Watchtower's "evolution" regarding se...

Watchtower's "evolution" regarding sexual abuse

Posted in the Jehovah's Witness Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“A voice of reason”

Since: Aug 09

Crooklyn

#1 Jul 23, 2012
As I read through the Watchtower attorney's closing arguments in the Conti trial, I noticed an interesting admission:

"Ms. Conti said she wanted to change policies. That's why she brought this suit. And we feel bad for Ms. Conti. But I can assure you, and I can assure her, that Watchtower's policies continue to evolve. And I can safely say that, with her verdict yesterday, Ms. Conti has succeeded. I encourage you to award no punitive damages in this case." [1]

So, I guess the Society's child sex abuse policies are sorta like President Obama's beliefs on same-sex marriage - they're "evolving."

And all this time, I thought the Society didn't believe in evolution...

References:
[1] Conti trial transcript, 6/14/2012, p. 24, lines 6-12.
hMMMM

Farmington, UT

#2 Jul 23, 2012
Olin Moyle wrote:
As I read through the Watchtower attorney's closing arguments in the Conti trial, I noticed an interesting admission:
"Ms. Conti said she wanted to change policies. That's why she brought this suit. And we feel bad for Ms. Conti. But I can assure you, and I can assure her, that Watchtower's policies continue to evolve. And I can safely say that, with her verdict yesterday, Ms. Conti has succeeded. I encourage you to award no punitive damages in this case." [1]
So, I guess the Society's child sex abuse policies are sorta like President Obama's beliefs on same-sex marriage - they're "evolving."
And all this time, I thought the Society didn't believe in evolution...
References:
[1] Conti trial transcript, 6/14/2012, p. 24, lines 6-12.
How shocking!!
The WBTS doesn't want to part with any of the dirty money they rake in from their disgusting scam???
red blood relative

United States

#3 Jul 23, 2012
how about we all just help the jw gov body to change the last few sentences to; ...

i encourage you to collect more money from us, or we won't repent...... as you can tell , we still haven't...

so, please feel free to sue for more than 28 million US DOLLARS to help us make the change.

i'm suspecting the whole jw gov body must be removed and go to jail, and their lawyers too

“A voice of reason”

Since: Aug 09

Crooklyn

#4 Jul 23, 2012
Can anyone tell us how the Society's policy on dealing with child sexual abuse has "evolved"?

Also, I wonder what further changes will be implemented as a result of the shellacking that Watchtower took in court?

There must be some changes coming down the pike...either that or Watchtower's lawyer was trying to fool the jury into not awarding punitive damages...
red blood relative

United States

#5 Jul 23, 2012
Olin Moyle wrote:
Can anyone tell us how the Society's policy on dealing with child sexual abuse has "evolved"?
Also, I wonder what further changes will be implemented as a result of the shellacking that Watchtower took in court?
There must be some changes coming down the pike...either that or Watchtower's lawyer was trying to fool the jury into not awarding punitive damages...
oh sure.... they will promise to repent and change their written rules again..... of course,... all liars promise to do that... especially those with blood guilt on their hands who are facing JAIL TIME.

they promise to write a new written rule...... but here is the funny thing..... the written rule has nothing to do with the secret rules from headquarters.

you see......... the jw drone elders call headquarters first, and then headquarters tells them that they must obey or get removed as an elder, for causing a division, and then they shush the whole thingy up.

do you get it yet?

“Bustin' Myths”

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

#6 Jul 23, 2012
Olin Moyle wrote:
Can anyone tell us how the Society's policy on dealing with child sexual abuse has "evolved"?
Also, I wonder what further changes will be implemented as a result of the shellacking that Watchtower took in court?
There must be some changes coming down the pike...either that or Watchtower's lawyer was trying to fool the jury into not awarding punitive damages...
Based on their latest letter to elders, sent out while this trial was in progress, they aren't changing anything about confidentiality or exposing known pedophiles in their congregation.

Since: Oct 10

Homebush, Australia

#7 Jul 24, 2012
this is an interesting post on JWN...

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/sc...

