@SixofNine,
Yes, you get a rim shot. Very funny.
ScenicViewer
JoinedPosts by ScenicViewer
-
503
Steven Unthank: What do we really know?
by SweetBabyCheezits ini'm gonna play the skeptic today on a topic that is painful for a lot of people on this forum.
my intent is not to stir anything up but to make sure facts are confirmed.
bear in mind, i'm sickened by the wt's role (and the heirarchy down to elders) in child molestation cover-ups.
-
-
-
503
Steven Unthank: What do we really know?
by SweetBabyCheezits ini'm gonna play the skeptic today on a topic that is painful for a lot of people on this forum.
my intent is not to stir anything up but to make sure facts are confirmed.
bear in mind, i'm sickened by the wt's role (and the heirarchy down to elders) in child molestation cover-ups.
-
-
ScenicViewer
Iamallcool said,
"The more I am reading about this, Steven Unthank is not a fraud."
Neither are (were) his cases against Watchtower,
1) B12082206 - Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society
2) B12083833 - Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society
3) B12083527 - Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses
4) B12083367 - Faithful and Discreet Slave
5) B12083108 - Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses
-
503
Steven Unthank: What do we really know?
by SweetBabyCheezits ini'm gonna play the skeptic today on a topic that is painful for a lot of people on this forum.
my intent is not to stir anything up but to make sure facts are confirmed.
bear in mind, i'm sickened by the wt's role (and the heirarchy down to elders) in child molestation cover-ups.
-
-
ScenicViewer
Ok, it seems the link I originally posted is working now.
http://www.magistratescourtvic.ozehosting.com.au/cgi-bin/searchlist.pl
The only search criteria I put in was to check the Criminal List circle, and select a date, 2-28-2012. Below is a single screen shot of cases coming up on that date; it was a very long list and this screen shot is only the top few.
So my question now is, if it's a fake or blacklisted site (maybe you can see in the address like of the pic it's an ozehosting site, which has www.magistratescourtvic in front of it), why does it produce results?
I get...
- Case numbers (these are links that take you to more information about each case.)
- Name of Informant/Respondent
- Name of Defendent/Applicant
- Name of the Court
- Date
Just curious. I don't understand these things very well. Try it and see what results you get, then give me your feedback.
-
503
Steven Unthank: What do we really know?
by SweetBabyCheezits ini'm gonna play the skeptic today on a topic that is painful for a lot of people on this forum.
my intent is not to stir anything up but to make sure facts are confirmed.
bear in mind, i'm sickened by the wt's role (and the heirarchy down to elders) in child molestation cover-ups.
-
-
ScenicViewer
I posted the screen shots of the search results I got a few weeks ago when I did a search regarding Steven Unthank's cases against Watchtower. Now I'm reading your responses that the link I posted is a 'phishing' site and a 'blacklisted' site.
I'm not sure what these terms mean...I'm not tech savvy...but I got the link from a post on this site months ago when the court cases started.
Indeed, I have just now tried to search using the link I provided and it doesn't work; I'm not sure if it's temporarily down, or something more. I've used it several times over that last few months, and can't explain why it isn't working now.
I used the link to the magistrates court provided by Cyberjesus, his post 3042, and was taken to the home page of the Magistrates Court, Victoria. From there I can't figure out how to do a search for specific cases.
However, since we have the case numbers of Unthanks's proceedings against Watchtower, perhaps someone gifted at searching could find a way to search by the case numbers. Here they are.
1) B12082206
2) B12083833
3) B12083527
4) B12083367
5) B12083108
I tried a general search on one of the links provided by Cyberjesus, but since 2-21-2012 has passed that date was grayed out, and not a search option. I tried searching for all cases, not just Unthank's.
Even though the date of the last court appearance has passed, and the cases have been dropped, therefore no future court dates, the case numbers should reveal the outcome, ie they have been dismissed.
