself in your own experiences. I did not take Pork Chop's comment to mean that he was defending the molesters, but that he thought that simply that the number was to high. I was thinking the same thought that Pork Chop was, that just because someone says something, doesn't make it so, not even when someone in an "authoritive" position says it is so. That is critical thinking. With critical thinking comes another thought. Show me the study that produced these figures. It is easy for anyone to say anything, something like this needs backing up. Show me where this was "reasonably tested and supportive. How many where in the study? Where was the study done? Was it done in the inner city or in the rural areas. What part of the country was it done in? Which country was it done in? Was it a controled study? How were the victims identified? How were the accusers identified? The list goes on and on, yet we here have seen no proof.

    And before you might think that I am defending child molesters, don't. As Waiting and a few others here know, I too, have personal experience in this area. I have been molested and I can't imagine that the several people who came at me had 299 other victims. Each of them couldn't have hide their activities, and surely would have been found out and stopped and procecuted. 300 people, even children, and in some cases, especially children, are a lot to keep silent. The molester would have a full time job just keeping them quiet. The molester would have no time for the "normal" life that most of them present to the "outside" that is necessary to carry on as molesters, or more would be caught.

    Averages are funny things anyway. They really don't mean much per individual. To get the average of 300, one molester could only molest one child. Another could molest thousands. But still that figure of 300 per molester sounds to high to me. even 50 sounds way to high to me. Most molesters do have more than one victim, possibly several, but not 300 each. Even the big time cases that hit the news, such as molesters in day care centers and priests in the churches, don't have such high figures, even when you figure that some didn't come forward. My opinion, anyway and in no way in defense of molesters!

    As Always,
    Lindy

  • Amazing
    Amazing

    Hi Pork Chop: You raise some good points. I will try to address them:

    You said,

    "Sorry, the fact that some attorney uses this number in court proves nothing. You can get expert witnesses that wills say about whatever you want. Been in court, know how that works. Have heard some real nonsense from experts."

    In my profession, I too spend time with judges, courts, and attorneys. When an attorney uses expert information or testimony, he has to make sure that it will hold up to challenge from the opposition. That is the point I made above. That is all I can make of it. I also made clear that the number seems high to me, but it does correlate with the natinal averages of victims in the general population. So, it has some meaning, and cannot be dismissed as 'meaningless'. It is proff positive, nailed down as absolute fact? No, and I admit that.

    You continued,

    "Why not ask the ones that participated in this survey how many knew a molester that had more than ten victims or even five?"

    That is not feasible to use those responses. If, for example an ex-JW knows a molester, and knows for a fact that the molester victimized 5 children, that is helpful, but does not address the broader question of how many victims. It just means that that ex-JW knows of 5 victims in a situation.

    One way would be for the ex-JW to go to the courthouse, see the Clerk and get a copy of the court records to find out how many were alleged, how many proven, and how many actually charged, and how many used in the final counts to convict. For example, a molester is suspected of molesting 20 children. He is eventually charged with molesting 10. During trial, his attorney is able to raise doubt about 3 victims. To reduce jail time, the molester pleads out to 4.

    Another way would be if you could get his test records before and after conviction, because the court will supervise additional discovery in pre-trial and post conviction where the molester will be put through a battery of tests to determine the severity of his behavior, and often additinal victims will be confessed to as the molester decided to open up and cleans his soul. Also, as news gets out, other victims may emerge, and new trails will be held for additional counts.

    Finally, a look at the civil suits may help narrow down better numbers, and this is where the attorney that I referred to comes in. In a civil trial, unless there is an out-of-court settlement, can bring on far more victims. Why? They stand a better chance of success because the burden of proof is less stringent than in criminal proceedings. If the molester is, say, a bishop of the Church of Great Wealth, then victims have a better chance of being awarded monetary damages. Why? The money is there. A poor molester cannot afford to pay. The attorney I refer to is one who sues in such cases involving churches, including the Roman Catholic Church, big buck mega religion. So, now a molester who was originally charged with 20 victims, but pleas out to 4 victims, may face a civil complaint where 30, 40 or 50 victims step forward to join the suit.

    The real clincher: For every victim stepping forward there are a good number, in fact as the attorney told me, a major number of about 90% who will not step forward. Why? Because they are ashamed and do not want to be identified. They do not want to re-live the emotional pain and suffering by facing the accused in court. They do not hear about the trial until it is too late to make a claim. Other victims just want to move on and forget what happened. Some victims, while wanting to participate, are satisfied that the molester got caught, and feel no need to join in further action.

    So, often when a molester gets convicted of a few victims, there are many more that the molester has victimized, but he will never be held accountable for. This is the real tragedy. - Amazing

  • waiting
    waiting

    Hey Amazing,

    The real clincher: For every victim stepping forward there are a good number, in fact as the attorney told me, a major number of about 90% who will not step forward. Why? Because they are ashamed and do not want to be identified. They do not want to re-live the emotional pain and suffering by facing the accused in court. They do not hear about the trial until it is too late to make a claim. Other victims just want to move on and forget what happened. Some victims, while wanting to participate, are satisfied that the molester got caught, and feel no need to join in further action.

    I think that is The Real Clincher - and one of the hardest things to accept in reality. We're all different, and it's so hard to allow others the freedom to choose how they deal with it. Also, how they perceive their molesters/rapists. Some of us change on a monthly/yearly basis, so we don't even understand ourselves sometimes.

    Some of us victims/survivors can be quite brutal with other victims because we can't understand "how they could think that way."

    Guess it's just the way it is.

    waiting

  • Pork Chop
    Pork Chop

    Amazing how about a link to this lawyer's web site. I'd like to get it from the horse's mouth. You're hanging a lot on one person's statements.

  • larc
    larc

    Amazing,

    The reason I have a problem with 300 victims is the math. That would amount to one victim per month for 25 years. I have to assume that some criminals are arrested short of 25 years. I have to also assume that most criminals are not able to commit this crime at the rate of one per month.

  • Pathofthorns
    Pathofthorns

    I find the 300 number to be unrealistic as well. The only way such a number would be possible would be to define "molesting" to include something as simple as brushing past a child in a crowd in an inappropriate way.

    I think the common perception of what constitutes "molestation" is generally percieved as something more than that.

    In order for your survey to have any sort of percieved credibility you need to be more conservative and realistic. I would say that 5-10 victims sounds more plausible and that may be more or less depending on how long before the molester is caught.

    It is also more plausible that these persons molest the same victims numerous times more so than molesting numerous persons just once.

    What your survey shows is that numerous molesters do exist in the religion and this is not some extremely isolated occurance.

    It is also likely that there are several thousand persons who have been molested over the years, and of these probably few have recieved adequate counselling and support for what happened. And sadly, probably just a few out of several hundred molesters have been brought to justice.

    Path

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit