Barry Verdict WT LOSES PUBLIC OPINION

by DannyHaszard 9 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  DannyHaszard

  Reporting abuse
  Concord Monitor, NH - 29 minutes ago
  ... some key questions. The case involved two children whose family belonged to a Jehovah's Witness congregation in Wilton. Paul Berry ...

  Reporting abuse

  Law created to protect children needs to be strengthened.

  Monitor editorial

  ---

  July 20. 2005 8:00AM

  N ew Hampshire law requires any person with reason to suspect a child has been abused or neglected to report those suspicions to law enforcement authorities. But the law is unclear about when exceptions apply, and a split decision issued last week by the state Supreme Court did little to clarify matters. It is imperative that the Legislature, which has been a leader in the fight to end child sex abuse and domestic violence, act quickly to answer some key questions. The case involved two children whose family belonged to a Jehovah's Witness congregation in Wilton. Paul Berry began abusing his daughter and stepdaughter when one child was 10 and the other 3, according to court records. Berry was convicted of abuse and is serving a 56- to 112-year prison sentence. The children, now adults, sued the church for damages. The story is all the more tragic because their mother claims she reported her suspicions to church elders on a dozen occasions, including several meetings when her husband was present. She was told, she said, "to be silent about the abuse and be a better wife." The elders - who are elected and unpaid - never reported the alleged abuse to authorities and, according to the mother, reminded her that such matters should be handled by the church and not secular authorities.

  The case raised a host of issues that the three-judge majority - Chief Justice John Broderick and Justices James Duggan and Joseph Nadeau -declined to address. (Justice Richard Galway did not sit, and Justice Linda Dalianis dissented from a major portion of the decision.)

  The reporting law requires all citizens to report suspected abuse, though clergy who learn of the abuse during a confession or similar privileged conversation are exempt. The case did not clarify whether elders in the Jehovah's church or other religious leaders who have no special training enjoy the religious exemption accorded to clergy. Nor did it clarify what constitutes a privileged conversation .

  High courts attempt to avoid deciding constitutional issues and rule first on matters of statutory and common law. So the majority held that since the reporting law made provision only for criminal penalties, not civil ones, the elders could not be held liable.

  Dalianis disagreed. The church, she wrote, enjoyed a "special relationship"with the children that imposed a common-law duty on the elders to report the abuse or to at least advise the mother to report it. The elders, Dalianis said, facilitated the continuing abuse by counseling the mother to be silent. If that's true, the question becomes why aren't the church's leaders facing criminal charges?

  There are no easy answers to the questions the case raises. But the next session of the Legislature needs to spell out when church leaders must live up to the reporting law and when they are exempt. It should also clarify when it is appropriate to sue for civil damages caused by a failure to report abuse.

  Peter Hutchins, a lawyer who settled 200 cases against the Roman Catholic Diocese of Manchester, believes that had those suits been filed after the Berry ruling, many victims who were not altar boys, at church camps or in some other direct relationship with the church would not have been able to seek damages. Hutchins estimates that as many as 15 percent of his clients would have been left with no recourse.

  That possibility is certainly not in the interest of society. The Legislature should use the court ruling as a starting point for debate and act quickly to strengthen this important law.

  ------ End of article

  Monitor editorial

  ------------------------------

  News departments
  Newsroom	Phone: 603-224-5301 ext. 670 Fax: 603-224-8120 E-mail: [email protected]
  Letters to the editor	Fax: 603-224-8120 ("Attn: Letters to editor") E-mail: [email protected] Footnote from:Danny Haszard i have a working correspondence with the staff of the Concord Monitor (New Hampshire) "do not discount the power of one" and i am not the only one - Zech 4:10
• 

  DannyHaszard

  Family ill served by Witness elders, VICTORIA CATER, Henniker ...
  Concord Monitor, NH - Jul 19, 2005
  feel for the mother and sisters who were so misguided by the Jehovah's Witness organization regarding being abused. I am no stranger ...
  

  This is from yesterday same paper
• 

  DannyHaszard

  (Lets see if it will copy this time.) Reporting abuse
  Concord Monitor, NH - 29 minutes ago
  ... some key questions. The case involved two children whose family belonged to a Jehovah's Witness congregation in Wilton. Paul Berry ...

  Reporting abuse

  Law created to protect children needs to be strengthened.

  Monitor editorial

  ---

  July 20. 2005 8:00AM

  N ew Hampshire law requires any person with reason to suspect a child has been abused or neglected to report those suspicions to law enforcement authorities. But the law is unclear about when exceptions apply, and a split decision issued last week by the state Supreme Court did little to clarify matters. It is imperative that the Legislature, which has been a leader in the fight to end child sex abuse and domestic violence, act quickly to answer some key questions. The case involved two children whose family belonged to a Jehovah's Witness congregation in Wilton. Paul Berry began abusing his daughter and stepdaughter when one child was 10 and the other 3, according to court records. Berry was convicted of abuse and is serving a 56- to 112-year prison sentence. The children, now adults, sued the church for damages. The story is all the more tragic because their mother claims she reported her suspicions to church elders on a dozen occasions, including several meetings when her husband was present. She was told, she said, "to be silent about the abuse and be a better wife." The elders - who are elected and unpaid - never reported the alleged abuse to authorities and, according to the mother, reminded her that such matters should be handled by the church and not secular authorities.

  The case raised a host of issues that the three-judge majority - Chief Justice John Broderick and Justices James Duggan and Joseph Nadeau -declined to address. (Justice Richard Galway did not sit, and Justice Linda Dalianis dissented from a major portion of the decision.)

  The reporting law requires all citizens to report suspected abuse, though clergy who learn of the abuse during a confession or similar privileged conversation are exempt. The case did not clarify whether elders in the Jehovah's church or other religious leaders who have no special training enjoy the religious exemption accorded to clergy. Nor did it clarify what constitutes a privileged conversation.

  High courts attempt to avoid deciding constitutional issues and rule first on matters of statutory and common law. So the majority held that since the reporting law made provision only for criminal penalties, not civil ones, the elders could not be held liable.

  Dalianis disagreed. The church, she wrote, enjoyed a "special relationship"with the children that imposed a common-law duty on the elders to report the abuse or to at least advise the mother to report it. The elders, Dalianis said, facilitated the continuing abuse by counseling the mother to be silent. If that's true, the question becomes why aren't the church's leaders facing criminal charges?

  There are no easy answers to the questions the case raises. But the next session of the Legislature needs to spell out when church leaders must live up to the reporting law and when they are exempt. It should also clarify when it is appropriate to sue for civil damages caused by a failure to report abuse.

  Peter Hutchins, a lawyer who settled 200 cases against the Roman Catholic Diocese of Manchester, believes that had those suits been filed after the Berry ruling, many victims who were not altar boys, at church camps or in some other direct relationship with the church would not have been able to seek damages. Hutchins estimates that as many as 15 percent of his clients would have been left with no recourse.

  That possibility is certainly not in the interest of society. The Legislature should use the court ruling as a starting point for debate and act quickly to strengthen this important law.

  ------ End of article

  Monitor editorial

  ------------------------------

  News departments
  Newsroom	Phone: 603-224-5301 ext. 670 Fax: 603-224-8120 E-mail: [email protected]
  Letters to the editor	Fax: 603-224-8120 ("Attn: Letters to editor") E-mail: [email protected] Footnote from:Danny Haszard i have a working correspondence with the staff of the Concord Monitor (New Hampshire) "do not discount the power of one" and i am not the only one - Zech 4:10
• 

  sf

  Danny,

  May I suggest that you edit this entirely by deleting it all. Then, embed the pages you want seen.

