Lloyd Evans's Blog, page 2

Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses Named as Defendants in Child Abuse Lawsuits

“We need to focus on the institution, not the individual priests. Practice and policy. Show me the church manipulated the system so that these guys wouldn’t have to face charges. Show me they put those same priests back into parishes time and time again. Show me this was systemic, that it came from the top down…

…We’re going after the system.”

– From the 2015 film Spotlight

On August 14th, 2019, multiple civil lawsuits were filed in the State of New York, naming the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses as co-defendants.

The all-male eight-member ruling authority faces accusations of negligence by controlling an institution which carelessly abused its power, resulting in the sexual abuse of a large number of minor children.

Attorney Irwin Zalkin is going after the system.

In an interview with JW Survey’s editors, New York and San-Diego-based Zalkin identified the core reasons for naming the self-appointed Governing Body as defendants in the latest round of lawsuits.

[image error]

“They are now going to be named defendants in a lawsuit. They are headquartered in the State of New York. They direct all of the activities of the Jehovah’s Witness Organization from the State of New York. They are very hands-on. The Governing Body is very hands-on in making policy and practice for the organization in issuing directives to elders including directives related to their sexual abuse policy. “

Among the directives approved by the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses is the 274-page secret elder’s manual known as Shepherd the Flock of God. An entire chapter has been devoted to managing child abuse, with the very first subheading titled “Legal Considerations.”

While Jehovah’s Witness elders claim that they endeavor to cooperate with law enforcement, they are neither permitted nor encouraged to immediately phone the police when they become aware of child molestation allegations.

Instead, they are under strict instructions to promptly phone Watchtower’s legal department in Patterson New York, where anonymous men type detailed allegations into their child abuse database. Before handing the call off to the religious Service Department, legal advisors decide whether mandatory reporting laws apply to clergymen in the state where the crimes occurred.

2018 JW Legal Department Intake Form- Top

Despite clergy-mandated reporting in nearly every State, Watchtower’s legal department relies heavily upon a broad interpretation of clergy-penitent privilege, a loophole which Watchtower leaders exploit in virtually every child abuse case.

The quandary is, courtrooms across the United States disagree with the liberal interpretation of clergy privilege. Watchtower claims that all conversations between elders and victims, perpetrators, Circuit Overseers, Appeals Committees, and New York Service Department elders are covered by this privilege.

However, clergy privilege was intended to protect the confession of a perpetrator to his priest or elder, It was never intended to protect an internal investigation initiated by a body of elders within a congregation. Attorneys for Jehovah’s Witnesses believe they are being unfairly held to the Catholic Church model, where privilege only applies to a confession made between the penitent and his priest.

From Shepherd the Flock Elder Manual



Multiple Lawsuits Filed

In the wake of the newly-enacted Child Victims Act legislation, dozens of lawsuits were filed on behalf of victims seeking justice. While a significant number of cases target Catholic New York Dioceses, Jehovah’s Witness abuse survivors are also lining up seeking justice, compensation, and validation.

The New York law sets aside Statute of Limitations restrictions for a period of one year, opening the door for victims previously barred from suing organizations which covered up abuse.

Because Jehovah’s Witnesses are an insular religious community, very few cases were ever brought before criminal or civil courts. Witnesses are encouraged never to bring reproach upon the “name of Jehovah” by straying outside of the organization to resolve matters involving church members. Such matters include allegations of child abuse.

While parents are sometimes advised by elders that they are free to report abuse allegations to the authorities, under no circumstances are they implicitly directed to do so.

Survivors Michael Ewing and Heather Steele know all too well what it’s like to have their lives destroyed by appointed members of the Jehovah’s Witness religion. Both have sought the aid of the Zalkin Law Firm after decades of suffering the after-effects of their abuse and the corresponding cover-up.

Court documents describe evidence that church leadership intentionally tried to circumvent law enforcement in an effort to reduce notoriety.

The abusers in both cases were appointees of the Governing Body, including an elder and a ministerial servant. Both are considered agents of the church.

Complaint Filed by Heather SteeleComplaint Filed by John Michael Ewing

Attorney Zalkin outlines a long history of non-compliance and non-cooperation with law enforcement, citing numerous secret church mandates sent only to congregation elders.

In both complaints, Zalkin states:

“Notwithstanding the reports received in response to the March 1997 and July 1998 letters which continue to be sent to this day, defendants WATCHTOWER and GOVERNING BODY left intact a longstanding Jehovah’s Witness policy dating to a July 1989 policy letter that required elders to frustrate law enforcement efforts to investigate child molestation, and to contact defendant WATCHTOWER’S Legal Department about child abuse allegations instead of cooperating with law enforcement or reporting child molestation allegations to the police. Similarly, victims were still to be discouraged from seeking any form of therapy where Jehovah’s Witness molestations may be disclosed to non-members. Despite being staffed with ministers, defendant WATCHTOWER’S Service Department has never made a mandated child abuse report to law enforcement.”

Attorney Zalkin seeks to hold the top officials for Watchtower responsible, specifically the eight members of the Governing Body. In 2014, Zalkin filed a motion to compel the deposition of the longest-standing member of the Governing Body, Gerrit Losch.

In defiance of this motion, Losch used two law firms outside of Watchtower to quash the motion to compel, with Losch claiming that he did not answer to Watchtower or create any of their corporate policies. Watchtower’s attorneys compared Losch to the Dalai Lama.

[image error]

Zalkin intends to prove that Losch’s professed detachment from Watchtower’s corporate structure is an attempt to evade accountability for the creation of dangerous and influential policies which affect over 8 million Witnesses worldwide.

While the Governing Body removed itself from the legal corporations owned by the religious empire in 2000, the new lawsuits indicate that this was merely a legal formality and that there are no policies which do not fall under the jurisdiction of the ruling body.

Gerrit Losch

The Governing Body and their corporations are in fact, alter egos of each other.

Meanwhile, in New Jersey, two more abuse victims have come forward as a result of the abuse of Heather Steele and her sister.

Plaintiffs Lynn Hagan and Tarah Bird have filed a 30-page civil lawsuit in which they allege that their own biological father, Donald Nicholson, sexually abused them for twenty years. Nicholson was the same prominent church elder who molested Heather Steele.

Complaint Filed by Hagan and Bird

Nicholson had been arrested and found guilty of molesting the two daughters of Jehovah’s Witness elder Lee Steele, who was a New York State Trooper at the time. Nicholson pled guilty in 1982 and spent 3 1/2 years in prison.

Nicholson Re-Offends While Incarcerated

Approaching the end of his prison sentence, Nicholson was transferred to the Wallkill Correctional Facility in New York, which had just initiated a family visitation program for qualifying prisoners. During recurring overnight visits, four-year-old plaintiff Tarah Bird was regularly forced to endure sexual assaults while her mother, Gail Nicholson, watched.

Gail Nicholson died October 3, 2018.

According to court documents filed on behalf of Nicholson’s daughters, the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses harbored a known child molester from 1974 to 2010. Attorneys for Hagan and Bird state:

“Additionally, upon information and belief, a known child molester was appointed to the Governing Body in 1974, and he controlled Watchtower Defendants’ database of molesters, policies toward their judicial cases, and non-reporting to authorities until his death in 2010”

The Governing Body member referred to is Theodore “Ted” Jaracz. It is unclear whether the law firm of Bochetto and Lentz will present physical documentation to substantiate the allegations against Jaracz.

Additional Lawsuit Filed Against Governing Body and Watchtower

On August 15th, 2019, attorney Irwin Zalkin filed yet another civil lawsuit against the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses, this time in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County.

The new case alleges that Kevin Ramirez was molested by Humberto Ramirez (not his father) between 1999 and 2001, when Kevin was between six and eight years of age. The documents state:

“Humberto molested Plaintiff on numerous occasions, including during and after Church events such as field service, bible study, and during a Jehovah’s Witness Assembly.”

Complaint filed by Kevin Ramirez

Humberto Ramirez was a congregation elder, appointed at through the oversight of the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses. According to the complaint, in 2001 Kevin finally revealed to his parents that he was being abused by Humberto Ramirez. His parents reported the allegations to congregation elders, who discouraged the family from reporting the matter to the police.

