Children in Peril in New York! Jews of all backgrounds will be protesting outside of D.A. Hynes' office, at 350 Jay St. Brooklyn, NY 11201, on June 20th at 4pm!

It is now common knowledge in New York that there is a history of covering up child sex abuse, aiding pedophiles, and avoiding the criminal justice system in a number of private organizations, ranging from the Catholic Church, to the Orthodox Jewish community, to Syracuse University. No District Attorney should be permitted to ignore what is so obviously in his or her own backyard.

Another Infant Dies Due to a Risky Circumcision Practice, and More Needs to Be Done Regarding Child Sex Abuse:

Recently, the New York Daily News reported that another infant had died from herpes, likely contracted from a mohel who had performed oral suction following Orthodox Jewish ritual circumcision. Oral suction is the practice of “sealing” the circumcision by placing the penis in the mouth of the rabbi, who then suctions the blood from the wound, in a centuries-old tradition.

Oral suction is a controversial practice in the Jewish community, and has fallen out of favor with many in that community. In ancient times, the practice was thought to contribute to hygiene, but as it was learned that the practice could spread disease, it was mostly abandoned. Moreover, those Jewish people who do still practice oral suction typically employ a glass tube in the process, to avoid direct contact and disease transmission.

This is not the first death of its kind, but it should be the last. The City of New York has criticized the practice in the past, following other infant deaths that have resulted. (See the New York Times stories here and here.) But neither the city nor the state has yet instituted procedures to ensure that this never happens again.

Now, the Brooklyn District Attorney, Charles Hynes, has rightly opened an investigation into the infant’s death. It is up to him to apply the laws of the State of New York to these facts.

Unfortunately, however, Hynes has thus far been ineffective in deterring or halting child sex abuse in the Chasidim community—hardly a good sign when it comes to his likely future effectiveness in investigating and prosecuting the ritual circumcision death. Thus, there are those who are concerned that this death will go unpunished. It should not.

The Fact That the Dangerous Practice of Oral Suction Is Traditional, Provides No Legal Defense

Importantly, religious belief is no defense when one follows a ritual that is known to cause infants’ death. The practice of exposing an infant’s fresh surgical wound to the risk of herpes (or any other potentially lethal disease that is capable of being spread through contact with saliva) should be outlawed, if it is not adequately covered by the State of New York’s criminal and tort law. At a bare minimum, the New York state legislature must institute its own independent investigation into the practice, the related risks, and possible solutions—including the solution of outlawing the practice of oral suction if it cannot be performed safely.

There is also a role here for the Attorney General, Eric Schneiderman. The mohels who persist in this practice need to be subjected to the full extent of the criminal law. And this is the time to bring the law to bear, before more infants die an easily preventable death. Infants are not expendable resources that religious groups have a right to sacrifice to ancient or contemporary practices. They are persons who have a right to life.

As a Letter to the Editor in the Jewish Week noted, more than one adult is responsible for the death of the infant who recently passed away. The parents, too, may be culpable, if they knew the risks. The mohels only get their power through the willingness of parents to hand off their infant sons to the mohels’ care during the circumcision. This couple is in mourning, no doubt, but if they were aware of the risks and went forward anyway, they are also the authors of their own tragedy.

The city, the state, the religious organization, the mohel, and possibly the child’s parents as well, are responsible for this latest death. Right now, it is the District Attorney who has the power to wring some justice out of this latest outrage, by prosecuting the death on the infant’s behalf. However, he will do no good if he operates under the cloak of secrecy on this issue.

There are those who fear that if the mohel and parents are criminally prosecuted in this case, then the practice of oral suction will go underground, and no one outside the religious organization will know what is happening. However, if law enforcement is doing its job, that is an empty threat. The Mafia was underground, too, but that did not tie the hands of law enforcement. Let them go underground if they choose, knowing full well that what they are doing is criminal. Good luck to them, if the authorities do their jobs properly.

