Various individuals, courts and the media around the world have raised concerns about the manner in which cases of child sexual abuse are handled when they occur in congregations of Jehovah's Witnesses. An independent 2009 study in Norway was critical of how Jehovah's Witnesses dealt with cases of child sexual abuse but stated that there is no indication that the rate of sexual abuse among Jehovah's Witnesses is higher than that found in general society. The organization officially "abhors" child sexual abuse, and states that "the incidence of this crime among Jehovah's Witnesses is rare."
The Society's child abuse policies have been published in Jehovah's Witnesses' publications, although more specific guidelines are only made available to elders, or on request. Press releases issued by the Watch Tower Society's Office of Public Information state that if a person accused of molestation repeatedly denies the charges of his victim, and there is no other witness to the incident, "the elders cannot take action within the congregation at that time", but would report to authorities if required by local laws. In 2015, it was disclosed that the Australia Branch of Jehovah's Witnesses had records of 1,006 alleged perpetrators of child sexual abuse, relating to more than 1,800 victims since 1950, none of which were reported to police by the church.
Some media and courts have reported that Jehovah's Witnesses employ organizational policies, which the group says are "Bible-based", that make the reporting of sexual abuse difficult for members. Some victims of sexual abuse have said that they were ordered by local elders to maintain silence to avoid embarrassment to both the accused and the organization. Members are told that they have every right to report crimes to secular authorities separately to reporting the "sin" to congregation elders.
In 2002, Jehovah's Witnesses' Office of Public Information published its policy for elders to report allegations of child abuse to the authorities only where required by law to do so, even if there was only one witness. The organization says that individuals known to have sexually abused a child are generally prohibited from holding any position of responsibility, and that, unless considered by the congregation elders to demonstrate repentance, such a person is typically disfellowshipped.
In 2016 a UK judge upheld a ruling against the Jehovah's Witnesses for failing to protect a victim of child sexual abuse, and the supreme court rejected an attempt by the Watch Tower Society to block a Charity Commission inquiry into how the organisation's charity handles allegations of abuse. This was the culmination of two years of legal proceedings in five different courts and tribunals. The commission's attorney said that "WTBTS has at every stage relentlessly challenged the legal basis and scope of the Charity Commission's inquiry".
Video Jehovah's Witnesses' handling of child sex abuse
Policies
Advice to members
The Watch Tower Society has published information on how to protect children from sexual molestation, such as the articles, Protect Your Children in the October 8, 1993 edition of Awake!, Help Your Children to Thrive in Awake! of August 8, 1997, the series, Keep Your Children Safe, in the October 2007 edition of Awake!, and in the book, Learn from the Great Teacher. These articles focus on prevention, and do not specifically state that a child or its parents should contact the police in the event of molestation. They also suggest that, in some countries, "the legal system may offer little hope of successful prosecution." Whether or not a victim seeks professional treatment from psychiatrists, psychologists or therapists is suggested as being the personal decision of the victim (or the parents), but such ones are warned to "make sure that any such professional will respect your religious views."
'Two witness rule'
Jehovah's Witnesses' congregational judicial policies require the testimony of two material witnesses to establish a perpetrator's serious sin in the absence of confession. The organization considers this policy to be a protection against malicious accusations of sexual assault. The Society maintains that this two-witness policy is applied solely to congregational discipline and has no bearing on whether a crime is reported to the authorities in countries where this is mandatory.
The Society states that it is not necessary for both witnesses to have observed the same instance of child molestation to establish guilt. Since 1991, statements by two victims of separate incidents by the same perpetrator may be deemed sufficient to take action and impose internal sanctions. However, critics argue that such an approach to determining guilt overlooks the seriousness of the initial abuse, and effectively allows a pedophile to go unpunished until he or she has been caught abusing two or more different victims. DNA evidence, medical reports, or information from forensic experts or police that proves sexual abuse may possibly be accepted as a valid "second witness", however critics argue that, without mandatory reporting for all accusations of abuse regardless of the local laws, such evidence could remain undetected.
In cases where there is only one eye-witness--the victim--to an allegation of child abuse, elders may monitor the accused individual closely, or even suspend any conspicuous congregation duties--but only if there is evidence based on the testimony of more than one witness to suggest that the alleged perpetrator has abused children. In some instances where there is only one witness to molestation, elders may discreetly inform parents in a congregation not to allow their children to spend time with someone accused of child abuse provided such a person has been deemed a "predator" by the local branch office based on the elders' observations.
Questioning the victim
In instances of a child reporting abuse, elders are instructed to investigate "every" allegation of child sexual abuse, questioning the victim if necessary, with elders' immediate concern to do what they reasonably can to help parents to protect their children from further abuse. Elders are also instructed that they are only "spiritual shepherds" whose aim should be to provide spiritual assistance and encouragement to victims of child sexual abuse and their families, without taking on a role similar to that of a mental health professional or therapist. A Watch Tower Society representative testified that the organization does not consider itself responsible for the "physical protection" of children in the community.
Victims of abuse are required to provide details of their abuse to a group of male elders, which may cause additional trauma. Testimony based on repressed memories is not considered reliable enough to form the basis for internal action. Elders are encouraged to treat persons reporting this type of memory with kindness, but not to pursue the case unless further proof is found. Abuse victims may be required to face their abuser to make an accusation, as stated on the Society's official website: "If the accused denies the charge, the two elders may arrange for him and the victim to restate their position in each other's presence, with elders also there."
Repentance and Discipline
If allegations of child abuse satisfy the organization's religious tenets, an internal judicial committee is formed, and the accused individual may potentially be relieved of positions of responsibility in the congregation. Anyone found to have sexually molested a child, based upon the criteria established by the organization, and deemed by the elders to not demonstrate sufficient repentance is disfellowshipped from the congregation and shunned.
The elders are instructed to gauge the abuser's repentance based upon their subsequent visible support of congregation activities, such as attending congregation meetings, and actively supporting the denomination's door-to-door work. The sustained participation in the group's activities has resulted in sexual predators remaining in good standing in the congregation.
Reproof and restrictions
An abuser who is judged repentant by a committee of elders is given a 'public reproof', wherein it is announced to the congregation that the named individual "has been reproved", though the nature of their crime is not stated. Such a person is automatically debarred from serving in any appointed position in the congregation, however privileges can be restored in the future depending on whether he or she is deemed by the branch office to be a "known molester". A few weeks later, a talk may be given to the congregation, discussing the type of sin and the need to be on guard against it, but the reproved individual is not named in connection with this talk. It is the intention that the talk about the type of sin, and the previously made announcement of reproof, should allow other congregation members to interpret what type of sin had been committed. When reprimanded, sex offenders may not offer public prayers, read paragraphs during congregation studies, or be given even minor responsibilities in the congregation, such as handling microphones or distributing literature in the Kingdom Hall.
Sex offenders are still permitted to participate in the congregation's house-to-house preaching. According to the Watch Tower Society's spokesperson, J. R. Brown, such ones are only allowed to preach when accompanied by a responsible adult. In 2016, a convicted pedophile was filmed going door-to-door for the denomination.
For a considerable period of time, a reproved individual is not permitted to participate in meetings by commenting in group discussions or making presentations from the platform. A 1997 issue of The Watchtower article stated: "For the protection of our children, a man known to have been a child molester does not qualify for a responsible position in the congregation. Moreover, he cannot be a pioneer or serve in any other special, full-time service." Elders are advised to give "kindly cautions" to the abuser in regards to "not [being] alone with children," "refrain[ing] from holding children or displaying other forms of affection for them," and "not allowing children (other than his own) to spend the night in his home, not working in field service with a child, not cultivating friendships with children, and the like."