Congregation elders opted not to pass on the allegations to law enforcement officials, despite being mandated reporters. The filing also revealed:

“Humberto used his position with Defendants to ingratiate himself with Plaintiff’s family. Without Humberto’s position with Defendants, he would not have had access to Plaintiff or the ability to commit the acts of molestation alleged herein. Humberto threatened that Plaintiff would not be accepted into paradise if he did not allow the molestations to occur. Indeed, Humberto used his position to molest multiple boys in Defendant Congregation”

All of the cases filed represent a growing cross-section of the Jehovah’s Witness community, a place where trust for congregation elders, ministerial servants, and the underlying organization has become increasingly dangerous.

The Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses is principally silent on the matter of child sexual abuse, but in 2015, Stephen Lett issued the following statement:

“Think about the apostate-driven lies and dishonesties that Jehovah’s organization is permissive toward pedophiles. I mean, that is ridiculous, isn’t it? If anybody takes action against someone who would threaten our young ones, and takes action to protect our young ones, it is Jehovah’s organization. We reject outright such lies.”

[image error]







[image error]

Additional Information: Please watch and share the latest Watchtower in Focus episode, where the JW Survey editors interview Attorney Irwin Zalkin from his New York Office:

The post appeared first on JWsurvey.

Jehovah’s Witnesses Lose California Child Abuse Case, Appeal to U.S. Supreme Court – Part One

“Jehovah’s Witnesses again find their First Amendment rights under attack and again seek protection.”

With these words, Watchtower attorney Paul Polidoro pleads the case of an embattled church struggling to re-define clergy-penitent privilege while spending millions of dollars protecting an ever-growing database of child abusers and their victims.

[image error]

What began in California as a binge of molestation by a now-defrocked, incarcerated Jehovah’s Witness elder has landed before the United States Supreme Court, which must decide whether the constitutional rights of the controversial religion have been violated.

The underlying case is a 2013 civil lawsuit commonly referred to as “JW versus Watchtower.” JW represents the initials of one of the victims of former Jehovah’s Witness elder Gilbert Simental, who is now serving 45 years to life for his crimes.

This article will discuss the backdrop of the case, beginning with the abuse and subsequent criminal trial which set these events in motion.

The Background of this Case

It was a hot Southern Californa Summer day.

On July 15th, 2006, the mother of nine-year-old JW anxiously packed an overnight bag for her daughter. This was JW’s very first sleepover, and it was the first time she’d ever spent a night away from home, apart from family. She was very excited.

Like any other concerned parent, JW’s mother needed some assurance that she was sending her daughter to a safe place. Her friends often commented on how protective she was of her children. As one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, she thought she could trust fellow member Gilbert Simental and his wife.

So she thought.

After all, he had been an elder since May 1996 and hosted a congregation meeting in his home for 13 years. On October 31, 2005, Simental had “stepped down” from his position as elder, but his reason seemed innocuous: he needed to spend more time with his son.

The congregation still treated Simental with respect. He would often conduct the weekly “bookstudy” meeting, and was almost always the person who read the paragraphs from the publication being studied. He took the lead in other congregation assignments, such as Kingdom Hall cleaning and maintenance.

Simental had a daughter close to the age of JW So it came as no surprise that JW was invited to the Simental home for a slumber party, along with two other Witness girls – sisters – also the same age.

There was no warning for what was about to happen on July 15th. The events of that day would forever change the lives of young JW and her family.

If only they had been informed.

The 1997 Watchtower Letter

On March 14th, 1997, Watchtower Headquarters in New York sent a letter to all Jehovah’s Witness congregations informing them that the organization was aware that some child molesters were serving in prominent, appointed positions within the church.

One week later, JW was born.

Gilbert Simental was already a known child molester. Local Elders and the Watchtower organization were well aware of the allegations against this man. But this knowledge was well-concealed from the parents of JW and her little friends. They never saw it coming.

“It may be possible that some who were guilty of child molestation were or are now serving as elders, ministerial servants, or regular or special pioneers. Others may have been guilty of child molestation before they were baptized. The bodies of elders should not query individuals. However, the body of elders should discuss this matter and give the Society a report on anyone who is currently serving or who formerly served in a Society-appointed position in your congregation who is known to have been guilty of child molestation in the past.”

– March 14th 1997 Letter to Elders

Watchtower’s letter revealed that the organization was accumulating a detailed inventory of child molesters and their victims, but not with the intent of referring congregation elders to law enforcement or child protection agencies. All matters involving child molestation were to be handled internally.

According to Riverside Criminal prosecutor Burke Strunsky, “This case is about a daylong molestation spree on the part of the defendant, Gilbert Simental. He exploited the innocence and trust of his own daughter’s slumber party by fondling her childhood friends. Three little girls, nine-year-old Holly*, her ten-year-old sister Amy*, and nine-year-old Laura* were all left in the care of Simental, a member of the local congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses, not to mention a close friend of the family.”

*[names have been changed]

Simental initiated his crimes in broad daylight, in his own swimming pool with his wife nearby – seemingly unaware that her husband was using a pool of water to shield what he was doing with his hands. By nightfall, his crimes escalated to the premeditated sexual assault of three innocent girls who were already in a state of shock from earlier events.

Strunsky, now a California Superior Court judge, has written a book titled: The Humanity of Justice, in which he details some of the most egregious crimes he’s prosecuted on behalf of the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office.

Chapter 7 of this book is devoted entirely to the atrocities of Gilbert Simental, and the subsequent obstruction of justice by the Jehovah’s Witness elders involved.

The Cover-Up

The crimes committed by Simental on July 15, 2006, left the girls in a state of confusion and disbelief. Fortunately, two of the girls were sisters, and one month after the sleepover, they timidly approached their parents and revealed what had occurred at the Simental home.

They borrowed each other’s strength and decided to get help. Not only were the girls in fear of this man within their church environment, but Simental’s daughter attended their school, which meant they would see him in multiple places. They knew they had to do something.

The girls’ parents were active Jehovah’s Witnesses, so they did what every Witness is told to do when there’s a problem: they called the elders. They thought perhaps that the congregation clergy could protect their girls within the boundaries of the congregation. However, the elders had no authority at school. So their mother called the school principal, not recognizing that teachers and school officials are mandatory reporters.

The principal immediately contacted law enforcement. A criminal investigation was launched into the allegations against Simental.

Meanwhile, congregation elders conducted their own internal investigation of the crimes committed, seeking out both Simental and his accusers. During the course of their probe, Simental confessed to some of the accusations against him, but convinced congregation elders that he was repentant. As a result, he was “reproved” – the Jehovah’s Witness equivalent of a slap on the wrist.

When the police came calling, however, Simental suddenly realized that his confession might send him to prison for the rest of his life.

The Watchtower organization and local elders did not want to see that happen. Congregation elders John Vaughn and Andrew Sinay, under strict procedural orders from Watchtower of New York, were issued subpoenas to testify. They declined. On February 15th, 2008, Simental’s attorney filed a motion to quash Sinay’s subpoena. One week later, he filed another motion to quash, this time to prevent Vaughn from testifying.

Simental’s attorney argued that his confession to the two investigating elders was a confidential discussion, protected by clergy-penitent privilege.

The law, and Prosecutor Strunsky saw things differently:

The confessions of a pedophile should …never be treated as classified information inadmissable in a court of law…In my years as a prosecutor in child abuse cases, I’ve learned that there’s no faith community, whether it’s a church, synagogue, mosque, or temple that’s fully prepared to deal with these cases; someone who has the perverse urge to sexually abuse children needs professional intervention. Religious institutions’ refusal to bring the crime into the light leaves the innocent child to live in silent pain, confusion, and shame.

The Humanity of Justice by Burke Strunsky

Strunsky’s Strategy

Long before a civil lawsuit was initiated against Watchtower and the Congregations involved in this crime, the elders associated with this case invoked clergy-penitent confessional privilege.

In effect, this amounted to an obstruction of justice, framed by U.S. First Amendment freedom of religion. The problem was, Gilbert Simental did not reach out to congregation elders to confess his crimes.

He was caught.

The two sisters who were friends of JW approached their parents, who summoned the elders instead of the police. The elders conducted their own investigation into the crimes, a fact that by definition disqualifies their discussions with Simental as clergy-penitent privilege.

However clear these facts appeared to the court, prosecutor Strunsky needed more. He wanted undisputed proof that the elders of a so-called confidential judicial committee would share information about Simental’s confession with other elders, either in the same congregation or elsewhere.

