Jump to content
The World News Media

Candace Conti Child Molestation Case


Anna

Recommended Posts

  • Member
6 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

OK. I'm sure we've picked over the remains of this dead horse more than enough now. Time to move on.

Hahaha, I agree. But I still maintain that had:

6 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Watchtower petitioned to have the case reviewed at Supreme Court

there is a strong possibility that the whole negligence thing would have been thrown out. Perhaps they should have fought to exonerate themselves of all accusations.

6 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

I'm guessing that pursuing it further would have benefited neither party in the end.

 

6 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

might only take it to the Supreme Court if Watchtower takes it there. Other than that we are waiting. The ball is still unfortunately in their court.'”

Candace is probably very happy that WT did not take it to the supreme court, she would have ended up stripped of everything, even if WT hadn't won.......WT have their own lawyers, and WT has a lot more money than Candace, WT had not much to lose compared to Candace. She had everything to lose, so I am sure it would have benefited Candace a lot less than WT. Think about that. WT could have fought, but they didn't. What does that tell you? Besides, this is not the only legal case WT has ever fought, being exonerated in the eyes of the world doesn't mean that much to them as long as their conscience is clear before God. Jehovah knows the truth of what happened, and that's more important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 5.5k
  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I have to agree with you there. Just the other day a sister brought up the subject of the convention and the talk about protecting our children. She is now the third person who absolutely did not thin

This is a sad argument about the repercussions of the indefensible and despicable behaviour of people who call themselves Jehovah's Witnesses. The monetary and reputational sanctions against all

I have to admit I didn't read all of the info that Anna and Ann plus others have submitted, but the article (submitted above) about what a child molester looks like :  http://www.childmolestat

Posted Images

  • 5 months later...
  • Member

There is no denying that the mishandling of sexual abuse by the JW organization has brought a great reproach upon Jehovah's good name. The response by the GB to these scandals brings even further reproach. I worry that many JWs are completely unaware of how these ongoing legal disputes are destroying public perception of our religion.

It was bad enough that many elders did not report claims of sexual abuse to the police, but when court cases exposed the abuse to the masses the GB should have immediately apologized to the victims for the mishandling and taken steps to make things right. Instead, they made excuses for the abuse and never took accountability. The inability to accept wrongdoing shows a major ego problem and a callousness. Furthermore, the GB has kept JWs in the dark by not addressing the sexual abuse cases. Shouldn't the GB feel a sense of duty to keep JWs informed about a major issue within the organization? 

I worry that saving face is more important to the GB than the safety of our brothers and sisters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
35 minutes ago, AllenSmith said:

Until government accepts responsibility for failed policies and laws? How can religion compete with proven social failures? Many of the past regulations and laws are still found in every STATE, even today.

However, I have yet to hear the Governing Body blame a “Victim” for any heinous crime perpetrated by someone with a sick mind, as other religions upper echelon has done in the past.

Also, NOT every Elder think alike, and can’t be placed in the same barrel as the unwise. Yet, I have seen countless of times, when Elders actually went against the prevailing social laws to see justice was rendered NOT only in a court of law but also to keep the Christian Congregation clean.

Why, doesn’t the NEWS make light of those cases. It wouldn’t be news worthy!!!!!!!!!

The man's lawyer asked Cunningham whether, in the eyes of the church, a child molested by a priest has committed a sin.

"The boy is culpable," Cunningham said Oct. 14, 2011, according to a transcript of the deposition.

His sworn testimony provides rare insight into the thoughts of the highest-ranking Catholic in Syracuse about one of the most troubling chapters in the church's history.

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2015/09/victims_partly_to_blame_in_priest_sex-abuse_cases_syracuse_bishop_testified.html

 

California evidence code 1030 1034

1030.  As used in this article, a "member of the clergy" means a

priest, minister, religious practitioner, or similar functionary of a

church or of a religious denomination or religious organization.

1031.  As used in this article, "penitent" means a person who has

made a penitential communication to a member of the clergy.

1032.  As used in this article, "penitential communication" means a

communication made in confidence, in the presence of no third person

so far as the penitent is aware, to a member of the clergy who, in

the course of the discipline or practice of the clergy member's

church, denomination, or organization, is authorized or accustomed to

hear those communications and, under the discipline or tenets of his

or her church, denomination, or organization, has a duty to keep

those communications secret.