I'd hate to think that I've been taken in by a clever fraud, but I guess it's possible. However I have the utmost faith in Barbara Anderson and others that have posted in support if Steven Unthank, so I don't believe that's what has happened here.
-
503
Steven Unthank: What do we really know?
by SweetBabyCheezits ini'm gonna play the skeptic today on a topic that is painful for a lot of people on this forum.
my intent is not to stir anything up but to make sure facts are confirmed.
bear in mind, i'm sickened by the wt's role (and the heirarchy down to elders) in child molestation cover-ups.
-
-
ScenicViewer
SweetBabyCheezits asked a good question,
"I just skimmed a couple this morning and I'm just curious if there are any goverment websites that provide details or a summary of the case or charges made?"
Yes there is such a website, and Steven Unthank is legitimate as the prosecutor of Watchtower, and as a genuinely concerned citizen for the safety and rights of children.
-- To confirm Unthank's legitimacy as prosecutor of Watchtower, go to this website,
http://www.magistratescourtvic.ozehosting.com.au/cgi-bin/searchlist.pl
-- Click on the Criminal Lists circle.
-- Fill in some of the information asked for to narrow down the search results.
A few weeks ago I did this and here is a screen shot of what it looked like...
The results of the search revealed all 5 cases that Unthank had against Watchtower. Here is the screen shot...
Since the cases have been dropped by the DPP I don't know what a search will show now, but up until 2-21-2012 Steven Unthank was clearly shown as the prosecutor of Watchtower.
As to the image of the crying girl, I believe the wording that it was an image of a molestation victim in the Traralgon Congregation is unfortunate. However, as he and Barbara Anderson explained the word "image" can be used in the sense of being a "representative image" to illustrate a point. It is very common in the publishing world.
It would be better in my opinion if the picture had not been posted, or at least the wording hadn't suggested that it was a photo of an actual molestation victim, because it caused a lot of confusion where it isn't needed. The word "photo" wasn't used, but that is the way many readers took it, and indeed the word "image" can also refer to an actual photograph. However this is a small technical point that should not overshadow the legitimacy of the criminal cases involved here.
Steven Unthank has done a tremendous amount of voluntary work to support the rights and safety of children in Victoria; he should be appreciated and applauded for it. Barbara Anderson is to be admired as well for her tireless work in support of child molestion victims in the Watchtower organization. For Barbara to support Steven in his work is a good thing. I don't believe that either one of them should be criticized for the work done, and the positive outcomes that have been achieved, in these child protection cases.
I am extremely thankful that people like Steven Unthank and Barbara Anderson exist and are willing to work tirelessly for the benefit of other human beings. They both have my whole-hearted support.
-
141
THANK YOU Steven Unthank
by cedars inohiocowboy has just posted this information on the two other threads dealing with the sudden collapse of the unthank cases.. i don't know steven unthank, but i just want to thank him from the bottom of my heart for having the courage against overwhelming odds to try and bring the watch tower society to justice over their deplorable neglect when it comes to protecting children from abuse and molestation.. steven is a man of justice and integrity who i deeply admire.
his actions will never be forgotten, and i only hope he can find it within himself to continue his work in whatever avenue may become available in the future.. they have won this battle, but they can never win the war.. .
cedars.
-
-
ScenicViewer
james_woods asked,
Isn't it also true that the witnesses backed down and had their elders register as people working with children as per the Australian law?
You are right about that. As I recall from a previous court update, when the judge asked Watchtower's attorney why they hadn't complied, she replied that "It's all been sorted out now."
Just prior to that court appearance a letter was sent to congregations telling elders to comply with the WWC Act.
In this respect Steven Unthank achieved a great victory, because without his efforts Watchtower would still be in non-compliance.
