Lawyers who defended Catholic pedophiles are now defending JWs pedophiles

[Srecko Sostar]

Attorney Matt Haverstick confirmed recently that his law firm is representing Jehovah’s Witnesses congregations around Pennsylvania on unspecified matters that are “very active right now.”

- article from 2023: https://www.denverpost.com/2023/04/19/charges-put-focus-on-jehovahs-witnesses-handling-of-abuse-2/

quote from article: The 140-member Ivy Hill congregation sued Pennsylvania’s Department of Human Services, asking Commonwealth Court to clarify whether elders are mandated reporters if they learn of child abuse through a confidential confession. Human Services runs the state’s ChildLine abuse hotline.

 

- article from 2018 about same Attorney Matt Haverstick: https://www.npr.org/2018/08/16/639149699/lawyer-for-2-catholic-dioceses-weighs-in-on-pa-grand-jury-report

quote from article: HAVERSTICK: Well, I think they start by apologizing for what happened. And they have. I mean, bear in mind, it is awful. It's a horrible read. It's shocking. But it is, by and large, as the grand jury found, literally from the last century. That's a church that doesn't exist anymore. The church today is deeply sorry for those events. But they don't do things that way anymore.

 

Until now, the eminent leading men in WTJWorg claim that no apology is necessary for anything, what GB said and did. So all other JWs elders are not obliged to apologize for their words and decisions either. An interesting point of view is represented by these JWs religious leaders. Obviously they should have some biblical quotes to support this kind of thesis? No, they don't. But that's why they CLAIM that this is the way YHVH works.
Indeed, that is reason enough to trust them. lol

 

video source: 

 

[Srecko Sostar]

 

[Srecko Sostar]

During the 2015 ARC process in Australia, not a single JW elder expressed regret for the victims. Not a single one, and among them was a member of GB who did not show grief for the victims of "his" elders. 

The same happened in other court processes where JW elders were present. 

The uniform response speaks of the unity of these JW elders. Commendable, isn't it? And where is the "biblically trained conscience"? Obviously, the permission did not arrive from the GB for the conscience to react and act. Shameful!

[Pudgy]

..

 

[BTK59]

It is concerning that governments are swayed by the testimonies of former witnesses, leading to the overturning of decisions made by lower courts, as seen in the case of Cardinal Pell in Australia, along with dozens of others.

No true witness should be swayed by negative comments from former witnesses and their agenda along with any disfellowshipped. That's no better.

[Srecko Sostar]

12 minutes ago, BTK59 said:

It is concerning that governments are swayed by the testimonies of former witnesses, leading to the overturning of decisions made by lower courts, as seen in the case of Cardinal Pell in Australia, along with dozens of others.

No true witness should be swayed by negative comments from former witnesses and their agenda along with any disfellowshipped. That's no better.

What really bothers you? Former members or so-called "negative comments"?
And what do you think are "negative comments"? Are the "negative comments" something that is incorrect or is it what exposes religious hypocrisy?

[BTK59]

17 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

What really bothers you? Former members or so-called "negative comments"?
And what do you think are "negative comments"? Are the "negative comments" something that is incorrect or is it what exposes religious hypocrisy?

I never pay any mind to ex-witnesses, hence they simply do not bother me. When it comes to their lies, my focus lies on emphasizing the undeniable truth, completely detached from the former members' inclination to twist it to their advantage.

So, why does it matter if a Catholic lawyer is supporting the Watchtower? Are you suggesting that they shouldn't? Religion stands strong in the face of manipulative governments and the spread of falsehoods and exaggerations by former members, especially when it's time to take a stand.

Remember, there are people here who identify themselves as witnesses and are willing to embrace your perspectives, even if they may be biased. Why? Because some of them, especially females, possess a misguided loyalty. Instead of recognizing the ways in which Satan manipulates humanity through the suffering of children, they become fixated on their own personal emotions.

If someone truly grasps the essence of scripture, it would be a misguided loyalty to turn a blind eye to the devious manipulation of Satan and the individuals he employs to sow division among God's people. No matter how strongly someone believes they are a devout Christian, if they fail to recognize this larger scheme, they cannot consider themselves faithful followers of Christ, let alone true witnesses.

[Srecko Sostar]

57 minutes ago, BTK59 said:

I never pay any mind to ex-witnesses, hence they simply do not bother me. When it comes to their lies, my focus lies on emphasizing the undeniable truth, completely detached from the former members' inclination to twist it to their advantage.

So, why does it matter if a Catholic lawyer is supporting the Watchtower? Are you suggesting that they shouldn't? Religion stands strong in the face of manipulative governments and the spread of falsehoods and exaggerations by former members, especially when it's time to take a stand.

Remember, there are people here who identify themselves as witnesses and are willing to embrace your perspectives, even if they may be biased. Why? Because some of them, especially females, possess a misguided loyalty. Instead of recognizing the ways in which Satan manipulates humanity through the suffering of children, they become fixated on their own personal emotions.

If someone truly grasps the essence of scripture, it would be a misguided loyalty to turn a blind eye to the devious manipulation of Satan and the individuals he employs to sow division among God's people. No matter how strongly someone believes they are a devout Christian, if they fail to recognize this larger scheme, they cannot consider themselves faithful followers of Christ, let alone true witnesses.

I think you are definitely wrong because of your imprecise and non-objective view of the problems at WTJWorg. I get the impression, from the comments, that religions like Catholic and JW are under attack from the secular government. So it's as if you're denying the reality of pedophilia within church structures, about which the atheistic-satanic structure is planting false information, slander. You don't mean it? Or? Yes, you really mean it. Terrible.

It is biased to say that some categories of people are more susceptible to disloyalty than others. To say that women are susceptible to the influence of deception and their own wrong feelings means that men are not, because that is your stated claim, it only speaks in favor of your bias. That way you lose originality and credibility. You are drowned in a mass of people who think like you. The kind of people who will never contribute to progress, but to enslavement by already seen stale prejudices.

The deviations you speak of, have thrived in WTJWorg since the very beginning, so they are no different than those in the Catholic Church. They just alternate with each other in their visibility and perversity.

[George88]

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

During the 2015 ARC process in Australia, not a single JW elder expressed regret for the victims. Not a single one, and among them was a member of GB who did not show grief for the victims of "his" elders. 

Here we witness the distortion spread by Srecko and Pudgy, endorsed by a renowned apostate known as "witness" who overlooks the absence of the word "apology" in the argument. This misrepresentation is a classic example of cherry-picking and distorting information to fit a particular narrative. It's important to consider the entirety of the document from the AU and the context in which it was written before drawing conclusions. 

In the Australian case, a Governing Body member showed empathy towards a victim who was identified as BCG. He acknowledged that more should have been done to support that individual and repeatedly aligned himself with the stance presented by BCG's lawyer. Therefore, attempting to create a negative impression from apostates only serves to provide further grounds for governments to resist being influenced by them.

"I don't know your client, but please, could you convey an expression of my love and concern and reassure her that obviously she has had an opportunity to speak about how she feels, and hopefully this will help the policies and procedures to improve."

Someone who shows this much empathy in their heart definitely feels sorry for the victim. I can sense a hint of remorse for the fact that more hadn't been done. 

The question is: Who wrote the government's privacy laws that the branch office had to rely on?

The GB member even went as far as suggesting that if the AU government made it mandatory for all accusations to be reported to the police, regardless of how trivial they may seem, it would be more advantageous for the Watchtower. This would effectively remove the responsibility from their hands entirely.

What was the Australian government's response? We will make some adjustments to our laws, but we will uphold the clergy privilege, and any form of reporting needs to be proven factual first. What sets apart the burden of proof standards between the Watchtower and the standard placed by the AU?
 
What about the sheer hypocrisy displayed by that commission when they initially "rejected" the idea of investigating the Australian Detention Centers for child abuse? It is truly astounding to think that even the prime minister at that time had passed a new law, forbidding doctors, nurses, or employees from speaking out against these horrific acts.

This flawed attempt to mislead others by the uneducated is yet another example of falsehoods being spread due to the omission of just one word, according to them.

I find it disappointing that some here misrepresent the facts presented by apostates and endorsed by witnesses.

[Pudgy]

3 minutes ago, George88 said:

"I don't know your client, but please, could you convey an expression of my love and concern and reassure her that obviously she has had an opportunity to speak about how she feels, and hopefully this will help the policies and procedures to improve."

… is NOT an apology.

[Pudgy]

…. not only is it  NOT AN APOLOGY, it does not even acknowledge reality, AND, “…  an expression of my love and concern ..,” were empty words that meant NOTHING.…. they STILL mean nothing.

….like a resume’ or CV of someone with no real life experiences, filled with “buzz words”.

[Pudgy]

1 hour ago, George88 said:

…. and hopefully this will help the policies and procedures to improve."

So …. tha ARC Hearings were in what, 2015? That was NINE YEARS AGO.

What Watchtower policies and procedures have improved since then?

The Society has even hired outside legal teams ( … guessing at about $3,500 an hour) because THEIR in-house legal team does not have the competencies to defend their positions, which has not changed in NINE YEARS.