  Example:
• 

  Leolaia

  Danny....I cannot read this article at all. Please either paste it without any of this formatting (save line breaks) or embed the page. It is scattered all over the place and I can't make sense of it.
• 

  sf
• 

  sf
• 

  Leolaia

  Unfortunately, there's something in the original post that forces your page embeds to turn up very slim....making them hard to read. If I view your posts individually, they have more normal width.
• 

  DannyHaszard

  SF thanks for your assist.The material is up just a bit annoying to view.

  Tell the truth and don't be afraid-Danny Haszard Bangor Maine
• 

  DannyHaszard

  [They carried the same bold Concord Monitor management editorial.] State's child abuse lawneeds improvement
  Nashua Telegraph - Nashua,NH,USA
  ... a Jehovah's Witness congregation in Wilton. Paul Berry began abusing his daughter and stepdaughter when one child was 10 and the other 3, according to court ...

  NNew Hampshire law requires any person with reason to suspect a child has been abused or neglected to report those suspicions to law enforcement authorities.
  
  But the law is unclear about when exceptions apply, and a split decision issued last week by the state Supreme Court did little to clarify matters.
  
  It is imperative that the Legislature, which has been a leader in the fight to end child sex abuse and domestic violence, act quickly to answer some key questions.
  
  The case involved two children whose family belonged to a Jehovah’s Witness congregation in Wilton. Paul Berry began abusing his daughter and stepdaughter when one child was 10 and the other 3, according to court records.
  
  Berry was convicted of abuse and is serving a 56- to 112-year prison sentence. The children, now adults, sued the church for damages.
  
  The story is all the more tragic because their mother claims she reported her suspicions to church elders on a dozen occasions, including several meetings when her husband was present.
  
  She was told, she said, “to be silent about the abuse and be a better wife.”
  The elders – who are elected and unpaid – never reported the alleged abuse to authorities and, according to the mother, reminded her that such matters should be handled by the church and not secular authorities.
  
  The case raised a host of issues that the three-judge majority – Chief Justice John Broderick and Justices James Duggan and Joseph Nadeau -declined to address. (Justice Richard Galway did not sit, and Justice Linda Dalianis dissented from a major portion of the decision.)
  
  The reporting law requires all citizens to report suspected abuse, though clergy who learn of the abuse during a confession or similar privileged conversation are exempt.
  
  The case did not clarify whether elders in the Jehovah’s church or other religious leaders who have no special training enjoy the religious exemption accorded to clergy. Nor did it clarify what constitutes a privileged conversation.
  
  High courts attempt to avoid deciding constitutional issues and rule first on matters of statutory and common law. So the majority held that since the reporting law made provision only for criminal penalties, not civil ones, the elders could not be held liable.
  
  Dalianis disagreed. The church, she wrote, enjoyed a “special relationship” with the children that imposed a common-law duty on the elders to report the abuse or to at least advise the mother to report it.
  The elders, Dalianis said, facilitated the continuing abuse by counseling the mother to be silent. If that’s true, the question becomes why aren’t the church’s leaders facing criminal charges?
  
  There are no easy answers to the questions the case raises. But the next session of the Legislature needs to spell out when church leaders must live up to the reporting law and when they are exempt. It should also clarify when it is appropriate to sue for civil damages caused by a failure to report abuse.
  
  Peter Hutchins, a lawyer who settled 200 cases against the Roman Catholic Diocese of Manchester, believes that had those suits been filed after the Berry ruling, many victims who were not altar boys, at church camps or in some other direct relationship with the church would not have been able to seek damages.
  
  Hutchins estimates that as many as 15 percent of his clients would have been left with no recourse.
  
  That possibility is certainly not in the interest of society. The Legislature should use the court ruling as a starting point for debate and act quickly to strengthen this important law.

  – The Concord Monitor Footnote from Danny Haszard-The point is either the Jehovah's Witnesses Elders are ordained ministers (don't forget that they say they are,in fact perform weddings and assert that they are APPOINTED BY HOLY SPIRIT) OR they are just 'good ole boys' with no ecclesiastical privilege you can't have it both ways power comes with culpability