The answer was found in Watchtower’s own secret elders manual, Pay Attention to Yourselves and all the flock.

Prior to the global availability of highly confidential manuals and policy letters of the Jehovah’s Witness organization, attorneys representing victims had to rely upon other attorneys filing similar cases in separate jurisdictions. Strunsky obtained the “Flock” book from lawyers representing multiple additional victims of abuse across the United States.

He found the evidence he needed to compel testimony from the two non-cooperative elders.

“By knowing the judicial committees’s internal procedures and protocols, I could ask these resistant witnesses the kinds of detailed questions that would hopefully lead to the truth ..Without this book I could have never uncovered the protocols and mandates of the organization’s disciplinary hearing procedures”

– The Humanity of Justice – Burke Strunsky

Under oath, Elder Andrew Sinay was questioned repeatedly about the Jehovah’s Witness policy of relaying the notes and content of one Judicial Committee to a second Judicial Committee, known as an Appeals Committee. The Appeals Committee is comprised of at least three different elders, usually from different congregations. These men would have access to all notes and files from a disfellowshipping case in which the accused could exercise his right to appeal the decision of the Elders.

[image error] The Humanity of Justice

Judge Dickerson ordered Sinay to answer Strunsky’s pointed questions, which revealed that the contents of Witness judicial proceedings did not qualify as clergy-pentitent communications. Not by a long shot.

Sinay also admitted that it was the elders’ practice to send copies of the elders’ notes, disfellowshipping forms and other documentation to Watchtower’s New York Headquarters, where their Service and Legal departments collect and process this data.

As a consequence of this ruling. the elders were compelled against their will to testify against Simental, leading to his conviction.

Gilbert Simental was found guilty of three counts of lewd and lascivious acts upon a child under the age of 14. In 2008 he was sentenced to 45 years to life for his crimes. At his sentencing hearing, a sizable group of Jehovah’s Witnesses demonstrated solidarity with Simental, appealing for a more lenient sentence. JW and her parents were treated as if they broke the congregation code of silence.

The Aftermath of the Criminal Trial

Prior to the criminal trial, on August 12, 2006, congregation elders announced that Simental was publicly reproved. A JW Survey source confirmed that the reproval was on the grounds of “loose conduct.”

Elders deemed that Simental was a reformed, repentant child molester who did not deserve to be disfellowshipped, despite the fact that he had confessed to multiple counts of child sexual abuse.

Additional evidence surfaced during the criminal trial which linked Simental to the abuse of several victims more than 30 years prior to his arrest.

Simental’s own niece told investigators that he had molested her when she was seven years old. The jury would not hear this evidence however, as the trial had already begun. In the end, the prosecution had sufficient evidence to convict even without the newly discovered victims.

The Civil Trial: JW versus Watchtower

Simental appealed, lost the case and was sent to prison. His wife was forced to separate or lose custody of her own children.

Meanwhile, the parents of JW wanted answers. Why was a known pedophile appointed to the position of Ministerial Servant in 1993, then elder in 1996? Why was he left unsupervised around so many children- not just his own? Why was he only “Reproved” after being convicted on multiple counts of lewd and lascivious acts upon a child?

The family wanted an explanation.

After multiple attempts to communicate with Watchtower headquarters in New York, the parents of JW were left in the dark, shut off, disconnected. They knew Watchtower was withholding mountains of evidence connected to Simental, but they weren’t about to release any of it to the family.

Elders met with Simental again in 2009, forming yet another internal judicial committee while the perpetrator was behind bars. He appealed. The family of JW sought legal representation. Ultimately, the civil case was turned over to the San Diego-based Zalkin Law Firm, which has litigated scores of Jehovah’s Witness sexual abuse lawsuits.

On May 19th, 2010, Gilbert Simental was finally disfellowshipped, nearly four years after he molested multiple girls.

By the time this action was taken, it was far too late. The damage was done, and questions remained unanswered.

There was only one way to flush out the facts: Take Watchtower to court.

In 2013, the family of JW filed a civil lawsuit against the Mountain View Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses, the French Valley Congregation, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, and the Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

It was the only way to get answers.

For five years, Watchtower fought vigorously against JW and her family, refusing to turn over scores of documents pertinent to the case, and which revealed the epidemic of child abuse within the Jehovah’s Witness organization.

The Riverside Superior Court of California ruled in favor of JW and awarded her a default judgment in excess of 4 million dollars. Watchtower filed multiple appeals, losing every time. Watchtower was forced to purchase a bond for $6,024,228.58 from Travelers Insurance Company to guarantee the judgment during the appeal.

In a final gasp of desperation, Watchtower has filed an appeal with the highest court in the United States: The Supreme Court. In part two of this article, we will review this appeal, and the opposition motion filed by JW’s attorneys.

On February 1st, 2012, convicted child molester Gilbert Simental was reinstated into the Mountain View Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses. He remains in prison.

“The only way we can make a difference is to put our fears aside and fight for what’s right.“

-a message from survivors of abuse and their families

[image error]







[image error]

The post Jehovah’s Witnesses Lose California Child Abuse Case, Appeal to U.S. Supreme Court – Part One appeared first on JWsurvey.

Watchtower: An Institution That Cannot Apologize

After a five year inquiry, lots of hard work and brave victim testimony, positive results of Australia’s Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse have emerged. One of the most important is the National Redress Scheme devised for, as their website (www.nationalredress.gov.au) puts it, “people who have experienced institutional child sexual abuse.”

[image error]

The public hearings for Case Study 29: Jehovah’s Witnesses, were held in Sydney from July 27th through August 14th, 2015. By October 2016, the Commission had issued a report. The findings noted systemic issues with how Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia, responds to allegations of child sexual abuse. Later, in their Final Report, the Commission listed recommendations for the Jehovah’s Witness organization which include that it:

• “…abandon its application of the two-witness rule in cases involving complaints of child sexual abuse.”
• “…revise its policies so that women are involved in processes related to investigating and determining allegations of child sexual abuse.”
• “…no longer require its members to shun those who disassociate from the organization in cases where the reason for disassociation is related to a person being a victim of child sexual abuse.”

That same Final Report makes recommendations for a redress scheme to be “regarded by survivors as being capable of delivering justice.” Some of these recommendations are:

• “an apology from the institution.”
• “the opportunity to meet with a senior institutional representative and receive an acknowledgment of the abuse and its impact on them.”
• “an assurance or undertaking from the institution that it has taken, or will take, steps to protect against further abuse of children in that institution.”

This brings us to October 21st, 2018. , Australian Prime Minister Scott Morris offered a rare national apology to victims of institutional child sexual abuse and their families. While such an apology can never remove the pain survivors of abuse live with due to their trauma, such gestures symbolize goodwill and can be a vital step in the healing process. It may demonstrate to those victimized that despite the institution’s failures, a victim’s best interests are a priority going forward.

For the Jehovah’s Witnesses in Australia, it could have been an opportunity to show that their institution made concerted efforts to prevent future abuses, protect its members and make amends for past negligence. We say it “could have been,” because Watchtower’s absence in Australia’s national apology couldn’t have been more notable.

The National Redress Scheme website has a search feature where you can find the names of all the institutions that have agreed to provide redress for victims and have completed the application process. A simple keyword search on the site for “Jehovah” or “Watchtower” will get you a “No results found” message. To be thorough, leaving the keyword search field blank will give you 1119 results. We’ve combed through all of them and could not find anything that would indicate that Jehovah’s Witness or any of their entities are participants in the redress scheme.

To be fair, the website does mention that “there may be a delay between the time that an institution announces it will join the Scheme, and the time that applications relating to those institutions can be processed.” To date, Watchtower has made no such announcement. Also, institutions have until June 30, 2020 to join the redress scheme. It’s possible that Watchtower’s application has not yet been processed or that they may choose to join the scheme later. Unfortunately, their track record on offering public apologies is virtually non-existent.

Sorry… Not Sorry

It’s clear that Jehovah’s Witnesses understand the importance of an apology. In their November 1st, 2002 Watchtower Magazine article: Apologizing – A Key to Making Peace, they proudly write:

“The Bible confirms that a sincere apology is often an effective way to repair a damaged relationship. For example, in Jesus’ parable of the prodigal son, when the son returned home and offered a heartfelt apology, the father was more than ready to receive him back into the household. (Luke 15:17-24) Yes, a person should never be too proud to swallow his pride, apologize, and seek forgiveness. Of course, for sincerely humble individuals, apologies are not so difficult to make.”

