JW's drop attempts to block sex abuse inquiry

Originally posted by FMF
Anyone can report a crime. Whether it ends up in a prosecution depends on the victims, witnesses, and the law enforcement authorities. The issue - in Australia for example - is how allegations of child sex abuse - made by victims - were handled by the JW organization, and how the way the allegations were handled contributed to a situation where the organization ...[text shortened]... ok at the material here http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/public-hearings/case-studies

Can you tell the forum what the actual policy of Jehovah witnesses was? That is correct it was to leave the matter up to victims and families to report and as the Royal commission reported more than 400 of the 1000 thousand or so allegations were reported to authorities. Can you tell the forum why you would remove the empowering of those involved to report the issue? for as has been rather admirably demonstrated and the point was made to the Royal commission not everyone who is a victim wants the matter reported.

Let me repeat the question so there can be no doubt. Why would you remove empowering the victim to report or not report the matter to authorities as they see fit?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Can you tell the forum what the actual policy of Jehovah witnesses was? That is correct it was to leave the matter up to victims and families to report and as the Royal commission reported more than 400 of the 1000 thousand or so allegations were reported to authorities. Can you tell the forum why you would remove the empowering of those involved t ...[text shortened]... remove empowering the victim to report or not report the matter to authorities as they see fit?

We discussed this before in detail and it ended with you hurling insults and then ignoring my contributions to the discussion completely. Go back and look at those threads if your interest is genuine.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
you don't think that settling legal requirements prior to hearing evidence is beneficial to all parties involved? Imagine that evidence was heard and later that evidence was overturned because of a legal technicality.

If your JW organization's handling of child sex abuse cases was found indeed to be wanting, wouldn't you welcome the intervention by the commission? Why would the JWs seek to overturn the outcome "because of a technicality"?

Originally posted by FMF
If your JW organization's handling of child sex abuse cases was found indeed to be wanting, wouldn't you welcome the intervention by the commission? Why would the JWs seek to overturn the outcome "because of a technicality"?

You were telling us about why you would remove empowering victims of abuse to report or not report matters of abuse to civil authorities, let me help you out

I FMF would remove the empowering of victims of abuse to report or not report the matter of abuse to civil authorities because. . . . .

Please insert a valid reason and lets see if you can do any better this attempt.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
You were telling us about why you would remove empowering victims of abuse to report or not report matters of abuse to civil authorities...

The commission found no evidence whatsoever of the Jehovah’s Witnesses reporting to the police a single one of the 1,006 alleged perpetrators of child sex abuse recorded by the organisation in Australia in the six decades since 1950.

If you can show me the commission's findings that state that the Jehovah’s Witnesses spent those sixty years "empowering victims of abuse", I'd be willing to look at it.

If that's what the findings of the Royal Commission are, I'd like to see them. Show me. If that's what the findings are, I may have to eat my hat.

Originally posted by FMF
The commission found no evidence whatsoever of the Jehovah’s Witnesses reporting to the police a single one of the 1,006 alleged perpetrators of child sex abuse recorded by the organisation in Australia in the six decades since 1950.

If you can show me the commission's findings that state that the Jehovah’s Witnesses spent those sixty years "empowering victi ...[text shortened]... n are, I'd like to see them. Show me. If that's what the findings are, I may have to eat my hat.

No one is claiming that they did, what they did find evidence of was of 400 cases having been reported to the police so we shall ask you again FMF

Why would you remove empowering victims of abuse from being able to report or not report a matter as they see fit, third time asking. This was after all the policy of Jehovah's Witnesses as they testified before the Royal commission and we would be interested given your criticism of the policy as to why you would remove it.

I FMF would remove the empowering of victims of abuse to report or not report the matter of abuse to civil authorities because. . . . .

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Why would you remove empowering victims of abuse from being able to report or not report a matter as they see fit, third time asking.

Produce the Royal Commission's findings that show the Jehovah’s Witnesses spent all those decades since 1950 "empowering victims of abuse". Show me those findings, and I will never mention the subject of child sex abuse within the JW organization in Australia to you again. I guarantee it. You will have laid the matter to rest and I will have had to munch on humble pie.

Originally posted by FMF
Produce the Royal Commission's findings that show the Jehovah’s Witnesses spent all those decades since 1950 "empowering victims of abuse". Show me those findings, and I will never mention the subject of child sex abuse within the JW organization in Australia to you again. I guarantee it. You will have laid the matter to rest and I will have had to munch on humble pie.

Its in the testimony given to the Royal commission, if you dispute this then fine but it does not answer the question why you would remove empowering victims of abuse to report or not report the matter to civil authorities as they see fit, so we shall ask you again for a fourth time,

I FMF would remove the empowering of victims of abuse to report or not report the matter of abuse to civil authorities because. . . . .

You seem to be floundering once again having backed yourself into a corner.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
...why you would remove empowering victims of abuse to report or not report the matter to civil authorities or not, so we shall ask you gain for a fourth time,

Show me any findings by the Royal Commission about the JW organization "empowering victims of abuse" and I will concede the point explicitly and unconditionally, and I will throw in a public apology too.

Originally posted by FMF
Show me any findings by the Royal Commission about the JW organization "empowering victims of abuse" and I will concede the point explicitly and unconditionally, and I will throw in a public apology too.

I have stated that its in the testimony given to the Royal commission, they testified before the Royal commission that their policy was to leave matters of reporting up to parents and victims, I suggest you read the transcripts of the case.

So you were telling us why you would remove empowering victims of abuse to report or not report a matter as they see fit to local authorities.

You seem to be made to dance on the wicket FMF.😵

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
So you were telling us why you would remove empowering victims of abuse to report or not report a matter as they see fit to local authorities.

You know full well I do not accept your assertion that the JW organization spent six decades "empowering victims of abuse" in Australia. So, a link please to the commission's findings. And I will back down, as it were, and apologize.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Its in the testimony given to the Royal commission...

Give me a link to testimony from victims of child sex abuse in Australia who testified to the commission that they were "empowered" by the JW organization.

Originally posted by FMF
You know full well I do not accept your assertion that the JW organization spent six decades "empowering victims of abuse" in Australia. So, a link please to the commission's findings. And I will back down, as it were, and apologize.

Whether you accept it or not is neither here nor there, the policy was to leave it up to victims of abuse to report or not report the matter as they see fit and we are still left wondering why you would not also empower victims of abuse to report or not report a matter as they see fit.

You have nothing to apologise for, its a simple question, Either we empower victims of abuse to report or not report a matter as they see fit or we have mandatory reporting and take away the right of a victim of abuse to not have a matter reported.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Either we empower victims of abuse to report or not report a matter as they see fit or we have mandatory reporting and take away the right of a victim of abuse to not have a matter reported.

A link to the "empowering victims of abuse" commission findings please.

Originally posted by FMF
Give me a link to testimony from victims of child sex abuse in Australia who testified to the commission that they were "empowered" by the JW organization.

Its quite a simple affair FMF, read the Royal commissions report, by having a policy which made reporting or not reporting a matter up to those involved this empowers the victims of abuse to report or not report the matter as they see fit. Its in the Royal commission and is available online.