Meanwhile, the Upstate New York DAs Enter Into a Deal With the Albany Diocese Regarding the Reporting of Clergy Child Sex Abuse

Also in New York State, another serious threat to children—clergy child sex abuse—is under debate. And once again the DAs can and should be forging the path to child safety.

Recently, it was announced that a number of District Attorneys had entered into an agreement with the Albany Diocese to improve the reporting of child sex abuse to the authorities. (The D.A.s were P. David Soares, Albany; Paul Czajka, Columbia; Richard D. Northrup Jr., Delaware; Louisa K. Sirea, Fulton; Terry J. Wilhelm, Greene; John H. Crandall, Herkimer; James E. Conboy, Montgomery; John M. Muehl, Otsego; Richard J. McNally, Rensselaer; James A. Murphy, Saratoga; Robert M. Carney, Schenectady; James Sacket, Schoharie; Kathleen B. Hogan, Warren; and Kevin C. Kortright, Washington.)

Apparently, the Diocese had been following the long-established practice of determining for itself what allegations were “credible” before making a report to the authorities. As usual, the Albany Diocese was—like all religious organizations—ill-equipped to make such determinations . Thus, its approach resulted in underreporting, from the perspective of the prosecutors. Kudos to the DAs for taking a proactive approach in examining the Diocese’s reporting practices.

Philadelphia’s Model Should Be Instructive for New York

However, while the DAs’ actions represent progress, they are obviously not enough to ensure that New York’s children are safe. Fortunately, there is a model for deterring and reducing abuse within the Catholic Church: Philadelphia.

In Philadelphia, it was the District Attorney, Lynne Abraham, who began to build the road to justice via a Grand Jury investigation of the cover-up of abuse in the Philadelphia Archdiocese. The investigation then resulted in the 2005 Grand Jury Report.

Laudably, Abraham convened the grand jury even knowing that charges might or might not arise out of its proceedings. She was motivated to get to the bottom of the situation, which involved widespread child sex abuse within one private Philadelphia organization. Abraham’s example ought to be followed. How can any DA fail to follow the trail of such abuse and still claim to be serving the purposes for which he or she was elected?

The 2005 Report did not result in criminal charges, because the statutes of limitations had passed, and other laws in the state were not adequate. But the next District Attorney, Seth Williams, convened another grand jury and issued his own Report last spring.

This time, there were crimes to charge, for there was conduct that fell within the statutes of limitations. In addition, that investigation led to the first criminal trial against a higher-up, Monsignor William Lynn, for his role in the cover-up of abuse. That trial, which is taking place this month, would not have been possible without the groundwork set forth in the 2005 Report.

New York Urgently Needs to Address Its Child Sex Abuse Situation

It is now common knowledge in New York that there is a history of covering up child sex abuse, aiding pedophiles, and avoiding the criminal justice system in a number of private organizations, ranging from the Catholic Church, to the Orthodox Jewish community, to Syracuse University. No District Attorney should be permitted to ignore what is so obviously in his or her own backyard.

That point was brought home forcefully in Pennsylvania with the grand jury investigation and report that turned a spotlight on the multiple victims of Jerry Sandusky and Penn State’s actions to cover up his crimes. Federal prosecutors are now involved, and apparently are investigating whether there were payoffs to victims, through Penn State and/or Second Mile.

So where is the District Attorney’s investigation into the abuse in the New York Archdiocese headed up by Cardinal Timothy Dolan? The letter of agreement with the Albany Diocese is simply not enough. Those DAs need to step up, too.

There is no current investigation by the Syracuse DA, because the statute of limitations has expired, which is a mistake in my view.