Former child molesters, including those who molested children before becoming Jehovah's Witnesses, those eventually reinstated into the congregation after being disfellowshipped, and those who were deemed repentant, are subject to a number of restrictions. Commenting on the effect of these restrictions, Jehovah's Witnesses' legal representative, Mario Moreno, stated that these restrictions alert members that the individual "lacks spiritual maturity." 'Privileges' may be restored to known child sex offenders if "considerable time has passed," at the discretion of local elders.
In 1995, elders were instructed that if a former child abuser moved from their congregation to another, they must send a letter to the body of elders in the new congregation outlining the offender's background and whether the abuser is still subject to 'restricted privileges'. However the 1997 Letter of Introduction of Jonathan Kendrick who was later convicted for child abuse failed to mention his confession of abuse, it even stated that 'he had helped young ones from veering off course.'
Positions of responsibility
The January 1, 1997 issue of The Watchtower stated, "For the protection of our children, a man known to have been a child molester does not qualify for a responsible position in the congregation. Moreover, he cannot be a pioneer or serve in any other special, full-time service." Whether or not a child abuser is deemed a "known molester" is left to the discretion of the local branch. The October 1, 2012 letter to elders states, "the branch office, not the local body of elders, determines whether one who has sexually abused a child is considered a known child molester" and adds, "It cannot be said in every case that one who has sexually abused a child could never qualify for privileges of service in the congregation."
Maps Jehovah's Witnesses' handling of child sex abuse
Cases of alleged abuse are reported to secular authorities if required by local laws or as instructed by the local branch office. A press release issued in 2002 by Jehovah's Witnesses' Office of Public Information stated: "In addition to making a report to the branch office, the elders may be required by law to report even uncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations to the authorities. If so, the elders receive proper legal direction to ensure that they comply with the law." The Watchtower has outlined the following policy: "Depending on the law of the land where he lives, the molester may well have to serve a prison term or face other sanctions from the State. The congregation will not protect him from this." A 2002 memo to all congregations stated: "Our position is that secular authorities deal with crime while elders deal with sin." Even where there is no mandatory reporting requirement, victims or others having knowledge of an incident of sexual abuse must not be discouraged from reporting it.
The New York Times commented:
The shape of the scandal [in Jehovah's Witnesses] is far different than in the Catholic church, where most of the people accused of abuse are priests and a vast majority of the victims were boys and young men. In the Jehovah's Witnesses, where congregations are often collections of extended families and church elders are chosen from among the laypeople, some of those accused are elders, but most are congregation members. The victims who have stepped forward are mostly girls and young women, and many accusations involve incest.
In 2008, the Watch Tower Society of Britain, in discussions with the UK Charities Commission, undertook to produce a Child Protection Policy and update its procedures to bring them into line with other religious and secular bodies.
Cover-up allegations
In some cases, members of Jehovah's Witnesses have been prevented or deterred from reporting child molestation to civil authorities. Particularly since around 2000, the Jehovah's Witnesses organization has been accused of covering up cases of child molestation committed by its members. In February 2001, Christianity Today printed an article reporting allegations that Jehovah's Witnesses' policies made reporting sexual abuse difficult for members, and did not conform to typical treatment of such cases. The article also included a response by representatives of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Australian Royal Commission heard that an elder discouraged an abuse victim from going to the police by saying, "Do you really want to drag Jehovah's name through the mud?" In Ireland in 2016, two Jehovah's Witness elders were removed from their positions as punishment for reporting a child molester to the police after the London Branch legal department told them not to.
The BBC reported allegations of a cover-up in July 2002, in an episode of Panorama entitled "Suffer the Little Children". The report revealed that the headquarters of Jehovah's Witnesses, the Watch Tower Society, requires all congregations to submit details of child abuse allegations and maintains an internal database on all cases of child abuse reported to them. It described one case where a child came forward to the elders of her congregation to report sexual abuse by her father, but was sent home, despite their having known for three years that her father was an abuser. When the girl eventually went to the police, her father was convicted and sentenced to five years in prison.
