Sneaking a few minutes B4 dub relatives show up. So I'll address posts in the order received.
Frannie: Thoughts on the "two-witness" rule. I think the best way to broach this to my wife would be the: "What if it was XXXXXX (our child)?" approach. See what you think of this possible dialogue:
Me: Man, I can't imagine how difficult it would be to know that "Brother" Scum-of-the-earth who raped our child is still in good standing in the congregation. I don't see why the organization doesn't just come forward with whatever they have on the guy and volunteer it to the authorities. Instead, we're going to have to make our child go through a bunch of interrogations in order to "maybe" get the DA to try and subpoena congregation files. If the organization really cares about our child, why aren't they more proactive?
How's that sound Frannie?
Mystla: I think, though I could be mistaken, that the "two-witness" rule meant that as long as the molestor never had two witnesses for any one event, he was off the hook as long as he kept flatly denying the charges. He could keep on molesting to his sick hearts content for years. Then, it was changed to the current policy that as long as there were two victims accusing him of separate events that that would qualify as "two witnesses". Only problem with that is it requires two victims B4 anything is done instead of just one.
I really like this part of your post Mystla:
no 6 y/o should have to "prove" their case before an elder body.. that's just demented. Have your wife put herself in that childs shoes while the elders ask where he or she was touched and how many times and did they "enjoy" it. This is what the police are for, they are trained to handle this, they have professionals who know how to help an abuse victim tell their side without further traumatising the kid. The elders should have no part in any of it once there has been an accusation. If they want to deal with the accused when the law is done with them... fine, but they should never question a child, they aren't qualified!
My wife is fully aware of the very limited "qualifications" of plenty of bonehead elders around here.
Now, for a moment, let me put on my Borg Apologist hat. As for digging up old files, let the families and/or victims that want to, come forward and ask for them. Some victims may not want them dug up. I'm sure the Borg will cooperate with anyone who asks for it. (Yeah right)
Hopefully she won't bring up that line of reasoning since I don't have any info showing that the Borg won't cooperate with a subpeona. Any dirt on the Borg currently refusing to cooperate with the courts?
Yesidid said:
So there is an admission that they used to cover up child abuse.
Well: Where is the written apology??????????
Blondie:
Your point on BOEs should call legal first and if not required by law, keep quiet. Also, elders aren't to encourage families to go to authorities. Here's how I might approach this one.
Me to wife: "Since molestation is such a horrible thing why doesn't the org take the high road of automatically turning it all in? Instead, they wait until their arms are twisted by Caesar. Elders should take the initiative to make families well aware that they can go to police with no reprisals. "
Blondie said:
Or the elders will tell them that religious sanctions will be brought against them if the family goes to the secular authorities.
I don't think that's CURRENT POLICY. Local Bozo BOEs may do that, but I've been told that's NOT current policy.
Best quote I can use from Blondie:
Finally, ask yourself, why are elders involving themselves in a felony criminal case? If you saw Brother Angry kill his wife or were fairly sure he had buried her in the backyard, should you tell the elders or the police? Some rank and file would say "tell the elders.
I LOVE THAT!!! Thanks Blondie.
NVRGNBK said:
And when you call Legal ( I know from personal first-hand experience) their main concern is: Is he/she interested in suing. Ah yes, so warm and compassionate! Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy just thinking about it.
Thanks NVR.
Me to wife: "An elder who called legal once told me.......... (rephrase what NVR said)
Scully:
RE: Pedophiles wandering at assemblies/conventions. It's troubling, for sure, and I think I'll bring that up just as a warning reminder (especially since we still have kids) and to add to the overall "yuck" factor of this blessed organization.
As for criticizing the policy, well, what are you suggesting? A scarlet "M" for molestors to wear at conventions? I'd like that, but my wife would say that would be too much of a "bad witness" for new ones to see. And we know how important it is for them to get on the road to "life". Same logic would apply to not calling them a "brother or sister". Wouldn't want to stumble new ones.
As for the congregation being kept in the dark, I like that one.
Me to wife: "How would you like to have a book study at our house and not be told that a child molestor is here. It sure would be nice if there was a policy that protected the friends better."
I hesitate to even type a word. Thank you for being willing to answer. I wouldn't wish what you and your wife have been through on anyone. And yet, sadly, it would almost take that to reach some dubs perhaps even including my wife. That's what I was talking about in an earlier reply about wishing I could give her a little "pain transfusion". If my wife could feel even a portion of what you've been through it would probably help. I'll try in some way to convey it. Just not sure how. Thanks again for sharing that with me.
And thanks again to all who have responded.
Please don't take any rebuttals on my part the wrong way. I'm just trying to make sure I've got my ducks in a row. As you know, if there's even a tiny thing wrong with my "facts" a desperate dub will be all over that and ignoring the rest.
Open Mind