The article even makes a case for the value of apologizing when one has done nothing wrong.

“Peace among fellow believers is more important than proving who is right and who is wrong. Keeping this principle in mind makes it easier to apologize for a wrong that someone thinks we have committed against him or her.”

Editors at Watchtower deemed Michael Jackson’s Thriller video disclaimer message and his remorseful apology in the May 22nd, 1984 Awake! magazine worthy of printing.

“Evidently not wanting viewers to conclude that it promoted spiritism, the film begins with the disclaimer: ‘Due to my strong personal convictions, I wish to stress that this film in no way endorses a belief in the occult’.—Michael Jackson.”

And how does the performer, Michael Jackson, feel about it in looking back? “I would never do it again!” says Jackson. “I just intended to do a good, fun short film, not to purposely bring to the screen something to scare people or to do anything bad. I want to do what’s right. I would never do anything like that again.” Why not? “Because a lot of people were offended by it,” explains Jackson. “That makes me feel bad. I don’t want them to feel that way. I realize now that it wasn’t a good idea. I’ll never do a video like that again!”

He continues: “In fact, I have blocked further distribution of the film over which I have control, including its release in some other countries. There’s all kinds of promotional stuff being proposed on Thriller. But I tell them, ‘No, no, no. I don’t want to do anything on Thriller. No more Thriller.’”

May 22, 1984 Awake! magazine

What is Watchtower’s own record for public apologies? While they have plenty to be sorry about, you’d be hard-pressed to find anything that approximates a sincere apology in the organization’s long history.

For example, the rape and death of thousands of Malawian JWs after the Governing Body decreed they were not allowed to hold a political card in a one-party state should certainly be on the apology list. We’ve already mentioned their child sexual abuse policies and resulting cover-ups. There’s also their ban on blood transfusions which has cost hundreds, potentially thousands of lives, including innocent children.

Certainly, all the times Watchtower editors have misquoted sources in their literature to mislead readers into thinking the quote supports their position when in fact, it does the opposite. Or when Rutherford’s tiger-tickling of Nazi leadership during WWII served only to exacerbate their vitriol toward German JWs who were brutalized in prison camps. Not to mention all the apologies due over their continued failed prophecies promoted with such certainty over decades of campaigns.

The only thing that could approximate an actual apology from Watchtower is what was printed in the March 15th, 1980 Watchtower article titled; “Choosing the Best Way of Life”. It pertained to the professed excitement and organizational disillusionment 5 years earlier, after 1975 came and went but nothing noteworthy had occurred. This is what that article had to say:

“In modern times such eagerness, commendable in itself, has led to attempts at setting dates for the desired liberation from the suffering and troubles that are the lot of persons throughout the earth. With the appearance of the book Life Everlasting-in Freedom of the Sons of God, and its comments as to how appropriate it would be for the millennial reign of Christ to parallel the seventh millennium of man’s existence, considerable expectation was aroused regarding the year 1975. There were statements made then, and thereafter, stressing that this was only a possibility. Unfortunately, however, along with such cautionary information, there were other statements published that implied that such realization of hopes by that year was more of a probability than a mere possibility. It is to be regretted that these latter statements apparently overshadowed the cautionary ones and contributed to a buildup of the expectation already initiated.”

For those old enough to remember living through the 1975 era, this amounts to a “sorry… not sorry.” The type of apology that must have felt empty and as unsatisfying as a single M&M for lunch. Passing the buck seems to be the name of the game and no acknowledgment is made to the fact that Watchtower’s implications and not the inferences made by the readers, are the real cause of all the disappointment.

To Say Sorry is to Be Human.

The Governing Body’s actions indicate they do not possess the humility, self-awareness, and empathy required to apologize to its own members. Yet, they not only expect members to overlook their blatant mistakes but must never be critical of their shortcomings and humbly accept whatever is offered as the revamped, “new light” doctrine.

By this I mean that Watchtower, as an entity and the Governing Body, as a collective group of individuals, seems incapable of the very human sentiments that could genuinely inspire an issued apology. The ability to genuinely apologize when actions or words hurt people is a vital trait of human relationships.

This isn’t just a blanket statement. In late June 2019; our documentary crew traveled to Sydney, Australia to conduct several interviews. We learned of how the story of Watchtower’s involvement in the ARC was spun by members of the Australian Branch to make it seem like the institution fared well in the process. There was a lot of “we were the best organization to come out of it” and a lot of “we should not have even part of the inquiry” but there was seemingly no acceptance of any deficiencies, much less any apologies.

In fact, during our trip, we were able to sit with Angus Stewart, the Senior Counsel Assisting at the time of the hearings. We asked him for his thoughts on Watchtower’s spin and his recollections of dealing with Watchtower’s representatives in comparison to other institutions that were also part of the inquiry.

Here’s a portion of what Angus had to say;

Angus Stewart – Former Senior Counsel Assisting during the Royal Commission.

Few people have had a close, detailed look at Watchtower’s inner workings in recent history. I can’t recall anyone questioning a sitting Governing Body member under oath. Mr. Stewart and his incredibly astute legal team did both of those things during the inquiry.

Given Mr. Stewart’s assessment, I truly doubt that Anthony Morris III has ever reflected introspectively over his many offensive utterances and thought to himself, “hmm, maybe I shouldn’t have said that.” I’d even give him credit for being too proud or too ashamed to apologize on the off chance the scenario I’ve described were even possible. However, I propose that circumstances will likely force them to do that which they are seemingly incapable of doing so on their own… Offer a public apology.

Don’t Count on it.

As we stated before, it’s possible that Watchtower will later join Australia’s National Redress Scheme which requires a public apology. It’s “possible” but given their track record, it’s reasonable to say to ourselves, “don’t count on it”. Public pressure and opinion might spark a change in their policy which I understand reads naïve, but there is cause for optimism.

Things have changed drastically since 1975. More and more people across the globe are connected to abundant streams of data and each other thanks to the internet. Hashtag movements like #MeToo have raised the awareness of the public to issues that were rarely openly discussed. As seen recently in Montana, abuse victims who take Watchtower to court are seeing judgments in their favor, and for larger sums.

Governing Body members who, thanks to the monthly JW Broadcasts, now provide a recognizable face to blame for their organization’s wrongdoings. In other countries, momentum is building for inquiries like Australia’s Royal Commission in places like the UK, Netherlands, Canada, Spain, and the US.

Television networks like A&E and producers like Leah Remini are creating content that specifically addresses the issues with high control groups such as Jehovah’s Witnesses. Narrative films like Daniel Kokotajlo’s “Apostasy” or “The Children Act” with Emma Thompson have made waves in the film festival circuits.

“The Truth About the Truth”, though still in production, is one of several upcoming documentary film projects to tackle the organization’s policies of shunning, mishandling of child abuse and the blood prohibition. There’s also an ever-increasing number of activists, writers and journalists who are now covering these stories in their media outlets for a growing social media community of former Jehovah’s Witnesses who do not drop the ball on sharing all this information. Can an institution that is never willing to apologize survive all this unwanted attention?

It seems things are building up to a tipping point and Watchtower will have to adjust its policies, adapt to changes or cease to exist as it does currently. Government and Religions are entities often reluctant and extremely slow to change. To Watchtower’s detriment, we now live in an era where such slowness can lead organizations to go the way of institutional Dodo birds like Blockbuster and Sears Roebuck & Company. Jehovah’s Witnesses are not immune to these realities.

What will they do if Watchtower’s tax-exempt status is challenged or if more governments act as Russia’s did and their properties are seized, or their publications are outlawed? How will they adapt to legislative changes spurred on by these inquiries? What about the civil lawsuits currently being litigated or already in the pipeline? How can Jehovah’s Witnesses publicly withstand the type of logical dissection of their policies as was demonstrated by the likes of Angus Stewart during the ARC?

It might be too soon to tell but all things considered, it certainly raises the stock value of three simple words required for an apology, doesn’t it?

Note to Readers: I had previously written guest articles for JWSurvey.org under the pseudonym “James Sequoia”. Unfortunately, there are many who must continue their work anonymously because Watchtower forces families to choose the organization over loved ones.

At the time, concealing my identity served as a protection for my still active JW family and the repercussions that inevitably come to many who speak out against Watchtower’s harmful and abusive practices.

