Can JW Television (digital news) be trusted?

[Srecko Sostar]

4 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Related to that, it has also been ruled in some courts that it was no longer a mere religious confession due to the very fact that the WTS kept detailed data on the perpetrators, and sent these "confessions" to secretaries to have forms typed, and then sent the details to Branch headquarters to have them discussed by lawyers, and retyped by secretaries in another database visible to several people in the service and correspondence departments.

Also, these were not voluntary confessions in most cases, anyway. In fact, in only 579 out of 1,006 alleged perpetrators was there a definite confession recorded. Just over half! Part of the judicial process is an attempt to try to get a guilty party to confess and judge whether there was sufficient repentance.

Confession of sins in secret before a priest in the Catholic Church is one thing. The admission of guilt and the circumstances, details of what was and how it was, before the JW Judicial Committee is a completely different matter.
That cannot be equaled. But, WTJWorg lawyers want to try to smooth some things out to exonerate their client. GB turns a blind eye, accidentally or intentionally, to the methods their lawyers use to be able to say; "That's what the lawyers said, not us".

[JW Insider]

Another curious piece of data that showed up in the analyses was that in almost every group (non-JW, baptized, ministerial servants, and elders) the average number of children involved in the accusations was close to 2 victims apiece. The highest percentage of children per perpetrator was among Ministerial Servants reported. Then Elders had almost the same ratio of children abused per Elder as non-JWs in the data. The lowest victim ratio was among Baptized JWs who were not Elders or Ministerial Servants.

Of course, this data can be complex, because several of these persons whose first accusation was as a Baptized Witness, went on to become Ministerial Servants and Elders, and some had to be deleted from their positions as Elder or MS. Same goes for alleged perpetrators we have been calling "Non-JWs" in the data. It just means that their first accusation was as a Non-Witness. Several of them also went on to become Elders and Ministerial Servants. So this fact would skew the numbers of victims per perpetrator (ratio) even higher as these perpetrators were promoted in their positions within the congregation.

Another potential skew of the data comes from the interpretation of the word "Unclear" for the number of victims. I could only equate these to ONE victim for that particular perpetrator, because we know it means "at least one." However, it is more likely that it's "Unclear" because it could not be determined whether it was 1 or 2, or 2 or 3, etc. It could possibly have been a question about whether it was: less than 10, 10, or 10+ child victims.

Also, the number of separate victims does not necessarily correlate with the seriousness of the crimes. A single victim can be molested many times over a long period by the same perpetrator, just as multiple victims can be molested many times over a long period by the same perpetrator.

[JW Insider]

2 hours ago, Fausto Hoover said:

6 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Also, these were not voluntary confessions in most cases, anyway.

Can you provide me with evidence of this?

This has nothing to do with the methods of obtaining confessions by the elders. I have only rarely heard of these methods being problematic. The spreadsheet indicates that only 58% of the alleged perpetrators made a clear confession.

I am saying only that at least 290 of those 579 reported confessions (50.1%) were not volunteered to a judicial committee due to remorse that followed soon after the sin/crime. These confessions happened most times after SEVERAL YEARS.

Imagine sitting in the same Kingdom Hall (or Book Study home) where your victim is also sitting and continuing to go on for years without ever admitting your crime. Or knowing that your crime has caused that person to leave the Organization and still not being bothered enough to confess until after an accusation is made years later and a judicial hearing is called. Imagine being in the same household pretending to be the spiritual head of the household in front of your wife and children knowing that you are abusing those same children, time after time, in some cases.

The most obvious cases where the perpetrator confessed, but not voluntarily, would be the 257 of those confessions that occurred after MULTIPLE children were abused by them. (I removed all the cases with just 1 victim or an Unclear number of victims.) With some of them, it was actually 10 or more children abused and their first abuse occurred when they were baptized publishers. For two others they began abusing when they were Ministerial Servants and still went on to abuse at least 10 victims each. With some elders, it was only after 2 or 3 or 5 or even 7 accusations that they finally confessed. Although they may have "voluntarily" confessed years later, i don't see this as a voluntary confession. No one is supposed to accept an appointment to be an elder without confessing to such crimes/sins that began after they were baptized.

With 44 alleged perpetrators where the confession was labeled "Unclear," these also had been accused of abusing MULTIPLE children. These 301 alone (257+44) )already puts us into the definition of MOST.

In all these cases the confession was about abusing at least ONE of the MULTIPLE children referred to in the accusation.

Even though this already covers enough of the numbers required to speak of MOST being involuntary there is a large number of additional cases which are based simply on the fact that there was no judicial hearing until years after the initial accusation of abuse. For these, of course, I removed those perpetrators whose first abuse was as a Non-Witness.

I should have mentioned before that I don't consider it a "voluntary" confession if a person waits years to confess it, or has continued to abuse MULTIPLE children before that confession. Even if just one child was abused, I think that waiting years until confessing at a judicial hearing (especially only after an accusation is made) doesn't count as voluntary.

[Matthew9969]

3 hours ago, Fausto Hoover said:

It appears you're an apostate in long-standing, so I will answer you just this once. Tell the Government of Australia how to view and handle their laws. A proper comprehension of the court system would reveal that your statement demonstrates a deficient understanding of not only Australian laws but also global laws as a whole.