1033.  Subject to Section 912, a penitent, whether or not a party,

has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent another from

disclosing, a penitential communication if he or she claims the

privilege.

1034.  Subject to Section 912, a member of the clergy, whether or

not a party, has a privilege to refuse to disclose a penitential

communication if he or she claims the privilege.

 

Evidence Code - EVID

DIVISION 8. PRIVILEGES [900 - 1070]

  (Division 8 enacted by Stats. 1965, Ch. 299.)

CHAPTER 4. Particular Privileges [930 - 1063]

  (Chapter 4 enacted by Stats. 1965, Ch. 299.)

 

ARTICLE 8. Clergy Penitent Privileges [1030 - 1034]

  (Heading of Article 8 amended by Stats. 2002, Ch. 806, Sec. 18.)

 

1030.

  As used in this article, a “member of the clergy” means a priest, minister, religious practitioner, or similar functionary of a church or of a religious denomination or religious organization.

(Amended by Stats. 2002, Ch. 806, Sec. 19. Effective January 1, 2003.)

1031.

  As used in this article, “penitent” means a person who has made a penitential communication to a member of the clergy.

(Amended by Stats. 2002, Ch. 806, Sec. 20. Effective January 1, 2003.)

1032.

  As used in this article, “penitential communication” means a communication made in confidence, in the presence of no third person so far as the penitent is aware, to a member of the clergy who, in the course of the discipline or practice of the clergy member’s church, denomination, or organization, is authorized or accustomed to hear those communications and, under the discipline or tenets of his or her church, denomination, or organization, has a duty to keep those communications secret.

(Amended by Stats. 2002, Ch. 806, Sec. 21. Effective January 1, 2003.)

1033.

Subject to Section 912, a penitent, whether or not a party, has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent another from disclosing, a penitential communication if he or she claims the privilege.

(Amended by Stats. 2002, Ch. 806, Sec. 22. Effective January 1, 2003.)

1034.

Subject to Section 912, a member of the clergy, whether or not a party, has a privilege to refuse to disclose a penitential communication if he or she claims the privilege.

(Amended by Stats. 2002, Ch. 806, Sec. 23. Effective January 1, 2003.)

2005 California Evidence Code Sections 1030-1034 Article 8. Clergy Penitent Privileges

EVIDENCE CODE
SECTION 1030-1034

1030.  As used in this article, a "member of the clergy" means a

priest, minister, religious practitioner, or similar functionary of a

church or of a religious denomination or religious organization.

1031.  As used in this article, "penitent" means a person who has

made a penitential communication to a member of the clergy.

1032.  As used in this article, "penitential communication" means a

communication made in confidence, in the presence of no third person

so far as the penitent is aware, to a member of the clergy who, in

the course of the discipline or practice of the clergy member's

church, denomination, or organization, is authorized or accustomed to

hear those communications and, under the discipline or tenets of his

or her church, denomination, or organization, has a duty to keep

those communications secret.

1033.  Subject to Section 912, a penitent, whether or not a party,

has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent another from

disclosing, a penitential communication if he or she claims the

privilege.

1034.  Subject to Section 912, a member of the clergy, whether or

not a party, has a privilege to refuse to disclose a penitential

communication if he or she claims the privilege.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priest%E2%80%93penitent_privilege#Federal_rule

 

According to New York state law, confessions and confidences made to a clergyman or other minister are privileged and cannot be used as evidence. This privilege is not limited to communications with a particular kind of priest or congregant, and it is not confined to statements made "under the cloak of confession". What matters is that the conversations were of a spiritual nature, were confidential enough to indicate that the penitent intended that they be kept secret, and that the penitent did not waive the privilege subsequently.

2012 New York Consolidated Laws

CVP - Civil Practice Law & Rules

Article 45 - (4501 - 4548) EVIDENCE

4505 - Confidential communication to clergy privileged.

Universal Citation: NY CPLR § 4505 (2012)

 

    § 4505.  Confidential communication to clergy privileged. Unless the

  person confessing or confiding waives the privilege, a clergyman, or

  other minister of any religion or duly accredited Christian Science

  practitioner, shall not be allowed disclose a confession or confidence

  made to him in his professional character as spiritual advisor.