A number in the prosecutors’ community also have now stated publicly that they back the Child Victims Act, which I discussed in this previous column. The Act will go far to protect New York’s children by increasing the statutes of limitations on child sex abuse, and creating a civil-suit window for all those survivors whose claims have expired. The DAs supporting the Act include: National District Attorneys Association; District Attorneys Association of the State of New York; Albany County District Attorney P. David Soares; Genesee County District Attorney Lawrence Friedman; Greene County District Attorney Terry J. Wilhelm; Oswego County District Attorney Donald H. Dodd; Otsego County District Attorney John M. Muehl; Queens County District Attorney Richard A. Brown; Rockland County District Attorney Thomas P. Zugibe; Schuyler County District Attorney Joseph G. Fazzary; Suffolk County District Attorney Thomas J. Spota; Ulster County District Attorney D. Holley Carnright; Denis Dillon, former Nassau County District Attorney; Michael C. Green, former Monroe County District Attorney; Robert M. Morgenthau , former New York County District Attorney; Mathew J. Murphy, former Niagara County District Attorney; and Michael A. Acuri, former Oneida County District Attorney.

DAs are elected officials, so the grassroots movement to obtain statute of limitation reform also is important.

Prosecutors can protect children effectively if they pursue the initial, deep investigation into the problem—and then follow through, as Philadelphia has. They are the front lines of child protection, and they—along with every DA everywhere—should be the heroes that our children need and deserve.

Marci A. Hamilton is a professor of law at Cardozo School of Law, and the author of Justice Denied: What America Must Do to Protect Its Children, which was just published in paperback with a new Preface. Her email address is Hamilton02@aol.com.


“DA HYNES: PROTECT VICTIMS, NOT PERPETRATORS”

Jews of all backgrounds will be protesting outside of Hynes' office, at 350 Jay St. Brooklyn, NY 11201, on June 20th at 4pm, to DEMAND that the DA immediately and publicly object to the Rabbinical policy that abuse allegations are vetted by a Rabbi before being brought to the police, and that he apply the same standards of transparency and justice to Jewish abuse cases as are afforded to any other case in his district.

The District Attorney of Brooklyn, NY is the highest local government authority tasked with ensuring justice. Yet evidence is mounting regarding his alleged long history of cooperating with Rabbinical authorities to enable the cover up of child abuse in the Ultra Orthodox community.

As a result, molesters have remained free to victimize children at will. The protest is being organized by Zaakah (Zaakah.com), a grassroots organization that arose from the protest, "The Internet Is NOT The Problem", an event that drew over 300 protesters and was covered by the New York Times, NBC News, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, the BBC and others.

Zaakah believes that press and communal attention is required to make changes within the ultra-Orthodox community with regard to child abuse. To that end they stage lawful and peaceful protests, as well as support victims when their cases come to court.

They seek tangible reform in the following areas: Rabbinical authorities unequivocally assert that ALL abuse allegations are brought directly to appropriate authorities; children and families are educated on abuse prevention and how to properly handle abuse incidents; all school, camp, and mikva employees and volunteers are fingerprinted and subjected to background checks.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:
https://www.facebook.com/events/142981299158849/

Moral Dystopia!

EVERYONE is good, until we’re tested.  (Well, NOT really!)

Eight tortured young men offered searing testimony in Bellefonte, Pa., about being abused as children by Jerry Sandusky in the showers at Penn State, in the basement of his home and at hotels.

But the most haunting image in the case is that of a little boy who was never found, who was never even sought by Penn State officials.

In February 2001, McQueary was home one night watching the movie “Rudy,” about a runty football player who achieves his dream of playing at Notre Dame by the sheer force of his gutsy character. McQueary, a graduate assistant coach and former Penn State quarterback, was so inspired that he got up and went over to the locker room to get some tapes of prospective recruits.

There he ran smack into his own character test. The strapping 6-foot-4 redhead told the court he saw his revered boss and former coach reflected in the mirror: Sandusky, Joe Paterno’s right hand, was grinding against a little boy in the shower in an “extremely sexual” position, their wet bodies making “skin-on-skin slapping sounds.” He met their eyes, Sandusky’s blank, the boy’s startled.