According to Witness spokesman J. R. Brown, Jehovah's Witnesses are not required to report crimes to elders before calling civil authorities. Victims and their families are free to call police, he said, although some don't choose to. The Watch Tower Society maintains a policy with no explicit requirement for elders to report all child abuse cases where such is not required by law. Elders are instructed to "leave matters in Jehovah's hands" if an abuser denies the accusations and there is no second witness available.
2014 investigations in the United Kingdom
In 2013 at the Jehovah's Witnesses congregation of Moston, Manchester, England, church elder and convicted paedophile Jonathan Rose, following his completion of a nine-month jail sentence for paedophile offences, was allowed in a series of a public meetings to cross-examine the children he had molested. Rose was finally 'disfellowshipped' after complaints to the police and the Charity Commission for England and Wales.
In a separate incident, prior to the trial and conviction for rape and sexual assault in June 2014 of Mark Sewell, an elder of the congregation in Barry, Wales, the church conducted an internal investigation of the allegations, where the women and children had to face their alleged abuser in "judicial committee" hearings organised by their church. A child victim, for whom Sewell was later convicted of rape, alleged that she was questioned closely by church elders when she came forward years after the attack, and was required to describe the incident to them in intimate detail, with Sewell present, but her claims were dismissed by the committee and not taken to the police for further investigation. In June Sewell was jailed for fourteen years for the rape and sexual abuse of parishioners, including children. All but one of Sewell's fellow elders who investigated claims against him, declined to give evidence in his Crown Court trial. They also provided no assistance to police and prosecutors in their investigation, despite "dis-fellowshipping" Sewell 20 years previously, and destroyed evidence showing claims against Sewell dating back more than 20 years. In June 2014, Sewell was sentenced to fourteen years in prison for eight sex offenses; in December 2014 he appealed unsuccessfully for reduction of his sentence.
In June and July 2014, the Charity Commission for England and Wales announced that it was formally investigating both the Moston and Barry congregations over their child protection policies, to be conducted independently of two statutory inquiries opened the previous month into Jehovah's Witnesses charities in relation to issues including child protection. The Charity Commission noted that it had "serious concerns" about the Manchester New Moston Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, having most recently opened a case into it in December 2013. The Watch Tower Society subsequently sought judicial review of the Charity Commission's enquiry; this was denied on 12 December 2014, on the grounds that the Charities Act 2011 required all other legal avenues to be exhausted prior to application for judicial review. Subsequent appeals against the investigation by the New Moston Congregation and the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Britain to the Charity Commission's tribunal were rejected in April 2015.
In two separate cases in England in December 2014, a Jehovah's Witness in Bournemouth and a Jehovah's Witness elder from Plymouth were convicted and sentenced for the sexual abuse of children.
2015 Australian royal commission
The handling of child sexual abuse cases in Australia by Jehovah's Witnesses was examined by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. The commission was established by the federal government in 2013 to investigate how institutions such as schools, churches, sports clubs and government organizations have responded to allegations and instances of child sexual abuse. In July and August 2015 it held a series of public hearings to present the accounts of two female sex abuse victims and also question seven elders and a circuit overseer associated with the congregations where the abuse took place. The commission also questioned two senior members of the Watch Tower Society Australian branch as well as Geoffrey Jackson, a member of the New York-based Governing Body.
In opening submissions by senior counsel assisting the commission, Jehovah's Witnesses was described as a tightly controlled, rule-bound organization that seeks to keep its members in relative isolation from the rest of society. The group was said to be "preoccupied with sin and sinning" and that it operated a judicial system in which a group of men "stand in judgement over their fellow men, women and children on every aspect of their lives".
