And a word (or more) about 'two witnesses'.
In the UK - and in many other jurisdictions, I believe - this principle continues in the form of seeking corroboration. The problem is that ignorant, arrogant, untrained, unprofessional JW overlords do not understand the concept and certainly do not wish to apply it even if they were capable of doing so. I must reiterate my view most strongly that JW heirarchy must immediately stand aside from any investigation of abuse and that by not doing so they risk causing further harm to victims, fouling up a prosection and further damage. Their god has no place in this process.
But a 'second witness' legally could include:
- 'Early complaint'
- Forensic evidence (DNA deposits, etc.)
- Evidence that the perpetrator was at the locus at the time
- Interview/admissions/lies from suspect
- Physical fact evidence (e.g victim describes birthmark on perpetrator)
- 'Similar fact' in serial cases (e.g. perpetrator had a fetish for certain acts/words)
- Multiple independent complaints from victims
It can readily be seen that JW elders etc. not only don't have the training/expertise to look at these aspects, it would be horrendous if they tried to do so.
I never was a JW and I try not to be over-critical of all elders and leaders. But sadly, all of the ones I have met and engaged in conversation have proved to be mildly deceptive at best and outright liars at worst.
I stand by my previous assertion on posts on this topic here. If while I was working in this field I had come across elders interfering in abuse investigations (even by following the 'flock' book) I would have arrested them for obstruction/attempting to pervert the course of justice.