“A VERY BAD MAN”

Since: Dec 06

Republic of Elbonia

#8 Jul 24, 2012
As many jurisdictions now consider clergy [and equivalents] to be mandatory reporters, with more and more of them moving in that direction, it seems there's a very simple way for JW elders to move forward: refuse to hear either confessions or allegations of serious crimes in a "church discipline" setting.

Simply inform those who seek them out up front that they are mandatory reporters and that, in conjunction with current strict interpretation of privilege provisions, they cannot and will not keep either confessions of or allegations of serious crimes confidential. This will serve to keep people from making the allegations to them in the first place.

Then, inform the claimant/confessor that they will not engage in either spiritual counseling or church discipline until the person making the allegation reports to the proper authorities or a confessor reports himself/herself to the proper authorities. This puts the onus on the individuals in their capacity as individuals to take these matters to the police - as they should in the first place - rather than attempt to pass their responsibilities off on JW elders [and then later hold them accountable for not doing what they "should" have done].

“A voice of reason”

Since: Aug 09

Crooklyn

#9 Jul 24, 2012
Watchtower Defender FH Chandler wrote:
As many jurisdictions now consider clergy [and equivalents] to be mandatory reporters, with more and more of them moving in that direction, it seems there's a very simple way for JW elders to move forward: refuse to hear either confessions or allegations of serious crimes in a "church discipline" setting.
Simply inform those who seek them out up front that they are mandatory reporters and that, in conjunction with current strict interpretation of privilege provisions, they cannot and will not keep either confessions of or allegations of serious crimes confidential. This will serve to keep people from making the allegations to them in the first place.
Then, inform the claimant/confessor that they will not engage in either spiritual counseling or church discipline until the person making the allegation reports to the proper authorities or a confessor reports himself/herself to the proper authorities. This puts the onus on the individuals in their capacity as individuals to take these matters to the police - as they should in the first place - rather than attempt to pass their responsibilities off on JW elders [and then later hold them accountable for not doing what they "should" have done].
"FH Chandler" posits an intriguing idea. It will be interesting to see if/how the Society's policy "evolves."

Perhaps "Chandler" (or one of this forum's other Watchtower Defenders) can also enlighten us on how Watchtower's policy has "evolved" over the years.

“A VERY BAD MAN”

Since: Dec 06

Republic of Elbonia

#10 Jul 24, 2012
Bowen handpuppet Trollin Moyle wrote:
Perhaps "Chandler" (or one of this forum's other Watchtower Defenders) can also enlighten us on how Watchtower's policy has "evolved" over the years.
My comments on this forum are not intended, nor should they be misconstrued - though they often are, by yourself, among others - as a defense of the legal entities that fall under the umbrella term "Watchtower."

Whether or not WT's policies have "evolved" or if they change from this point on is of no concern to me; for their own good, they could easily nip this problem in the bud by, in their role as mandatory reporters, stating up front that they cannot - due to both the letter of the law and prevailing precedents regarding "penitent/clergy privilege" provisions - keep everything told to them confidential, and specify allegations of or confessions of serious crimes [they could even specifically mention "sex crimes"]. Further, they can state that they will not act either in their capacity as spiritual counselors or as church disciplinarians until the allegations of or confessions of serious crimes are reported by the alleging party or the confessor to the proper authorities.

“A voice of reason”

Since: Aug 09

Crooklyn

#11 Jul 24, 2012
Watchtower Defender and Internet Perry Mason FH Chandler wrote:
Whether or not WT's policies have "evolved" ... is of no concern to me
Really? You appear to have devoted a significant number of posts on this forum to debates related to the Society's sexual abuse policy and the attendant lawsuits that have arisen.

So, what do you think? Do you agree with Watchtower's attorney who told the jury that the Society's policies have evolved? If so, how have they evolved?

“A VERY BAD MAN”

Since: Dec 06

Republic of Elbonia

#12 Jul 24, 2012
Trollin Moyle wrote:
Really? You appear to have devoted a significant number of posts on this forum to debates related to the Society's sexual abuse policy and the attendant lawsuits that have arisen.
And?

Trollin Moyle: So, what do you think? Do you agree with Watchtower's attorney who told the jury that the Society's policies have evolved? If so, how have they evolved?