Though it comes at great personal expense, my immediate family has managed to exit the organization while our children are still young enough to grow up unaffected by our affiliation with the religion.

Personally, this means severed relationships with my close extended family and lifelong friends. For my wife, who is not disfellowshipped, choosing to remain supportive of me and raising our girls as non-JWs means her family shuns us as well.

Despite all those negatives, I’ve come value my freedom and “James Sequoia” is now just a reminder of my imprisonment, so today I’m breaking him free. For my wife, for my lovely daughters and for the loved ones we’ve lost to Watchtower, I must right some wrongs, and speak my truth openly and honestly.

Going forward I’ll do so proudly under my given name, Javier Ortiz.

[image error]







[image error]

The post Watchtower: An Institution That Cannot Apologize appeared first on JWsurvey.

Life and Love After Watchtower: Breaking Free from Cycles of Emotional Abuse

[image error]Organizations and narcissistic individuals employ the same tactics in their attempts to control

I recently had the pleasure of joining a Facebook support group for ex-Jehovah’s Witness women. Reading through the posts, I noticed two interesting phenomena.

First to stand out were the quotes and memes being circulated to encourage women and help them recover from cult indoctrination. They were the same ones I had seen on other forums dedicated to recovery from abusive relationships, which I had also joined. The second were the posts written by the women of the group themselves. Many had been involved in romantic relationships that were abusive, psychologically or otherwise. The overlap was not a coincidence.

It comes as no surprise that vulnerability – whether owing to an empathetic nature, a need for stability or community, or a history of abuse – primes targets for manipulation. The same holds true whether the target is groomed by a high control religion or a high control partner. But there is an added layer for those who have already been victims of the first. I would argue that being women in a high control religion predisposes us to succumb to the tactics employed by psychologically controlling and emotionally abusive partners. By no means does this observation intend to even partially blame victims, only to explain how exploitative people select their supply. It is often our best qualities that make us so appealing in the first place.

While this sort of abuse knows no sex and men can and do find themselves on the receiving end of emotional abuse, women contend with an added dimension of coercive control in a religion like that of Jehovah’s Witnesses, in which they are expected to be deferential not only to the organisation, but to their husbands. The only way to break free from these cycles of abuse is to empower ourselves with knowledge by both untangling the complex web of strategies used by abusers and examining the way this treatment is rationalised by its victims.

Note that in this article I will often reference narcissistic abuse, as it is most similar to the calculating, intentional, and exploitative manipulation a high control organisation like Watchtower uses in its rhetoric. I also use the word ‘victim’ for clarity and simplicity, but those who have suffered psychological abuse are so much more than this experience. They are tough-as-nails survivors forged in a crucible meant for the obliteration of their mental health, self-esteem, trust, and hope. And it is no hyperbole to say that.

Common threads

One thing nearly all victims of narcissistic abuse will say is that every article they read on the topic seems to perfectly describe their experiences. The abuser seems cut from the same sheet of cookie dough. Cults likewise have a set of defining characteristics to which all their variations seem to conform. This makes the two fairly simple to identify, in theory, which is the first step to building up defences against them. What was amorphous and intimidating now has a name, and we know the weapons in its arsenal.

It can be mind-boggling to recognize that so many different individuals, from different backgrounds and walks of life, can all exhibit the same characteristics and use the same devices to keep people under their thumbs. But human psychology is fairly predictable. It follows patterns. It is why we can study it in the first place. And it is precisely these patterns manipulative, power-hungry individuals and organizations take advantage of to keep their victims in a perpetual state of submissiveness and compliance.

Those who choose to manipulate others are masters of psychology. They are able to lure their targets in – and keep them in – with disturbing accuracy and efficiency.

The goal is the same: to enforce their own agenda, to keep power firmly on their side of the court, and to recruit others into doing their work. Narcissists, for example, feed off of external validation, which is why their victims are often referred to as ‘supply’. Void of self-affirming worth, they seek outside supply to feed the ego by choosing attractive, high-status partners who are generous with their affection, trusting, and optimistic. They leech onto these appealing qualities and flaunt themselves by proxy while exploiting ‘weaknesses’ like a tendency to see the good and to trust others.

I want to be careful not to dehumanise (a narcissistic personality is the result of genetics often combined with environmental factors in the formative years, such as trauma or excessive adoration), but it is an unfortunate reality that the preferred coping mechanism of the narcissist is a win-at-all-costs mentality that involves projecting on others and using relationships exclusively for personal gain.

High control groups seek something very similar. Built on a feeble foundation of unconvincing ‘truths’ for which there is little to no evidence or intrinsic value, these groups must propagate, perpetuate, and maintain their power at all costs. They do so through emotional blackmail, gaslighting, propagandistic appeals, and fear of the ‘outside’, keeping members isolated from any threats that would expose the groups for what they are. Much like narcissists who, through triangulation, make use of third parties to smear or discredit their victims, these groups use members to recruit others and to keep them in line. The purpose, in the end, is the same. The power balance must be maintained in their favor.

It may seem a paradox, but those who have been through the wringer once are likely to go through it again if not privy to the methodological way abuse is carried out.

Love bombing

It is said that narcissists promise dreams only to deliver nightmares. If the appeal of involvement were not so powerful, far fewer people would become entangled with abusers.

Both narcissists and cults love bomb in the initial phase. They tailor their messages to our unique needs, they promise us affection, a family, redemption, a beautiful future in paradisiac conditions. They flatter us, and we inevitably lower our guards. We see in them a soul mate, or in the case of an organization, a sense of purpose and a reason to hope in a better life. The God of Love wants us in His embrace. This person, who seems too good to be true, has chosen us. We are honored and humbled. We are hooked. This love is one of two most powerful emotions. The other is fear.

Carrot and stick

Once we are comfortably situated and basking in the warm glow of affection and idealization, we soon learn of the rules we must abide by to maintain this favorable, delicate balance. By the time we have made our emotional investment, we learn that love is conditional. Fall out of line, and the same hand that offered us our dreams on a platter now metes out punishment: the cold shoulder, distance, a marked shift in behavior.

[image error]Abusive groups and individuals entice people with rewards and then prey on their insecurities

Where once we were idealized, we are now devalued. Cognitive dissonance sets in, and we struggle to wrap our heads around this change in light of the person we thought we knew. How could a God of love isolate us from friends and family? How could the person we thought to be our missing half, the person who showered us with so much praise, now discard us? The fault must lie in us.

We ramp up our efforts to please. We play by the rules, and the reward that follows conditions us to do so in the future also. The embrace, literal or metaphorical, that follows an emotionally devastating episode provides relief of euphoric proportions – literally. By alternating love and fear, manipulators forge our bonds with them through trauma and reinforce them, conditioning us to behave in a certain way. When we see in someone the ability to placate our fears, we become disposed to do almost anything to stay in their good graces. This means the systematic erosion of our boundaries.

Boundaries

God disciplines those he loves. The pain that we feel at being cut off from friends and family is a manifestation of love, of our rehabilitation and redirection onto the right path. The crippling self-doubt and loneliness we endure during a phase of neglect is a way of showing us we did something wrong. Anyone who questions the validity of this treatment is a crazy ex, or an apostate. The true ‘victim’ is the one whose authority was challenged.

The effects of this power imbalance, created through feelings of dependency on the abuser to restore our self-confidence and sense of worth, result in a savior-sinner dynamic. We are nothing without them. We are not worthy of them. We need them to save us. And they know what we need to be happy. If we leave, if we fail to submit, there is hell to pay. We are made to feel as though we are the problem. We begin to wonder in every situation whether we are doing the right thing.

Herein lies the root of the problem. Our conditioned response to restore peace, to return to the good times, erases our boundaries. It is the reluctance to establish firm boundaries that predisposes us to suffer cycles of abuse. When we are told, whether by a manipulative partner or group, that our passions, our hobbies, our time, our self-improvement must all be sacrificed to serve, it becomes all too easy for us to question whether anything we ever do will be enough.

By indulging the idea that we are selfish for taking time and attention away from service to an organisation or a person and dedicating it to ourselves, we arrive at a total erasure of the self accompanied by persistent feelings of guilt, self-loathing and shame. If we talk about our feelings, our reactions, and our thresholds, we our putting ourselves first.