 

 

 

RULE 505: Communications to members of Clergy

Texas Rules of Evidence

A member of the clergy” is a minister, priest, rabbi, accredited Christian Science Practitioner, or other similar functionary of a religious organization or an individual reasonably believed so to be by the person consulting with such individual.

(2) A communication is “confidential” if made privately and not intended for further disclosure except to other persons present in furtherance of the purpose of the communication.

(b) General Rule of Privilege. A person has a privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent another from disclosing a confidential communication by the person to a member of the clergy in the member’s professional character as spiritual adviser.

 

 

 

(c) Who May Claim the Privilege. The privilege may be claimed by the person, by the person’s guardian or conservator, or by the personal representative of the person if the person is deceased.  The member of the clergy to whom the communication was made is presumed to have authority to claim the privilege but only on behalf of the communicant.

 

 

 

    Texas Rules of Evidence

    CCP Article 42.12

I don't see what clergy penitence privileges has anything to do with what's under discussion. If a person has reasonable suspicions that a child may be in danger, or if there is evidence that the child has already been a victim, then that person can go to the police, regardless of any confession by the perpertraitor. But really, the other problem is, lack of transparency that WE  have a problem at all, regardless how small in comparison, in our own words "one molested child is one too many". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Not to worry .... One of the reasons Cardinal Ratzinger, later Pope Benedict XVI, resigned as Pope, was that he was involved in the Great Pedophile Priest Cover Up .... ( a German in the Hitler Youth as an artilleryman, that looked EXACTLY like the Star wars Emperor ...  what could go wrong ? ... ), it is rumored that he tried to redeem himself by forgiving all those despicable, lustful children that seduced his priests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Nobody, but nobody, assembles their entire membership as JWs did at their most recent Regional Conventions, and reviews detailed scenarios under which child sexual abuse might happen, so that parents can train their children - obviously the first line of defense.

Especially emphasized was the fact the the perpetrator is likely to be someone a child knows and trusts.

If a relative, or friend, or anyone, seems overly attentive to your child. If there are tickling sessions. If there are sleepovers. If there are trips alone to the public restroom. If ....there were several others. These are all potential red flags,  maybe harmless, but maybe not, for the parent to be aware of. 'The wise one sees the [potential] calamity approaching, and takes action' is the verse repeatedly applied.

JTR saw it too. But he likes his cartoon and wants to spin it around the world a few more times. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

AllenSmith:

Just because someone is EXTREMELY critical of someone else's performance, competence, or motives ... does NOT necessarily make them an opposer.

It's like "God LOVES you, he just hates the bad things you do ..." which we hear quite often.

I can be a great fan of the New York Yankees baseball team but when someone fouls up ... player, coach or manager, etc., I might completely excoriate them, and "rip them a new one" .. AND STILL BE A LOYAL FAN!

Loyalty being "My Country, right or wrong ... but MY COUNTRY" ( Nathan Hale), only works with politics, by those not claiming a special relationship with God.

The German Army once had belt buckles with the inscription "Got Mit Uns", or "God is with us".

Their mission to spread German Culture and Civilization to the World was opposed, and with blood, fire and steel, they had to be destroyed .... TWICE!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
15 hours ago, Anna said:

In the mean time, have you perhaps thought of writing a letter to them, similar in content of what you wrote here? It's possible that if they receive many letters complaining about the lack of transparency regarding this issue it might hurry things along.

I have written letters to the Society in the past about my concerns, but I have never received any word back from them. I just assume at this point that they pitch any letters that questions their policies. I highly doubt that a letter campaign from JWs would work, because JWs either are ignorant to the problems or wouldn't dare question organizational policy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
49 minutes ago, Noble Berean said:

I have written letters to the Society in the past about my concerns, but I have never received any word back from them. I just assume at this point that they pitch any letters that questions their policies

In at least 40 years of my experiences, my experience and conclusions are and have been the same as yours, Noble Berean.

Several times, as an experiment, I wrote about matters as serious as life and death matters .. and enclosed a contribution.  The check was cashed, and I got a form letter back having NOTHING to do with the subject of my inquiry, with a disclaimer at the bottom of the letter that my contribution did not obligate them to do ANYTHING ...

Without the enclosed check, I only received one letter back, circa 1986, after a year, and it said basically I should read the Bible more, completely ignoring the appeal to help other brothers who needed food, and dental care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    • Avrek

      Avrek 0

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,670
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Apolos2000
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.