Patiently waiting for Truth

I don't think it's about retaining the position, but more about fear of slandering the person. When there is notoriety surrounding someone in a responsible position then that position is usually removed. 
 
Yes, that is was what I was trying to imply.

:))) is this "sexism" ?

Nobody ever thinks about such things on social media. The actual news media has long since set the example of relaying accusation as though it were conviction.
Nobody ever thinks of such things. Until it happens to them. Then they think of it.

You don't know JTR like we do, he would totally understand.

@Anna I think enough facts have been proven Earthwide against the GB and the CCJW / Watchtower. 
The Two Witness Rule was used as an excuse not to believe Children when they reported CSA to parents and / or Elders. 
I haven't judged JTR and I won't, but everyone has to keep an open mind about everyone else. There are no 'really nice guys or gals'. We are all sinners. Hence I trust no one. The scripture is "Continue putting up with one another.. "  but it doesn't say trust. 
Quote Anna (regarding the Two Witness Rule ) "Not just CSA, but any accusation, to do with anything." 
As I understand it, Brothers and Sisters that have spent the night in the same building together have been accused of sexual misconduct BUT without any witnesses.. I'm sure there was a topic on that. 
All off topic and i hope JTR gets judged fairly and honestly. 

Thinking seems not to be thinking. And if they are sooooo very upset and disgusted then why are they even commenting or reading it ?
None of us have judged James and I don't think any of us will.  But in some ways things have been put into perspective here. ......................
@Anna  I think the ARC case you quoted must be where I got that information from, Thank you.
However he did say, at first, that he would not report murder. 
" THE CHAIR:   Q.   If a different crime, to take the most  extreme, murder.  If you were told that a member of the congregation had killed someone else, would you report that  to the police? 
 A.   We would encourage the person to do that. 
 Q.   Would you do it yourself? 
 A.   No.  I would try very hard not to - not that I would  try very hard not to, but I would encourage the person continually to do that.  That's a decision they need to make. "
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is my opinion that when a person is put on the spot like that, then what they first say is the truth from their standpoint. In my opinion, he meant, he would not report it. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 

You are right about one thing, these discussions should be moved to a topic of its own, as 4jah2me suggested, because none of us are now actually discussing JTR  (except for you). There was one comment with information about his current status, as all had been wondering what had happened to him, some fearing him dead. You may not have noticed, but most were quite fond of him and expressed sympathies. But now, this is no longer a thread discussing JTR, so it should be split into another thread. Unfortunately I don't know how to do that. 

It wasn’t exactly a lover of Jehovah who did this, and for better or for worse, the mission statement of this website is (apologies to the Washington Post) “Theocracy Dies in Darkness.”
Point well made. 

Which also says that the person may be guilty or innocent and being charged means nothing at this point ...
Even if he is guilty in the end....shame on all those who threw their hats in the ring...before it  was legally morally and spiritually decided.
This is none of your business nor mine...never alone being a topic of discussion by brothers and sisters on a public forum...
why would any of you do this?....where are your senses...
I am gobsmacked  at how you have all expressed your personal opinions and posts like a mob of gossipy old  women...
Talk about shafting someone before a trial...sheesh...hate to have you as my friends ...
One would have to be very ignorant to think everything that comes out of the Sheriff  office is true..and wow ..with a mug shot as well....
Let him have his trial....let him defend himself or not defend himself...
if he is guilty so be it...if he is innocent...imagine him coming here and reading all of this...
I don’t know what is going on but nor do you..so I would advise the moderator to take down all  of these posts until his trial is over...
 
 
 
 

It is not "just" of the internet, it is from a county sheriff's office. 

I’m not having a shot at you ..and I know you didn’t do this ..(and I’m going to address this to all brothers and sisters here)......but to post a brother or anyone’s photo up without absolute bullet proof evidence.. ...something just of the internet is incredibly serious....this is not how Jehovah handles his judicial matters at all...so why are we all talking on this with out evidence....
Personally I would think the moderator better jump on this...and those of us that claim to be one of Jehovah’s Witnesses better pull our heads in and  shut  our mouths.....remember how Jehovah acts on such incidences and not judge a matter before all the evidence has been gathered....
I have seen what false accusations or misunderstood trials etc has done to a man...and woman...it’s absolutely cruel...and if a person is guilty...then same thing applies...
If this brother did this...then let the courts handle it...and we mind our own businesses ...we DO NOT KNOW THE CIRCUMSTANCES OR DETAILS...
This sort of thing puts this forum down In to the gutter
PROVERBS 18:13 NLV
Sprouting off before listening to the facts is both shameful and foolish 
Message Bible ...Proverbs 18:13 
Answering before listening is both stupid and rude.