This invalidation of our personhood, of everything that constitutes our ‘selves’ separate from our partner or the high control group, is the end result of a gradual erasure of boundaries. It leads us to believe that we can take on an infinite number of responsibilities, that we are weak for being tired, that we can always give more of ourselves, that ‘love covers all sins’, or that if we just prayed enough, just gave more attention, then we would come into their good graces.

Breaking the cycle

When women who are taught that they are an inexhaustible well of emotional resources enter into relationships, it is often with the mentality that they can and should save their partner, that they can endure anything (even physical abuse), and that they must do the above with stoicism, ‘dignity’, and a spirit of forgiveness.

Emotional generosity and labour can only derive from a place of remarkable strength, but at what cost are they expended and, to use a familiar expression, what fruits do they yield? We must face the very unromantic reality that abusive people do not change because we nurture them; sometimes, constant forgiveness has the opposite effect. It reinforces the idea that they can get away with their treatment of us, that we will always be there to stroke their ego. When we are taught to be givers, we learn to never ask for what is rightfully ours, to never ask for help, to bear our burden in silence.

To break free from this sort of thinking, encouraged by both Watchtower and society in general to an extent, we must disabuse ourselves of the notion that we are only worthy of love through what we can endure. Love does not cover bruises and scars, both visible and invisible. Love does not cover degradation. It does not cover negligence. Love for the other must never exceed love for ourselves. And it is not selfish to say this. It is an affirmation of our dignity and worth independent of external validation. It is the opposite of selfishness and narcissism.

As women who have emerged from the vice of a controlling organization, we must use our unique knowledge to recognize and avoid the traps of manipulation and break free once and for all from ‘truths’ and people who promise more than they can – or ever will – deliver.

[image error]

The post Life and Love After Watchtower: Breaking Free from Cycles of Emotional Abuse appeared first on JWsurvey.

Love and Justice in the Face of Wickedness

A Review of Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Public Claims Concerning Child Protection

Editor’s Note: After reviewing this article, you may use the following links to jump directly to the discussion of specific paragraphs.

Paragraph 1 Paragraph 2 Paragraph 3 Paragraph 4 Paragraph 5 Paragraph 6 Paragraph 7 Paragraph 8 Paragraph 9 Paragraph 10 Paragraph 11 Paragraph 12 Paragraph 13 Paragraph 14 Paragraph 15 Paragraph 16 Paragraph 17 Paragraph 18 Paragraph 19 Paragraph 20 Paragraph 21 Paragraph 22 Paragraph 23 | Why don’t Witness Elders Report? | The Two Witness Rule | Elders “Endeavor” to Comply

“Jehovah God hates all forms of wickedness,” says the opening line of the May 2019 study article of the Watchtower. It bears the title “Love and Justice in the Face of Wickedness.”

[image error]

This opening sentence reveals the difficulty in examining religious beliefs and practices, and the language used to support such beliefs. Often, it is subjective. What is wickedness? Who is responsible for its definition?

For the vast majority of humanity, wickedness might be identified with genocide, murder, prejudice, homophobia, or even killing animals. Yet for fundamentalist religions, these societal ills somehow become “God’s will” when defined by the men who lead such religions.

This column reviews the carefully scripted language of the Watchtower article discussed in Jehovah’s Witness congregations worldwide on Sunday, July 14, 2019.

The world has changed rapidly in the past 20 years. Social media, technology, and investigative journalism have merged into a powerful and undeniable force for exposing child abuse and the massive global cover-up by religious and other institutions.

Jehovah’s Witnesses are currently under investigation in multiple countries and jurisdictions for their role in harboring documents which reveal that their elders and senior officials have failed to report child abuse since the inception of their religion.

Paragraph 1

As expected, Watchtower uses its stock child abuse policy claim in the opening paragraph: “Jehovah’s Witnesses abhor child abuse.” Largely, aside from the abusers themselves, this statement is true. But it is immediately followed with “[they] do not tolerate it in the Christian Congregation.”

This is where they mislead the public and their own members.

The very nature of the religion’s infamous “Two-Witness” edict mandates that no congregation action be taken against an accused offender unless there are two corroborating witnesses to the abuse. Any individual of modest intelligence would agree that there are almost never witnesses to child abuse.

By declining to take congregational action against an offender, Witness elders “tolerate” child abuse.

Paragraph 2

“Child abuse is a selfish, unjust act that makes a child feel unsafe and unloved”

This statement might appear correct at first glance, but for those who study the psychology of child abuse, it is a dangerous oversimplification of a complex problem, and it is the reason so many victims of abuse take years or even decades to come forward.

Watchtower’s writers have no training or expertise in this area. They are anonymous men, and the criteria for becoming a Watchtower writer does not include education.

An abused child does not always feel “unsafe and unloved.” In many cases, just the opposite. Abusers create a “special” relationship with their victims where they feel exceptional, loved, and worthy of attention from a respected adult. This is confusing for a young mind, but the clever child molester knows just how to make a child feel that their relationship is somehow normal.

A predator knows that a child may have little knowledge of their sexual organs, but he seeks to find a way to elicit the sensation of pleasure in his victims, creating a very dangerous connection between abuser and victim.

Survivors of abuse are often tormented with guilt for having experienced some measure of pleasure at the hands of an adult abuser. They are not equipped to process the complexity of these interactions. Due to the extreme insularity of Jehovah’s Witnesses, coming forward to a school counselor or other non-Witness authority figure is almost always out of the question.

Similar insularity and complexities are associated with the claims made against deceased pop-star Michael Jackson, whose victims have often been maligned for failing to come forward at the time of the abuse.

As reported in the Guardian in 2005,

“At no stage did any witness or victim report Jackson to the police. Or try to stop the alleged abuse. They went to lawyers, tabloid editors and television reporters, but never to social services.”

Jackson’s victims were much like Witness children- they were insulated, showered with love and attention by their abuser, and reminded by the Jackson organization that confidentiality was not to be broken.

Paragraph 3

“Sadly, child sexual abuse is a worldwide plague, and true Christians have been affected by this plague.”

It is noteworthy that after stating the obvious- that abuse is a global plague, the Watchtower makes an odd confession:

“some professing to be a part of the congregation have succumbed to perverted fleshly desires and have sexually abused children.”

The language used implies that the Jehovah’s Witness (JW) congregation is somehow pure, and only those “professing” to be part of the congregation would fall into the practice of abusing children.

The clever use of “professing” implies that the sexual predators who have abused Jehovah’s Witness children over the decades were somehow never part of the religion- that they only professed to be so.

This language is deceptive and disguises the fact that a great number of JW abusers were quite well-respected, dedicated Witnesses of Jehovah, and were given positions of authority which extended over years, even decades- all while they sexually molested Witness children.

JW Survey reported on a recent case brought to light with the arrest of former elder and Service Overseer Roderick Watkins. Watkins was arrested in 2018 following at least four different police reports filed in Heber Springs Arkansas- not by congregation elders – but by the families of the victims.

Upon further investigation, it was discovered that Watkins was a longtime, prominent elder who served at Brooklyn headquarters during the 1980s, and was subsequently sent to serve as Elder-Pioneer in multiple congregations throughout Missouri, Indiana, and Arkansas. Following our Survey article from May 31, 2019, additional victims have come forward from Indiana, with estimates of sexual abuse ranging from dozens of children, up to one hundred. Only time will tell the full extent of damage caused by this elder.

Given the extensive and lengthy history of Watkins inside the Witness organization, it’s clear he was more than just a “professed” Christian.

Paragraph 4

The identification of child abuse as a “grave sin” might be the understatement of the year. While is seems wholly unnecessary to mention this, it is part of Watchtower’s policy and strategy to convince members that elders have little or no obligation to pursue criminal reporting when allegations of abuse are made.

Paragraph 5 – “A sin against the victim”

“Children must be protected from such a wicked deed…”

Such a true statement should be followed up with recommendations for engagement with law enforcement, professional therapists, and other trained and educated individuals who specialize in the investigation and treatment for victims of abuse, but these recommendations are absent.

Does Watchtower Believe the Victims are Innocent?



[image error]Elders are instructed to call Watchtower’s Legal Department, not the Police.



Paragraph 10

“Handling Instances of Serious Wrongdoing”

“The elders are primarily concerned with maintaining the sanctity of God’s name…They are also deeply concerned with the spiritual welfare of their brothers and sisters in the congregation.”

