Where is Johnamos... what would he say to defend this monster and blame it on the parents?
When have I ever said anything to defend the perpetrator or the WTS?
four girls – the youngest aged just five – who didn’t report what had happened to them for many years because they feared they would not be believed,
“He told her not to tell anyone else or she would not get into the New Order, a term for a kind of heaven. She didn’t tell anyone because the defendant had told her not to.”
This is exactly why I said that it was a necessity for parents to make sure that they teach their children to tell them (the parents) if they (the child) were ever touched/abused in any way by someone.
In regards to what you call me “blaming the parents”, my argument on that is that it is the responsibility for “WHOMEVER” becomes aware that abuse has taken place they should report it to the authorities.
If the parents are among the ones that are in the “WHOMEVER” category being aware that their child as been abused then it follows that they have the responsibility to report it to the authorities. But it seems that many here feel that because these parents are brainwashed by the teachings and beliefs put forth by the WTS/GB, then because of that the parents are now exempt from the responsibility of reporting such cases to the authorities on behalf of their children.
Who could be anymore brainwashed than the followers of the Islam religion, yet I suppose by the reasoning of many that individual Muslims are not responsible for their own actions but instead the only ones that are responsible for the actions of individual Muslims are the ones that brainwash these individuals into believing and doing what they are taught to believe and do.
Trial in child abuse case regarding Jehovah’s Witnesses…
One GB member on the witness stand:
Q:Were you aware that a member in the so-and-so congregation was said to have abused the child of member’s so-and-so in that congregation?
A:YES, elders in that congregation informed the legal department at WTS headquarters and they informed us.
One elder in congregation that informed the legal department on the witness stand:
Q:How did you come to know about this said child abuse?
A:Member’s so-and-so who is the parents of the child came to the elders here and told us.
Parents of child on the witness stand:
Q:How did you come to know that your child is said to have been abused?
A:She came to us and told us.
Q:Did you report it to the authorities?
A:NO, we reported it to just the elders, that is what we are told to do first and then when we did so, they told us not to report it to authorities, so we didn’t because we follow what they say because they are the ones taking the lead over us.
One elder in congregation that informed the legal department on the witness stand:
Q:Did you tell the parents not to report it to authorities and if so why? And did you report it to the authorities?
A:YES, we told them (the parents) not to report it and we (the elders) did not report it either, because that is what the legal department told us to do, so that is what we did because they spoke with the GB and together that is what they decided and we follow what the GB say because they are the ones that take the lead over us.
One GB member on the witness stand:
Q:Did you and the rest of the GB members along with the WTS legal department tell the elders not report it and to tell them to tell the parents not to report it to the authorities? And did you or any other member of the GB or the WTS legal department report it to the authorities?
A:YES we told the elders that and NO we didn’t report it either because in the information that the elders gave the legal department it was said that there was no witnesses to any said abuse other then the child and when the one being accused was asked if he abused this child he said he didn’t, so because we think we understand the Bible we believe that it shows that we can not take action unless there is at least 2 eye witnesses and this is what is told to the elders as well as the parents and the child.
Judge addresses court:
Well, I can’t get into the Bible here, I have to stick just to the law, even thou much of our law is based on the Bible, as even in our laws we too need to have eye witness testimony and evidence to show and prove that a crime as been committed and as to who is guilty of such. While I understand that there may not have been any other person that witnessed the said abuse, there still could have been evidence collected and perhaps even admission of guilt by the accused if he were questioned by authorities and not by elders only. That questioning and possible evidence collected would have been done had this said abuse been reported to authorities… but that was x # of years ago that this said abuse was said to have taken place and the one that is now reporting it is the child who is no longer a child or at least much older then they were when the said abuse was said to have taken place.
If the accused turns out to be guilty, do you know that all of you that were told back then by the victim about the crime of abuse that took place on them, that you have actually helped the criminal evade detection all these years by your inaction of not reporting it to the authorities and had it not been for the victim them self that have finally came forward and reported it, then this criminal would still be evading detection by your inaction to not report it.
ExJW’s in the courtroom standing up and yelling out:
NO! NO! Judge, blow us, you insensitive prick…don’t be talking about the inactions of the parents of them not reporting it. Sure its true that they care more about the GB then their own children, so it is no surprise that they listen to being told not to report it over actually doing the right thing for their own child and reporting it… heck, they will even stop talking to this same child if they say they no longer believe in 1914… but Judge, its not the parents fault, its because they are brainwashed by GB, don’t you see you clown!
[Knowledge of the crime
To be convicted of an accessory charge, the accused must generally be proved to have had actual knowledge that a crime was going to be, or had been, committed. Furthermore, there must be proof that the accessory knew that his or her action, or inaction, was helping the criminals commit the crime, or evade detection, or escape.]