The hearing was told that in response to a summons issued by the commission, the Watch Tower Society had produced 5000 documents including 1006 case files relating to allegations of child sexual abuse made against members of the Jehovah's Witnesses church in Australia since 1950--each file for a different alleged perpetrator of child sexual abuse. The documents showed that of those alleged perpetrators, "not one was reported by the Church to secular authorities". The commission was told: "This suggests that it is the practice of the Jehovah's Witness Church to retain information regarding child sexual abuse offences but not to report allegations of child sexual abuse to the police or other relevant authorities." Officers of the Royal Commission "referred information in relation to 514 alleged perpetrators to police", adding that "of the remaining 492 alleged perpetrators identified in the case files, officers at the Royal Commission determined that there was either insufficient evidence in the case files to warrant referring matters to police or that the matters had already come to the attention of police".
An elder from the Australian branch office said that when not required by law to report abuse allegations to authorities, the church left the decision to report to authorities with the victim and his or her family. The commission found that the Watch Tower Society legal department routinely provided incorrect information to elders based on an incorrect understanding about what constitutes a legal obligation to report crimes in Australia. In March 2017, the Royal Commission reported that since its initial 2015 investigation, the Watch Tower Society reported 15 of the 17 allegations it received from members to authorities, indicating that the remaining two were not reported at the request of adult survivors of historical abuse.
In its report, the Australian royal commission concluded, "We do not consider the Jehovah's Witness organisation to be an organisation which responds adequately to child sexual abuse." It added that, "the organisation's retention and continued application of policies such as the two witness rule in cases of child sexual abuse shows a serious lack of understanding of the nature of child sexual abuse."
Lawsuits
In a press release dated November 21, 2007, Jehovah's Witnesses' Office of Public Information stated:
In the United States, over 80,000 elders currently serve in over 12,300 congregations ... During the last 100 years, only eleven elders have been sued for child abuse in thirteen lawsuits filed in the United States; In seven of these lawsuits against the elders, accusations against the Watchtower Society itself were dismissed by the courts.
In 2004, a Canadian court awarded CAD$5000 to a plaintiff for the negligence of an elder who failed to follow the official policy of the church. However, the court dismissed charges against the Watch Tower Society, and directed the plaintiff to pay the Watch Tower Society's legal fees amounting to CAD$142,000.
In 2007 during a trial motion in the Napa, California court against the Watchtower Society, victims' lawyers convinced the court that 'ecclesiastical privilege' does not supersede the legal obligation of clergy to report child sex abuse to secular authorities. The Watchtower Society paid an undisclosed amount without admitting wrongdoing in an out-of-court settlement with 16 unnamed victims of alleged sexual abuse within the group. According to court documents obtained by NBC News, one plaintiff was awarded over US$780,000. The Press-Enterprise newspaper reported in 2008 that subpoenaed elders declined to testify against accused penitents, citing the confidentiality of penitent-clergy privilege. However the elders did not object to testifying once the court found that "the privilege of penitential communication did not apply".
In June 2012 the Superior Court of Alameda, California, ordered the Watch Tower Society to pay US$21 million in punitive damages, in addition to compensatory damages, holding that the Society's policy to not disclose child abuse history of a member to parents in the congregation or to report abuse to authorities contributed to the sexual abuse of a nine-year-old girl. The court held that congregation elders, following the policies of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, contributed to the abuse. It held that the elders as agents of the Watch Tower Society failed to disclose to other parents regarding the confession of the molester who inappropriately touched his step daughter, adding that the degree of reprehensibility was of "medium range". Based on the ratio between the compensatory and punitive damages, the court subsequently reduced the Watch Tower Society's total liability to US$10 million, Lawyers for the Society appealed the ruling, calling the decision "unprecedented" and denying responsibility for abuse. In April 2015, the appeal court reversed punitive damages finding that the congregation had no duty to warn the parents or members about the child abuse history of other members. However, the court concluded that the Watchtower Society was negligent in preventing the abuse and upheld the trial court's decision on compensatory damages amounting to US$2.8 million to be paid by Watchtower Society and the congregation. The Watchtower society appealed against the negligence verdict to the supreme court of California and the case was settled for an undisclosed amount during appeal.