This view is 100% apostate view and stance.

duhnt duhnt duhnt.....another one bites the dust!

[Pudgy]

Fausto … rather than just pontificate, offer an alternate explanation that fits the facts, point by point.

It is painfully obvious that your reasoning ( and I use the term loosely) is agenda driven and not reasonable, or exhibits any common sense whatsoever.

[Srecko Sostar]

3 hours ago, Fausto Hoover said:

It appears you're an apostate in long-standing, so I will answer you just this once. Tell the Government of Australia how to view and handle their laws. A proper comprehension of the court system would reveal that your statement demonstrates a deficient understanding of not only Australian laws but also global laws as a whole.

This view is 100% apostate view and stance.

One does not become an apostate if one leaves a religion that manipulates theology, that exploits the naivety of its followers, that collects and asks for material donations, that engages in real estate business, that deceives and lies to the judicial authorities, that does not protect weak and vulnerable people.

The exit of a person from such a religion is called "exit from Babylon the Great", in biblical terminology. And in secular terminology, the process that precedes the decision to leave a group and organization that abuses people's trust is called critical thinking.

If a member of the JWorg or any other religion wants to feel that only he is in the true religion, and that everyone else is in error, he can continue to live in such a sense of self-worth, and self-deception. It is your free will with whom you want and do not want to communicate. Whether someone is a fanatic or is in cognitive dissonance or is misled by promises, that has always been and will be as long as humanity exists.

 

[Pudgy]

3 hours ago, Fausto Hoover said:

What is the best way to communicate with a dog that doesn't comprehend the English language?

Well, dogs use body language to talk to each other …. Perhaps you could become a Mime.

After all …. A Mime is a terrible thing to waste!

You could practice trying to get out of an invisible box!

[Pudgy]

Fausto …. Are you aware of the reputation “the little back room” at the Kingdom Hall has among the average Publisher?

It’s referred to as “the little back room” with nervous laughter, “the red room”, or the dreaded “Room 101”.

My guess is that you are oblivious of these labels, so from the ChatGBT A.I.:

”If you said you dreaded being taken to "Room 101," it would most likely be a reference to George Orwell's dystopian novel, "1984." In the novel, Room 101 is a place where individuals are subjected to their worst fears and phobias, essentially representing their personal hell. It is a room used for psychological torture and breaking the will of individuals who resist the authoritarian regime depicted in the story. The phrase "Room 101" has since become a cultural reference for a place or situation associated with extreme fear, pain, or suffering.”

F.Y.I.

Of course, all done in pleasant dulcet tones and mild mannered. 

[Pudgy]

That’s what agenda driven thinking will do to you Fausto … you misunderstand everything and defend the indefensible as if everyone in the Universe is stupid, and will believe your rationalizations. After awhile you begin to believe your own explanations, not because they are true, but out of a sense of duty and loyalty to your bogus agenda, imagining that this serves God.

[Pudgy]

2 hours ago, Fausto Hoover said:

It seems clear that you are expressing your personal perspective based on your own experience. As it seems like you're inclined to dispute, I'll excuse myself and let you make your own decisions.

As I mentioned earlier, I am willing to read your message if it contains something worth considering.

Of course I am sharing my personal perspective based on my own experience, and when things like that happen to ANYBODY, it’s burned into your memory sans physical scars.

However, on the ARCHIVE several years ago, perhaps 7 to 10 years ago, this issue was discussed at great lengths by many people and there was a plethora of shared experiences pretty much the same.

This is not a made up problem.

We have discussed at great length the fact that disfellowshipping and shunnings are not done according to the specific criteria laid out in Matthew the 18th chapter.

This is not just a theoretical treatis.

It translates into common experiences at each and every Kingdom Hall on planet Earth with some possible very rare exceptions.

[Pudgy]

I think you misunderstand me, which is not unusual because you always misunderstand. It’s to be expected for agenda driven thinking.

I fully agree with the basic concept of disfellowshipping as Scriptural, and often a necessity.

My case was an outlier because I brought the issue to the Elders, and asked to be disfellowshipped so that the legal problems I faced would not be associated with “one of Jehovah’s Witnesses”, to protect the reputation of the Brotherhood.

What I disagree with is how it’s done as an extreme example, not supported with the extremely detailed, specific and unambiguous instructions of Jesus Christ in  Matthew 18 of how to do it.

You know, despite his gentle persuasive manner and diplomatic style, you know you’re not gonna have a good day when Manny the  used car salesman shows up drunk in the operating theater as your volunteer Cardiac Surgeon, and brings power tools from Home Depot.

That’s why “Room 101” has the dreaded reputation it has.

Even the Gestapo had a fully functional Orphanage System during WWII, supported by Officers who had money deducted from their pay to support that system.

A fine thing to do …. If you disregarded that they killed the parents, and non-Aryan children.

[Matthew9969]

20 hours ago, Pudgy said:

Well, dogs use body language to talk to each other …. Perhaps you could become a Mime.

After all …. A Mime is a terrible thing to waste!

You could practice trying to get out of an invisible box!

Sniffing each others butt's comes in pretty handy with communicating:P