The text from the magazine is written in a way that shows some ideas. Who should do what and why? It seeks to show the separation of "church from state", "spiritual from secular". And in this way, vague and unclear, the possibility is left for the organization, through other instructions, both public and only for the eyes of elders, to make rules and solutions in accordance with the circumstances and current framework of an event and time and internal policy. And in some situations to invoke the “rights” enjoyed by members of the clergy, the “sworn enemy” of God and Truth and God’s earthly organization i.e. WTJWorg.
From the parts of the text of the WT magazine you put, a difference is expressed in which it is clear that WTJWorg has what it claims it does not have. The existence of a class of clergy and laity. The text states that: "When elders learn about serious wrongdoing, they approach the individual ....  On contrary: But what if you are not an elder and you come to know about some serious wrongdoing ...The Law stated that if a person was a witness to apostate acts, sedition, murder, or certain other serious crimes, it was his responsibility to report it and to testify to what he knew.
Anna, I found answer on your dilemma. Text itself speaking about this context: Elders, not an elder, another Christian and then made comparison with guidance from  Old Israel Law.  Message is clear to whom JW member need to give report. It is also clear from other JW church teachings, and members in this way or another "know" answer, that they need to report matter to elders. Text said "Law" referring to Bible law. Next words are "serious wrongdoing" and especially "apostate act"  and "sedition". From this is very clear that State have nothing with doctrinal things and opposition inside religious organization. 
But writer of text mixing this part of "serious wrongdoing" with other serious things: murder, or certain other serious crimes,. This other things JW member is obligate to report also. To whom? To elders. Well, this WT text show complete "separation" from secular state and show how elders  have to deal not only with "sins" but also with "crimes" too. Text named that with wording "serious wrongdoings" and in numbering few of serious wrongdoings they put "murder" in it and "other serious crimes". This showing tendency that WTJWorg want to have complete power over JW people (and all other people in the future) to judge them not only for "spiritual transgressions",  but for all sort of acts that are known from human history. 

I think using the word excuse is unfair since no one wants to see a child harmed.

Yes. I had jumped the gun there and had him already convicted. I apologize. JWI mentioned that the trial has now occurred....
By the way my comment was not meant to be about JTR, I just used him as an example of what can happen in situations like this.

Whose Responsibility Is It? WT 97/8/15
"When elders learn about serious wrongdoing, they approach the individual involved to give needed help and correction. It is the elders’ responsibility to judge such ones inside the Christian congregation. Keeping a close watch on its spiritual condition, they assist and admonish anyone who is taking an unwise or wrong step.—1 Corinthians 5:12, 13; 2 Timothy 4:2; 1 Peter 5:1, 2.
But what if you are not an elder and you come to know about some serious wrongdoing on the part of another Christian? Guidelines are found in the Law that Jehovah gave to the nation of Israel. The Law stated that if a person was a witness to apostate acts, sedition, murder, or certain other serious crimes, it was his responsibility to report it and to testify to what he knew. Leviticus 5:1 states: “Now in case a soul sins in that he has heard public cursing and he is a witness or he has seen it or has come to know of it, if he does not report it, then he must answer for his error.”—Compare Deuteronomy 13:6-8; Esther 6:2; Proverbs 29:24".
Unfortunately, nowhere in this WT excerpt is there clear direction to whom this "serious wrongdoing" should be reported to.
One of the scriptures mentioned is Esther 6:2 where Mordecai reports a matter about two court officials plotting to kill the king, it is not clear to whom he reports the matter, but it was obviously to a secular authority. (logical, since the matter involved a secular king).
However, the other references from the Hebrew scriptures involve reporting to those under the mosaic law, and those from the Christian Greek scriptures involve fellow Christians in a congregation setting reporting “on the inside”.  So there doesn’t seem to be anything in the Bible about Christians reporting to those on the “outside”; i.e. the secular authorities.
When D. Ali, was questioned by the Australian Royal commission he was not quite sure what action he was supposed to take if he was told that a member of the congregation killed another member. (this is what @4Jah2me may have been referring to)
(transcript):
THE CHAIR:   Q.   If a different crime, to take the most  extreme, murder.  If you were told that a member of the congregation had killed someone else, would you report that  to the police? 
 A.   We would encourage the person to do that. 
 Q.   Would you do it yourself? 
 A.   No.  I would try very hard not to - not that I would  try very hard not to, but I would encourage the person continually to do that.  That's a decision they need to make. 
 Q.   What if the person wasn't prepared to go to the police, but they told you that they saw the killing  happen - what would you do? 
  A.   Am I being asked on the present day circumstances? 
  Q.   Yes. 
  A.   Yes.  I would take the action of ringing the branch and getting some legal advice on that. 
  Q.   You are living in Queensland, aren't you? 
  A.   Yes. 
 Q.   Do you have any knowledge of the law or legal obligations to report knowledge of crimes at all? 
  A.   Not - not really, no. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time and time again it has been remarked on by the courts and commissions such as the one above that nowhere in JW  publications was there any clear written direction on reporting crimes (which includes CSA) to secular authorities that could be referred to.*
It would also appear from Ali's remark ("Am I being asked on the present day circumstances"?) that in the past one would not seek direction from the branch to seek legal advice. (I am assuming that the legal department would be familiar with the "legal obligations" in Queensland to report crimes  and would have advised Ali to that effect). But I wonder what would happen "not" in present day circumstances......
* This as we know has now changed (thanks to the ARC) and the direction is clear for those who wish to report. Unless they are elders, since that is unfortunately contingent on mandatory reporting. But nevertheless, a massive improvement.