Reply: Compared to?

I can only speculate as to what was meant by the term "evolved," but it would seem that as time has progressed, society's overall view of allegations of abuse and how they should be treated has "evolved," and the way law enforcement agencies, courts and non-government organizations view those allegations and how they treat them has "evolved" along with it.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#13 Jul 24, 2012
FH Chandler wrote:
As many jurisdictions now consider clergy [and equivalents] to be mandatory reporters, with more and more of them moving in that direction, it seems there's a very simple way for JW elders to move forward: refuse to hear either confessions or allegations of serious crimes in a "church discipline" setting.
Simply inform those who seek them out up front that they are mandatory reporters and that, in conjunction with current strict interpretation of privilege provisions, they cannot and will not keep either confessions of or allegations of serious crimes confidential. This will serve to keep people from making the allegations to them in the first place.
Then, inform the claimant/confessor that they will not engage in either spiritual counseling or church discipline until the person making the allegation reports to the proper authorities or a confessor reports himself/herself to the proper authorities. This puts the onus on the individuals in their capacity as individuals to take these matters to the police - as they should in the first place - rather than attempt to pass their responsibilities off on JW elders [and then later hold them accountable for not doing what they "should" have done].


It would be a breath of fresh air should the Watchtower organization finally go public with who they send information to that is confessed to them. For decades it has had elders to report on the most sensitive and personal details of confessed “sin” in writing to its local branch officials where only God knows how many prying eyes consume the information for whatever reason they concoct. And yet not one time has Watchtower publicized this reporting of confidential information to third parties outside presence of the confession. Not once.

My preference would be to have Watchtower inform congregants that henceforth allegations of child molestation will be promptly reported to secular authorities charged with protecting all children and not just children of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com

“A VERY BAD MAN”

Since: Dec 06

Republic of Elbonia

#14 Jul 24, 2012
The MarvTower Announces Shilmers Pimpdom wrote:
It would be a breath of fresh air should the Watchtower organization finally go public with who they send information to that is confessed to them.
Why?

MarvTower Announces: For decades it has had elders to report on the most sensitive and personal details of confessed “sin” in writing to its local branch officials where only God knows how many prying eyes consume the information for whatever reason they concoct.

Reply: While I'm sure perverse-minded individuals like yourself imagine that various unnamed individuals take some form of delight in salacious details reported to them, that speaks more to your own dysfunction than that of any of these unnamed people you think are out there treating correspondence from local congregations as though it was Penthouse Fourm.
UGETTHAT

Melbourne, Australia

#15 Jul 24, 2012
If WTBTS is guided by 'holy spirit' why did it take a law suit to get the 'holy spirit' to act.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#16 Jul 24, 2012
FH Chandler wrote:
MarvTower Announces: For decades it has had elders to report on the most sensitive and personal details of confessed “sin” in writing to its local branch officials where only God knows how many prying eyes consume the information for whatever reason they concoct.
.
Reply: While I'm sure perverse-minded individuals like yourself imagine that various unnamed individuals take some form of delight in salacious details reported to them, that speaks more to your own dysfunction than that of any of these unnamed people you think are out there treating correspondence from local congregations as though it was Penthouse Fourm.


Not surprisingly, you evade the point of Watchtower having NEVER informed the Witness community at large that confessions to elders in judicial committees that result in disfellowshipping are in each instance SHARED with third party individuals unknown to the confessor and without their prior knowledge. These third party individuals are those men at Watchtower who receive and file these tens of thousands of reports annually.

Over the decades there are hundreds of thousands of individuals whose most personal intimacies were shared in this way without them being notified.

Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com

“A voice of reason”

Since: Aug 09

Crooklyn

#17 Jul 24, 2012
Watchtower Defender FH Chandler wrote:
I can only speculate as to what was meant by the term "evolved," but it would seem that as time has progressed, society's overall view of allegations of abuse and how they should be treated has "evolved," and the way law enforcement agencies, courts and non-government organizations view those allegations and how they treat them has "evolved" along with it.
Well, that was a nice non-responsive answer.

Perhaps one of this forum's other Watchtower Defenders has something to add. I noticed that Watchtower Defender "thirdwitness" made a post today that seems to support a position that Watchtower's policy regarding reporting child abuse has not changed.[1]

With that backdrop, I wonder what's this "evolution" that Watchtower's lawyer was touting to the jury...

Reference:
[1] http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...
Jace

Ardsley, NY

#18 Jul 24, 2012
UGETTHAT wrote:
If WTBTS is guided by 'holy spirit' why did it take a law suit to get the 'holy spirit' to act.
Ain't nothing like a good Harvard law graduate pinp slapping the wt to get that HS flowing for some new light

Can you imagine the Romans having to pass laws In order for the first century Christians to do right????

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#19 Jul 24, 2012
Olin Moyle wrote:
With that backdrop, I wonder what's this "evolution" that Watchtower's lawyer was touting to the jury...


The loudest change I’ve observed in directives to elders is that of telephoning Watchtower’s legal department.

Once upon a time Watchtower had dismantled its legal department. Then it started it up again but elders were never given instruction to ask for that department.

Then about 20 years ago elders were told to contact Watchtower’s legal department for certain occasions, like allegation of child molestation. More recently Watchtower’s written directive tells elders over and over again to contact the legal department for this and that.

One thing I noticed over the years handling reports of child molestation is that if an incident appeared ugly enough Watchtower would stop communication with local elders except through one of its lawyers. I guess Watchtower has for some time realized the clergy/penitent privilege would only go so far keeping Watchtower’s innards under wraps; hence it layered attorney/client privilege on top and kept on giving the same directives it would have given otherwise.

In the Conti case Watchtower’s attorney repeatedly invoked attorney/client privilege of communication between Watchtower’s legal department regarding the handling of child molesters amidst JWs. Right now inside Watchtower I suspect it is mulling over whether it should direct all matters from local elders to be communicated through its legal department for this very reason.

Marvin Shilmer
http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com

“A VERY BAD MAN”

Since: Dec 06

Republic of Elbonia

#20 Jul 25, 2012
The MarvTower Announces Shilmers Pimpdom wrote:
Not surprisingly, you evade the point of Watchtower having NEVER informed the Witness community at large that confessions to elders in judicial committees that result in disfellowshipping are in each instance SHARED with third party individuals unknown to the confessor and without their prior knowledge.
I didn't evade it, it just doesn't matter.

"Confidentiality" doesn't, generally, mean that only two people know about a matter. That may be how California [and some other] courts interpret it where it concerns their narrow "Clergy" and "Penitent" privilege provisions, but in everyday use the term is not so limited.

Apparently you believe that personal matters between a JW congregant and JW elders in the course of either spiritual counseling/church discipline that might be shared in an organizational setting with some person in some department in New York - much the same way my personal financial information is shared between me and various individuals in various banks - should be a matter of public record where it concerns the congregation at large.

Because multiple parties are aware of my personal financial position, that doesn't mean that anyone and everyone is entitled to know my business; similarly, everyone in a JW congregation isn't entitled to know anyone's personal business that they've chosen to share with JW elders simply because some portion of that information might - for, among other things, legitimate recordkeeping - be shared with someone in New York.

MarvTower Announces: These third party individuals are those men at Watchtower who receive and file these tens of thousands of reports annually.

Reply: Banks I do business with - and multiple individuals within them - receive and file tens of millions of reports annually; that doesn't mean that the public at large is entitled to know personal information about me.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jehovah's Witness Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Yet, Another New Forum... 10 min I_know_better_now 260
New Today music thread (Jun '17) 48 min GreatSouthbay4040 1,952
Biblical Head Knowledge is NOT knowing God 51 min rsss11 2
meaning of immortal 56 min I_know_better_now 190
Learn to Speak CHURCHESE Fluently! (Jul '10) 2 hr rsss11 124
Just IMAGINE churchoids going door 2 door! (Jun '15) 2 hr rsss11 212
No more "Holy GHOST"??? (Apr '17) 2 hr rsss11 419
The Most Accurate of ALL Translations! (Nov '17) 3 hr rsss11 622
The Bible Jehovah`s Witnesses main text Book 4 hr rsss11 101