It cannot be overstated that Witnesses sell their procedures as insurance policies to protect God, listing this objective as the first priority. Placed second is the welfare of congregation members, including victims.

The unusual emphasis on the protection of God’s name seems to beg the question: Why does the organization feel its Creator is unable to defend his own reputation?

Paragraph 11

“In addition, if the wrongdoer is a part of the congregation, elders are concerned with trying to restore him if that is possible.”

While it might seem noble to restore troubled individuals to a congregation, the matter is much more dangerous and complex when dealing with child molesters. Elders are not equipped to counsel or “restore” an individual with a sickness which demands professional attention.

Handling such matters internally places many children at risk, particularly when a repeat offender enters a congregation.

“Their Scriptural counsel can help him to restore his relationship with God, but this is only possible if he is genuinely repentant.”

The issues at play with child abuse are extremely serious. These abusers are not persons dealing with issues such as smoking or petty theft. A child molester frequently repeats his crime, and there are no religious sanctions or counsel which can change the nature of this sickness. It must be handled professionally.

Paragraph 12

“Clearly, elders have a weighty responsibility…For that reason, they act promptly when they receive a report of serious wrongdoing, including child abuse.”

Acting “promptly” means launching an internal investigation, and does not include an immediate call to local authorities.

Paragraph 13

“Do elders comply with secular laws about reporting an allegation of child abuse to the secular authorities? Yes.”

This answer should be changed to “No.”

“In places where such laws exist, elders endeavor to comply with secular laws about reporting allegations of abuse.” [italics ours]

The sentence above clearly modifies the opening sentence, revealing that Jehovah’s Witness elders do not comply with laws in any location where there are not clergy mandated reporting laws in place.

Furthermore, in states where such laws do exist, elders still fail to report, citing the clergy-penitent loophole. As stated earlier, when a religion claims it is their accepted practice to keep allegations of child abuse private, they ignore mandatory reporting laws.

“So when they learn of an allegation, elders immediately seek direction on how they can comply with laws about reporting it.”

To be accurate, this statement should read “elders immediately seek direction on whether they can escape mandatory reporting laws and leave it to a family member or concerned citizen to report.”

Paragraph 14

“Elders assure victims and their parents and others with knowledge of the matter that they are free to report an allegation of abuse to the secular authorities.”

Being free to report a matter to the secular authorities and encouraging a person to contact the authorities are two completely different things.

Under no circumstances are elders advised to contact law enforcement, nor do they advise families to report. They are told to take a passive stance in this regard. Reporting has never been encouraged.

Paragraph 15 – The Two Witness Rule

“In the congregation, before the elders take judicial action, why are at least two witnesses required?”

After describing the parallel system of justice practiced within the Witness organization, Watchtower asks:

[image error]

This is where reality takes a hard-right turn from the publicly stated policy of Jehovah’s Witnesses. The mere suggestion that elders can theoretically contact law enforcement even when there are not two or more witnesses to child abuse is just that: theoretical.

“Does this mean that before an allegation of abuse can be reported to the authorities, two witnesses are required? No.”

Elders are never permitted to contact law enforcement following allegations of child abuse. Their instructions are very specific: They must call Watchtower’s legal department first.

The legal department of Watchtower then advises elders of two things:

Whether they are in a mandatory reporting state or countryWhether there is a clergy-penitent loophole

In every single case, even when there is a mandatory reporting law, elders are not permitted to contact local authorities when they are told they can use clergy privilege as a way to avoid reporting.

In countries such as the United Kingdom, where clergy mandated reporting laws do not yet exist, reports are never made.

Paragraph 16 – Elders “Endeavor” to Comply

“When they learn that someone in the congregation is accused of child abuse, elders endeavor to comply with any secular laws about reporting the matter….” [bold, italics ours]

The use of the word “endeavor” in this Watchtower article has great significance. The anonymous Watchtower writers are driven, not by the desire for accuracy, but by the necessity for obfuscation.

In other words, Watchtower knows it can’t say “Elders always comply with any secular laws about reporting child abuse.” Instead, they must insert the word “endeavor” to avoid the obvious repercussions from lying to the public. By using this word, they can claim that when they fail to report, at least they “endeavored” to do so.

“In addition, the elders remain alert regarding the alleged abuser to protect the congregation from potential danger.”

Jehovah’s Witness elders are in no position to protect even their own congregation from the crimes committed by a pedophile. These men are ill-equipped and untrained to deal with these crimes.

It is doubtful that any elder would attempt to assume the highly technical role of murder investigator- yet when it comes to the crime of child abuse, Witness elders immediately launch their own isolated investigation, which includes delving into the sexual and intimate details surrounding the abuse of a minor child- matters which should be left to the police.

If a man commits murder, the elders will disfellowship such a man on the basis of his conviction by secular authorities, whom they trust have done a thorough investigation of the murder, arriving at a guilty conviction. This raises the question, if Jehovah’s Witnesses accept the civil authorities’ conviction on a murder charge, why would Witnesses need to launch their own private investigation of child sexual abuse?

Shouldn’t they accept the decision of the civil authorities, who have spent most of their lives studying and executing investigations into child abuse?

The answer to this question should leave the public stunned and shocked:

Jehovah’s Witnesses investigate child abuse allegations to determine whether the child was a willing participant in the sexual acts.

As disturbing as this sounds, it is a solid reality which reveals that Witnesses consider both baptized and unbaptized minors as fully capable of having consensual sexual affairs with grown adults, and they hold these children accountable for their “sins.”

My first experience with disfellowshipping came in the 1980s, when a teenage girl in my congregation was disfellowshipped for having sex with the husband of a local Witness woman. She was treated harshly, as a willing participant in the act of coercing and seducing a minor child, and paid dearly as a victim of this pedophile. She was branded a fornicator, with no consideration for the manner in which she was seduced and abused.

The man was sentenced to a heavy prison term, but only after the victim’s family notified the authorities. The elders had no intention of involving the police, as is their policy to this day.

Paragraph 17

“What is the role of the judicial committee?”

“The elders do not interfere with law enforcement; they leave criminal matters to the secular authorities.”

Jehovah’s Witness elders have been judged guilty of interfering with law enforcement for decades. As recently as 2018, the Attorney General for Delaware imposed a fine of $10,000 per elder for failure to report the abuse of a 14-year-old baptized Witness boy who attended the Laurel Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Watchtower’s legal team attempted to save their reputation by signing an out-of-court settlement agreement with Delaware, hoping that the public would not discover their concession, which took place immediately before the scheduled trial.

JW Survey obtained the settlement agreement with the cooperation of State Government officials.

In September 2018, a Montana jury found Jehovah’s Witnesses guilty of obstructing Montana’s mandatory abuse reporting statutes and awarded the victim 35 million dollars. Four million was awarded for negligence, with the additional 31 million awarded for intentional malice in non-compliance with the law.

To claim that elders do not interfere with law enforcement is a blatant and significant lie.

Paragraph 18

“If he is repentant, he may remain in the congregation. However, the elders will inform him that he may never qualify to receive any congregation privileges or to serve in any position of responsibility in the congregation.” [bold, italics ours]

When elders take on the role of spiritual policemen of the congregation, they tread on very dangerous ground.

First, a child abuser will never be disfellowshipped from any congregation without a second witness to the crime- and there is almost never a second witness.

When accusations are made, they are effectively not taken seriously. Police are never called, and without corroborating evidence, elders tell congregation members and victims to “leave the matter in Jehovah’s hands.”

Abusers remain in the congregation, and at best, a handful of parents might be warned about an individual who was found guilty of child abuse- not by civil authorities, but by congregation elders. Hence, this situation is quite rare.

Another matter of concern is the idea that serial pedophiles can “repent” and may be given responsibility in the congregation at a future time.

The use of the term “may” indicates the reality that elders have little understanding of the psychological sickness of pedophilia, and would consider reappointing a man after their unqualified elders come to a decision that this person is no longer a danger to children.

Pedophiles will always be a danger to children.

Paragraph 19

“Who have the responsibility to protect children from harm? Parents do.”

This statement completely bypasses the issue at hand. The cornerstone issue is obedience to the law, which states that members of clergy have the obligation to report child abuse to the police.

Watchtower is effectively changing the subject, diverting attention from the obligation of elders to comply with mandatory reporting laws.

Child abuse cases are deeply complex, and in some cases involve parents or step-parents, as well as siblings of the victims.

Placing the expectation of reporting on parents completely ignores these complexities. For example, the spouse of an abuser is often frozen in their tracks- unable to report that their spouse has abused a child. Why? Because that spouse may be financially dependent on their mate- or worse, they may fear for their own safety.

This is why members of clergy are generally required to report all allegations of abuse. Their separation from the family should be unbiased, and if they respect “Caesar’s law”- they must report.

Paragraph 20

“First, educate yourself about abuse.”

This is good advice- except that the education should not come from Watchtower publications. Page 12 of this Watchtower article features all of the information deemed by Jehovah’s Witness leaders as “education.”

Sadly, none of these resources have been written by anyone with professional training. It is a hodge-podge collection of Watchtower-only material, much of which is outdated even by Witness standards.

Paragraph 21

“Maintain good communication with your children.”

This is good advice. What should be added to this is “If your child reveals that someone touched them in a sexual manner, contact the authorities immediately”- and not local elders.

Paragraph 22

“Educate your children.”

Again, this is a good suggestion. However, it is followed by:

“Use the information that God’s organization has provided on how to protect your children.”

Not once does this Watchtower article recommend that parents avail themselves of professional resources, counseling, or meeting with law enforcement officials. By placing such devoted trust in the Watchtower organization, parents are trusting an organization found guilty of covering up decades of child abuse.

The cover-up, it is said, is worse than the crime itself.

Paragraph 23

“As Jehovah’s Witnesses, we view child sexual abuse as a gross sin and a wicked deed…our congregations do not shield perpetrators of abuse from the consequences of their sins.”

The final paragraph sums up the emphasis Jehovah’s Witnesses place on sin, as opposed to crime. While we do not deny religious organizations the right to declare certain behaviors as sinful, they do not have the right to obstruct justice by advising elders not to report allegations of child abuse to the authorities.

Love and Justice in the Face of Wickedness

While sexual predation and evil exist in our world, we are a global village with a collective obligation to take action against any who would harm our children.

The complexity and nature of child abuse require that it be investigated by trained professionals – skilled women and men who care deeply for children.

If you or a family member has been abused by someone inside or out of the Jehovah’s Witness organization, please seek immediate assistance from law enforcement and professional counselors, and be sure to obtain legal representation.

While some might feel apprehensive about asking for legal advice, there is nothing to fear. Attorneys have been able to obtain settlements for survivors of abuse, and those funds help pay for the medical bills and counseling which can bring a survivor back to life.

Love requires we protect our children; justice demands it.

[image error]

Additional resources:

Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Secret Elder’s Manual

U.S. Government Child Welfare Website & Resources

The Child Victims Act

The Atlantic Reports: The Secret Database of Child Molesters

**Contact an attorney for support and legal advice

[image error]

The post Love and Justice in the Face of Wickedness appeared first on JWsurvey.

New York Law Means Justice for All: The Child Victims Act

On February 14, 2019, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo delivered a powerful speech at the New York Daily News headquarters, moments before signing what might be the most significant piece of legislation involving survivors of child abuse to date.

The legislation has become known as the Child Victims Act.

As stated by New York’s Government Web Site, this new law:

[image error]



Provides that the statute of limitations for criminal prosecution of a sexual offense committed against a child shall not begin to run until the child turns 23 years of age.



Provides that a civil action for conduct constituting a sexual offense against a child shall be brought before the child turns 55 years of age.



Revives previously barred actions related to sexual abuse of children.



Grants civil trial preference to such actions.



Eliminates the notice of claim requirements for such actions when the action is brought against a municipality, the state or a school district.



Requires judicial training relating to child abuse and the establishment of rules relating to civil actions brought for sexual offenses committed against children.

These stipulations represent landmark changes to New York laws protecting minors, which previously placed unrealistic limits on the time given for victims to come forward and report abuse, or file a civil lawsuit seeking justice.

Experts in the field now recognize that it may take 25, 30, 35 years or even longer before a victim of childhood abuse is able to disclose the crimes committed against them.

According to veteran Psychotherapist Beverly Engel,

“Many of us are familiar with the reasons why children do not come forward to report child sexual abuse, but many don’t understand why adults continue to carry this secret, sometimes to their graves.” – from the article Why Adult Victims of Childhood Sexual Abuse Don’t Disclose, Psychology Today.

Thanks to brilliant investigative reporting of the past 20 years, journalists have given a voice to survivors, while exposing the corrupt and flawed organizations which so often suppressed reports of abuse, or protected these pedophiles.

This collective voice has empowered thousands to come forward seeking justice- not just for themselves- but for the vast number of at-risk children left unprotected because of organizational secrecy and lack of respect for mandatory reporting laws.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo



Why Significant for Jehovah’s Witnesses?

In addition to extending the age for reporting abuse both criminally and civilly, the most potent legislative change gives all abuse survivors the opportunity to seek help and representation even if they were previously barred due to the Statute of Limitations.

The new law is commonly referred to as a “Window to Justice” – a term which refers to the time period survivors now have to file charges or civil lawsuits in the State of New York. For New York, the window is one year, and the clock begins ticking from August 14, 2019, and will run through July 2020.

While civil cases often take several years to process and resolve, as long as the initial filing takes place within the specified window, victims who file can be assured that they will see their day in court.

For the majority of survivors of abuse, the new law is a welcome legal tool, but only for citizens of New York State. However, for Jehovah’s Witness victims, the legislation is far more significant. The Witness organization is headquartered in New York, which means that any and all cases from all 50 States are eligible where the Watchtower Organization is a defendant.

The key to filing such cases revolves around Watchtower’s decades-old policy in which allegations of sexual abuse are handled internally as matters of “sin”- but are rarely if ever reported to law enforcement.

While Jehovah’s Witnesses publicly claim to abide by and follow mandatory reporting statutes, they deliberately obstruct justice by claiming that clergy-penitent privilege applies to nearly every allegation of abuse reported.

The distortion, or corruption of clergy privilege has effectively become a JW corporate policy directed at self-preservation rather than child-preservation. Such procedures hinder trained law enforcement experts from addressing these crimes.

The Child Victims Act permits victims of abuse to hold accountable the institutions which intensified their injuries through negligence and malice.

A driving factor in the exposure of these flawed policies has been the heroic and tireless efforts of investigating and reporting journalists, beginning with the Catholic Church inquiries.

True Journalism Matters

At the outset of Governor Cuomo’s February speech at the Daily News headquarters, he stated:

“Why are we at the Daily News today? Because one lesson is that true journalism still matters. It’s not enough to have facts and righteousness on your side. If one is trying to take on major institutions, and challenge the status quo, and raise an ugly reality, the first step is still exposure…”

“The first step is to tell the truth, that citizens must understand the problem, and it’s the citizens that must demand change before the political process will act. Theoretically, traditionally…that is the role of journalists: “

“To reveal the facts, to paint the picture, to tell the truth, even when ugly, even when uncomfortable, to comfort the afflicted and to afflict the comfortable, to challenge the abuse of big institutions.”

Cuomo went on to explain how the Daily News started the drumbeat for justice by writing 252 articles on the Child Victims Act since 2009, including 223 articles and 29 editorials.

“That my friends is real journalism, and that’s how we make change,” said Cuomo.

Since 2012, JW Survey has reported on child abuse within the Jehovah’s Witness organization, more than any other subject matter.

If you are a victim, what can you do?

For those who have been affected by the cruel act of child abuse, it may take decades or longer to heal from the wounds inflicted during childhood. There are many pathways to recovery, and there is no one-size-fits-all solution.

If you are at the point in your life where you wish to come to terms with your abuse, the Child Victims Act might prove to be just what is needed.

If you choose to speak to a qualified, competent attorney, rest assured they will help guide you through the process with courtesy, kindness, and professionalism. Coming forward may seem overwhelming at first, but the resources available now are more dependable than ever.

Holding institutions accountable for failure to report abuse sends a strong message: You can’t maintain child protection policies, then fail to protect children.

The welfare of children far outweighs the reputation and interests of global corporations like Jehovah’s Witnesses.

The Child Victims Act will make sure of that.

[image error]

Additional Resources:

New York Senate Bill S2440

Mandatory Child Abuse Reporting Laws- by State

Child USA

CNN: Report on Child Victims Act

[image error]

The post New York Law Means Justice for All: The Child Victims Act appeared first on JWsurvey.