In October 2014, a case was heard in San Diego, California about the sexual abuse of Jose Lopez by Gonzalo Campos. Witness elders were aware that Campos had confessed to the abuse of at least one other child in 1982, but in 1986 they recommended Campos as an instructor to Lopez. Campos moved to another congregation in 1987 and became an elder in 1993. Campos later confessed to abusing at least eight children between 1982 and 1995, and subsequently fled to Mexico. For failing to protect Lopez from a known offender and for its subsequent refusal to co-operate with the court, the Watch Tower Society was ordered to pay US$13.5 million to the plaintiff. The Watch Tower Society appealed the ruling. The appeal court vacated the judgment, granting that lesser sanctions might compel the Watchtower Society of New York to comply with the court's requirements. While the document discovery dispute was still in progress the case was settled out of court in January 2018. In a separate case involving another victim of Gonzalo Campos, the Watchtower Society produced redacted copies of documents related to child sexual abuse in the United States from 1997 until 2001. The Watchtower Society asserted that it had no access to more recent documents held by the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, a separate subsidiary of the Watch Tower Society. The court sanctioned Watchtower $4,000 for each day that it did not submit the documents. Watchtower unsuccessfully appealed against the ruling, and the court of appeals directed Watchtower to pay fines (US$48,000 by the time of appeal) and submit to the court order. The case was settled out of court in February 2018. The law firm representing Lopez filed similar cases in Connecticut, Vermont, California, Oregon and New Mexico.
In the United Kingdom in June 2015, the High Court of Justice in London awarded damages of £275,000 to a woman known only as 'A' because Jehovah's Witnesses failed to protect her from a known pedophile, Peter Stewart. 'A' alleged Stewart abused her from the age of four and threatened that she would be "damned as a sinner" if she told anyone about the abuse. The elders became aware of the abuse in 1990 and announced that Stewart had been given a disciplinary reproof without specifying the reason. The abuse ended only when Stewart was arrested for offenses against another child in 1994. The court held that the elders failed to adequately warn the members of the congregation about their knowledge of past abuse by Stewart. The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Britain sought several times to appeal against the judgement, but the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, holding "fair just and reasonable" to order the organization to pay the awarded damages, refused permission to appeal and upheld the ruling to pay to the victim £275,000 in compensation, in addition to the legal costs of the case, estimated at approximately £1 million.
On September 15, 2017 an application was filed in the Superior Court of Quebec for a class action lawsuit on behalf of victims of sexual abuse by a Jehovah's Witness. Three corporations of Jehovah's Witnesses are named as defendants: The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Canada, The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania and The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. A Calgary, Alberta law firm subsequently began an investigation for a national class action lawsuit against the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Canada for cases related to child sexual abuse.
See also
- Child sexual abuse
- Criticism of Jehovah's Witnesses
- Religious abuse
- Roman Catholic sex abuse cases
- Scouting sex abuse cases
- Silentlambs
References
External links
Neutral
- Jehovah's Witness Palmer Congregation Sexual Abuse Investigation FaithLeaks
Critical
- Article of Erica Rodriguez's suit
- Transcript of an interview with an abuse victim
Supportive
- Jehovah's Witnesses Official Media Web Site at the Wayback Machine (archived June 12, 2010):
-
- "Jehovah's Witnesses care for victims of child abuse" (November 21, 2007) at the Wayback Machine (archived June 12, 2010)
- "Jehovah's Witnesses and Child Protection" at the Wayback Machine (archived June 12, 2010)
- "Inquiries on Child Abuse--Our Response" at the Wayback Machine (archived June 12, 2010) (video)
- "Dealing with Child Abuse--Our Policy" at the Wayback Machine (archived June 12, 2010) (video)
- Letter from Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia to all bodies of elders re child abuse, October 1, 2012. Submitted to Victoria Parliament Inquiry into the Handling of Child Abuse by Religious and Other Organisations, April 9, 2013.
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments