 |
| Moshe Friedman in Court According to the signed and sworn police report which was the basis of his indictment: The People of the State of New York County of Kings v Moshe Friedman: …Between September 01, 2013 … and June 06, 2014 … at … [a yeshiva in Boro Park], the defendant … on multiple incidents per month … |
Getting Away With Abuse
Michael J. Salamon
Just
last week a New York State licensed teacher, an admitted and convicted
child molester, received what is being referred to as a sweetheart
sentence for his crimes. This 31-year-old charedi man sodomized a
6-year-old, bit his penis and among other threats put a gun to his head
and warned that he would kill him and his family if he told anyone what
happened. Yet this perpetrator received a sentence of probation from the
court. No jail time for him. And he did not even have to register as a
sex offender, something that under other circumstances would have at a
minimum occurred.
It
is not unreasonable to suggest that the district attorney prosecuting
this case was willing to make this deal, allowing a misdemeanor plea,
despite the fact that the perpetrator was originally charged with
first-degree felony sexual acts against a minor because there may have
been no other option. It is reasonable to assume that either one of two
scenarios played out prior to sentencing: either the parents of the
6-year-old molested boy did not want the child to testify, or the
community put significant pressure on the family to not testify against
the perpetrator.
This is not mere conjecture; it is
based upon the history of avoidance of reporting to the authorities
within this particular segment of the Orthodox community. Many cases
have not even made it to a courtroom for these reasons and the result is
that sexual predators have been able avoid any prosecution. Despite a
law requiring anyone who provides health care or teaches children to
report any reasonable suspicion of abuse to the authorities, reporting
in this community rarely happens.
This case was
resolved the same week that the first Kol v’Oz conference was held. As
reported in The Jewish Week (“This Is Something We Can’t Ignore,” Feb.
10), Kol v’Oz is an organization whose mandate is to bring together
international professionals from across the Jewish world to prevent
child sexual abuse in the worldwide Jewish community.
I was among the presenters and
attendees at this important gathering and had the opportunity to ask
some questions of religious leaders who presented their perspectives on
the problem, suggested interventions and their rationale for the best
way to react to protect children.
In virtually all
cases we discussed it was clear that a state law exists that more or
less indicates that those caring for children who suspect child abuse
must report it. This is true in Israel, where everyone is considered a
mandated reporter. In the State of New York, the State Department of
Education issued a clear ruling that even in private schools, anyone who
works with children must report suspected abuse. This ruling by the
department has no room for delaying or discussing a suspicion with
anyone but the properly trained authorities. This makes a great deal of
sense as it is only those professionals who know how to conduct a proper
investigation who should do so. Further, any delay allows a perpetrator
time to continue to offend, threaten those who he or she has already
abused and make excuses for previous offenses.
There are those in
the Jewish world, perhaps now a minority view, who argue that prior to
reporting to the authorities, a rabbi should be consulted. When asked at
the Kol v’Oz conference about this view, one rabbi would not take a
position against it. My follow-up question to him was about licensed
professionals who by law are mandated to report their suspicions
immediately. Were these professionals, I asked, also supposed to ask a
rabbi first or were they required to follow the law and report
immediately?
The response I
received was disconcerting. The rabbi started out by saying that he
would not answer the question. He went on to suggest that the law was
open to interpretation and a case could be made that a report may not
have to be made instantly. I had several follow-up questions that I
could not ask and they bother me still: Who assumes the responsibility
of protecting the child during the delay, and if the state chooses to
prosecute the professional for not reporting as required, will the
Jewish community pay the legal fees?
I am not an
attorney so I have only a limited understanding and even less of a
stomach for the implications of the phrase “open to interpretation.”
What I do know is that there should be no variability for interpretation
of the best interests of a child. As long as we find ways to obstruct
or subvert reasonable legal tools that help to remove abusers and move
to more aggressively protect children, perpetrators will be able to
continue getting away with their abuses — and even when caught may not
receive an appropriate sentence for their perverted crimes.
Dr. Michael J. Salamon is
a fellow of the American Psychological Association and the author of
numerous articles and books, most recently “Abuse in the Jewish
Community” (Urim Publications).
No comments:
Post a Comment