-
17
Why enact legislation with penalties for non compliance,then do nothing when an org.refuses to comply ??
by smiddy inthe mind boggles: the australian government / victorian government is held up to ridicule by people all over the world for failing to prosecute the wtb&ts, eg.jehovahs witnesses, for refusing to obtain working with children checks over a period of three years,in spite of the various agencies offering to give advice and assistance over that period of time to obtain one.
they arrogantly refused any such help.
today we learn that the dept.of prosecutions has taken over the case with the intent to dismiss this case because it`s" not in the public interest.
-
-
ScenicViewer
Smiddy asked,
"Why enact legislation with penalties for non compliance,then do nothing when an org.refuses to comply?
"
I think this is the major question of the day. People who are aware of this case are wondering about the lack of logic, the lack of common sense, and the lack of child protective law in the law.
-
17
Crisis of Conscience now available at Amazon. Sold by Cynthia Franz.
by ScenicViewer inthis book has been out of print for some time, causing used copies to sell for $100 and more.
the price of these new ones is much more reasonable.. hard cover, $30 here.. soft cover, $26 here.. shipping is free, and ray franz' widow, cynthia, is the seller..
-
-
ScenicViewer
It appears the paper back edition has sold out for now, hopefully there will be more later.
There are plenty of hard cover copies still in stock.
-
47
Can anyone prove that birthday celebrations are forbidden by God?
by FaithfulBrother ini know that there is no mention of any birthday celebrations in the bible besides the two which were celebrated by non-believers.
and it just so happened that on each of these events, someone died (one non-believer and one believer).
but does it mean that just because the bible mentions these two events, that all birthday celebrations are forbidden?
-
-
ScenicViewer
FaithfulBrother asked,
does it mean that just because the Bible mentions these two events, that all birthday celebrations are forbidden?
You make a good point about lots of things, like shaving, having a pagan connection. Almost everything has a pagan connection at some point in history. Just because the 2 b'days in the Bible had a pagan connection is a pretty thin reason to ban all b'day celebrations. After all, it was the murder that was the offensive act in both of those examples, and murder is wrong whether or not it's on someone's birthday. To say that b'days are wrong based on nothing more than those 2 Bible examples is a making a giant leap that is unwarranted.
A few pagan based practices that JWs accept are,
-- Giving flowers at a funeral
-- Wearing wedding rings
-- Feeding cake at a wedding
-- Having a pinjata at a party
-- Wearing pants (Billy the Ex-Bethelite has a funny presentation on this site about pants.)
-- Owning dogs (No positive remarks made about dogs in the Bible)
-- And now, shaving
Interestingly, Watchtower has a double standard when it comes to pagan based observances. In some instances they are condemned, but in other instances they are allowed using this reasoning...
(Awake 9-22-03 p23, 24)
“A main concern is, not what the practice meant hundreds of years ago, but how it is viewed today in your area. Understandably, opinions may vary from one place to another. Hence, it is wise to avoid turning such matters into big issues.”Yet Watchtower turns b'day celebrations into a very big issue, even though they are perfectly acceptable today, and have no meaning other than to commemorate the day of the birth of a child, which is as harmless as observing the day of a wedding anniversary.
-
7
The Surprising Faith Of 8 American Presidents... # 6 is interesting!
by koolaid-man inhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/darrin-grinder/the-presidents-and-their-_b_1283210.html.
6. dwight d. eisenhower.
eisenhower may have been instrumental in bringing "under god" to the pledge of allegiance and making "in god we trust" the national motto, but he was reared in a religious tradition that does not allow its adherents to take oaths of office or to recite the pledge of allegiance--the jehovah's witnesses (a religion/denomination born in the united states, as was mormonism).
-
-
ScenicViewer
Eisenhower became the only president to be baptized and join a church during his presidency--the Presbyterian church in this instance.
Was he previously baptised as a Bible Student? If so, he would be an apostate in Watchtower's eyes because of joining the Presbyterian church, at least by today's Watchtower standards. However the Bible Students were much more lenient in their view of other religious groups. But perhaps he was never baptised into Watchtower to begin with.