I know a number of people who have been convicted and later proved to be innocent...I don’t know what is going on here...and I’m not going to comment on this because I don’t have proof of anything....it seems he has yet to go to trial???....

Key words here are "suppose to", but we know that isn't the case when it comes to jw's so far in Australia, England, Russia, Germany, Italy, America and more. 

I'm glad.

A fine new ally of @The Librarian. Who would have guessed? Like two peas in a pod, they are.

No offense, but isn’t this a first for you? I think Anna raises a good point—if it is someone you know, and thus can see as more than one-dimensional, it makes a difference. Someone else, you posted headlines of being a “sex beast,” despite the touching offense (more serious than this case) being decades in the past and never repeated. “One would think that Epstein and Maxwell would have taught that source what a “sex beast” was,” I mentioned, and you disagreed. 
People are many-faceted. They are not just one thing. If it is judged that JTR has done wrong, there will be a price to pay. Hopefully thereafter he will get his life back on track. I wish him well in that regard. 
This is a ridiculous statement. All it means is that there is sometimes not enough evidence upon which to take action. Why don’t you suspend evidence altogether? If anyone is accused of anything, off to jail they go.
It is all irrelevant anyway. There is no reproach in reporting an abuser to police that he has not already brought upon himself—this was made absolutely clear in that WT of last year, studied by the whole congregation. Thus, regardless of what the congregation does, secular authorities can investigate and possibly punish with their own enhanced methods—examining hard drives, for instance.
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/02/the-reproach-of-child-sexual-abuse-falls-on-the-abu.html
The problem of a “culture of insularity” has been solved. If anyone thinks an abuser has pulled the wool over the eyes of elders, there is no stigma in going to outside authorities, as that study article makes clear.

Yes, i understand. If elders make decision about, that sin is forgivable, than congregation follow direction.

Yeah its sad, they were more generous because you had to paid full price for the books. I also agreed probably people used to be more generous in the past but now i believe people are more wary about religion organisations... 

I see the correlation to Matt 6:14.  Although I'm not sure  what believing in the trinity, or not, has to do with how the scripture is rendered.  These scriptures can be considered: 
“Then behold, they brought to Him a paralytic lying on a bed. When Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, “Son, be of good cheer; your sins are forgiven you.”
3 And at once some of the scribes said within themselves, “This Man blasphemes!”
4 But Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said, “Why do you think evil in your hearts? 5 For which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven you,’ or to say, ‘Arise and walk’? 6 But that you may know that the Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins”—then He said to the paralytic, “Arise, take up your bed, and go to your house.” 7 And he arose and departed to his house.
8 Now when the multitudes saw it, they marveled and glorified God, who had given such power to men.”  Matt 9:2-8
So He got into a boat, crossed over, and came to His own city.  Then behold, they brought to Him a paralytic lying on a bed. When Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, “Son, be of good cheer; your sins are forgiven you.”   Matt 9:1,2
If Jesus has been given the authority to judge, (John 5:22) and is the perfect image of God, (Col 1:15) he also has the authority to forgive.  Which means, the verse in Col 3:13 could correctly be rendered as Jesus Christ, the forgiver of sins; even if we do not believe in the trinity.  
“And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.”  Matt 28:18
“For as the Father raises the dead and gives life to them, even so the Son gives life to whom He will. 22 For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son, 23 that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.”  John 5:21-23
 
 
 

There is good money to be made from JW literature, and it is all profit to those who have freeloaded
https://www.ebay.com/b/Antiquarian-Collectible-Books-Jehovah-Witness-Watchtower/29223/bn_55470279

Maybe the person is trying to get some money back from all the donations given in the past. 😆😆😆