“I’ve never been involved in anything remotely close to this,” the 37-year-old McQueary said. “You’re not sure what the heck to do, frankly.”

He was slugging back water from a paper cup, with the bristly air of a man who knows that many people wonder why he didn’t simply stop the rape and call the police instead of leaving to talk it over with his father and a family friend.

He said he felt too “shocked, flustered, frantic” to do anything, adding defensively: “It’s been well publicized that I didn’t stop it. I physically did not remove the young boy from the shower or punch Jerry out.”

He told Paterno the next morning and went along with the mild reining in of Sandusky, who continued his deviant ways.

Put on administrative leave, McQueary has filed a whistleblower lawsuit against the school. (He was promoted to receivers coach and recruiting coordinator three years after the incident.) “Frankly,” he said, “I don’t think I did anything wrong to lose that job.”

It’s jarring because McQueary looks like central casting for the square-jawed hero who stumbles upon a crime in progress, rescues the child thrilled to hear the footsteps of a savior, and puts an end to the serial preying on disadvantaged kids by a man disguised as the patron saint of disadvantaged kids.

How could so many fine citizens of this college town ignore the obvious and protect a predator instead of protecting children going through the ultimate trauma: getting raped by a local celebrity offering to be their dream father figure? A Penn State police officer warned Sandusky in 1998 to stop showering with boys; Saint Jerry ignored him.

That accuser testified that at the Alamo Bowl, Dottie Sandusky, a good German, came into the hotel room while her husband was in the shower threatening to send the boy home if he would not perform oral sex. Jerry came out and she asked him, “What are you doing in there?” But she soon disappeared.

“She was kind of cold,” the young man recalled. “She wasn’t mean or hateful, nothing like that, just, they’re Jerry’s kids, like that.”

Another accuser, now 18, testified that he screamed when Sandusky raped him in the basement; though Dottie was upstairs, there was no response.

NBC’s Michael Isikoff reported on a secret file discovered in Penn State’s internal investigation, led by Louis Freeh, the former F.B.I. chief. Graham Spanier, a former university president, and Gary Schultz, a former vice president, debated whether they had a legal obligation to report the 2001 shower incident, and in one e-mail, agreed it would be “humane” to Sandusky not to inform social service agencies.

That revoltingly echoes the testimony in the trial of Msgr. William Lynn in Philadelphia, where the late Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua ordered the shredding of a list of 35 priests believed to be child molesters. Lynn testified that he followed Bevilacqua’s orders not to tell victims if others had accused the same priest of abuse, or to inform parishes of the true reason that perverted priests were removed and recirculated.

When a seminarian told Lynn in 1992 that he was raped all through high school by the monstrous Rev. Stanley Gana, Lynn conceded he let it fall “through the cracks.” He also admitted he “forgot” to tell the police investigating a preying priest that the diocese knew of at least eight more cases.

Yet Lynn claimed he did his “best” for victims.

Inundated by instantaneous information and gossip, do we simply know more about the seamy side? Do greater opportunities and higher stakes cause more instances of unethical behavior? Have our materialism, narcissism and cynicism about the institutions knitting society — schools, sports, religion, politics, banking — dulled our sense of right and wrong?

“Most Americans continue to think of their lives in moral terms; they want to live good lives,” said James Davison Hunter, a professor of religion, culture and social theory at the University of Virginia and the author of “The Death of Character.” “But they are more uncertain about what the nature of the good is. We know more, and as a consequence, we no longer trust the authority of traditional institutions who used to be carriers of moral ideals.

“We used to experience morality as imperatives. The consequences of not doing the right thing were not only social, but deeply emotional and psychological. We couldn’t bear to live with ourselves. Now we experience morality more as a choice that we can always change as circumstances call for it. We tend to personalize our ideals. And what you end up with is a nation of ethical free agents.

“We’ve moved from a culture of character to a culture of personality. The etymology of the word character is that it’s deeply etched, not changeable in all sorts of circumstances. We don’t want to think of ourselves as transgressive or bad, but we tend to personalize our understanding of the good.”

And as if we needed more evidence that perversity lurks everywhere, the Jehovah’s Witnesses have been ordered to pay more than $20 million to a woman who was abused for two years, starting at age 9, by a congregation member in California. She had filed a lawsuit accusing the church of instructing elders to keep sex-abuse accusations quiet.

“There are so many ways to rationalize doing the easy thing. And it’s really easy for us to overlook how our inaction to step up and do even the simplest thing leads to profoundly destructive consequences in our society.”

I asked Cory Booker, the Newark mayor, why he ignored his security team and made a snap decision to run into a burning house to save his neighbor. He said his parents taught him to feel indebted to all the people who had sacrificed for his family.

 And he recoiled in law school at the idea that there was not always a legal obligation to help the vulnerable.

“We have to fight the dangerous streams in culture, the consumerism and narcissism and me-ism that erode the borders of our moral culture,” he said. “We can’t put shallow celebrity before core decency. We have to have a deeper faith in the human spirit.

As they say, he who has the heart to help has the right to complain.”

READ ENTIRE ARTICLE:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/17/opinion/sunday/dowd-moral-dystopia.html?emc=tnt&tntemail1=y

'Why didn't the adults do more?'

PHILADELPHIA (AP) When the child sex abuse scandal at Penn State erupted last year, public anger was directed not only toward Jerry Sandusky, but toward the people around him who didn't report their suspicions to police.

In the months that followed, that anger led many states to re-examine and expand their so-called mandatory reporting laws that require people to report suspected abuse or face civil and criminal penalties. Some state laws apply to professionals like doctors and teachers, while others apply universally to all adults.

Child advocates and academics are divided, however, about whether increasing the number of mandatory reporters will make the public more vigilant, or simply overload an already stretched-thin child welfare system and siphon limited resources from children who need help most.

Forty-eight states require at least some professionals to immediately report knowledge or suspicion of child sexual abuse to some authority, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The list of professionals varies by state and can include teachers, school nurses, doctors, social workers, police, day care workers, coaches and camp counselors.

Of those states, 18 have laws that require mandatory reporting of suspected child abuse by all adults.

Many states have no specific sanctions for those who fail to comply with such laws, while others have penalties but they are not enforced unless a case is particularly heinous or deadly, said Teresa Huizar of the National Children's Alliance, a Washington-based advocacy group.

''On the surface, (universal mandatory reporting) sounds like an outstanding idea,'' she said, ''but if you make something everybody's responsibility, it can end up becoming no one's responsibility.''

About 105 bills on the reporting of suspected child abuse and neglect have been introduced in 2012 legislative sessions in 30 states and the District of Columbia, many of them directly in response to the Sandusky case. Legislation has since been enacted in 10 of those states, according to the latest NCSL tally updated Monday.

Oregon, West Virginia, Virginia and South Dakota are among states that expanded their list of professions that are mandatory reporters, while Indiana and Iowa are requiring schools to develop new policies and reporting procedures for responding to suspected child abuse.

Indiana, also in response to the Penn State scandal, passed legislation that requires the state to work with child sexual abuse experts to develop education materials, response policies and reporting procedures on child sexual abuse. A new Iowa law requires schools to implement policy for employees in contact with children to report suspected physical or sexual abuse.

Also as a direct result of the Sandusky case, Florida has passed what is now the toughest mandatory reporting legislation in the country: Failure to report suspected child abuse is a felony, and universities would be fined $1 million and stripped of state funding for two years if officials don't report child abuse. The law applies to everyone - from university coaching staff to elementary school teachers to students.

''Florida now has the toughest laws in the country for protecting children,'' said Lauren Book, who created a nonprofit foundation for child abuse victims and pushed for tougher sex offender laws with her father, lobbyist Ron Book.

She said the legislation compels individuals and institutions to speak up, the aim of which is to prevent what allegedly happened at Penn State from occurring in Florida.

''Mandatory reporting is a good thing but it's only a Band-Aid for a bigger issue,'' said Jim Hmurovich, president of Chicago-based child advocacy organization Prevent Child Abuse America. ''The right solution is we should ensure as adults that the abuse and neglect ever happens in the first place.''

Dozens of universities are implementing their own reporting requirements. Penn State itself has instituted a new policy requiring all employees to report suspected child abuse to state authorities, while the University of Arkansas requires university employees who suspect child abuse to first call the state's Child Abuse Hotline and campus police.

Hmurovich and Huizar said they support the idea of mandatory reporting laws, even if imperfect.

''When we don't prevent abuse and neglect from happening we spend $80 billion a year trying to remediate it with treatment,'' Hmurovich said.

New Jersey's child abuse hotline received as many as 750 calls a day in November after a grand jury indicted Sandusky, compared with 400 in the months before the scandal broke. In Pennsylvania, where about 2,300 reports of suspected child abuse are reported every week, there were more than 4,800 reports of suspected child abuse made statewide for weeks after Sandusky's indictment.

Massachusetts-based child advocacy group Stop It Now saw a 130 percent spike in calls during the first two weeks after the sexual abuse allegations at Penn State, services coordinator Jenny Coleman said.

Huizar said standardizing the current patchwork of requirements, agencies and procedures would make reporting abuse less intimidating and difficult - but perhaps more importantly, a national awareness campaign would be an invaluable step to reducing the societal stigma that makes victims and witnesses remain silent.

''In the same way we've taught people about the dangers of smoking, about using seat belts, about drinking and driving, when there's that kind of a commitment, you really see the dial move in the right direction,'' she said. ''Without that level of investment, you're not going to see that kind of result.''

Despite the uncertainty about whether legislation brings about better outcomes, Huizar said the Sandusky case has shown that there have been encouraging changes when it comes to the way Americans view child abuse.

''The instantaneous and universal outrage ... really is different than what you would have had a decade ago,'' Huizar said. ''People were instantly saying, 'Why didn't the adults do more?' That assumption is an enormously positive change in our societal understanding of who has responsibility for reporting abuse. So we're learning.''

Online: State list of mandatory reporting bills: http://bit.ly/xmDo6r

READ ENTIRE ARTICLE:
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/wake-sandusky-scandal-questions-laws-160746241--ncaaf.html

Texas Rancher Says He Killed a Man Who Was Trying to Sexually Assault His Daughter

A father who killed a man he claims sexually assaulted his 4-year-old daughter will now face the justice system. The Texas rancher told officials he heard his daughter screaming. He found her by a barn and said he saw a farm worker trying to sexually assault her.

Lavaca County Sheriff Micah Harmon described the dad’s account of events, saying, “During the course of him trying to rescue his daughter, he struck the individual several times and the individual ended up dying.”

The sheriff said there is no evidence that has led investigators to doubt the rancher’s story, but it’s up to a grand jury to decide if he will be charged with a crime.

Online Surveys & Market Research

SOURCE:
http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/06/12/father-protecting-his-child-or-cold-blooded-killer-texas-rancher-says-he-killed-a-man-who-was-trying-to-sexually-assault-his-daughter/

Humiliation, Shame and Fear....

On this first day of the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse trial, the prosecutor, Joseph McGettigan, put the following words up on a screen: humiliation, shame and fear. Those are the reasons it almost always takes a long time for abused children to come forward, if they ever do, perhaps especially boys raped by older men.

As Richard B. Gartner said on our Op-Ed page on June 7: “Even in 2012, we are socialized to think that ‘real men’ should be resilient, and certainly not victims. For a man to acknowledge sexual victimhood, even to himself, is to say he is not really male.”

Mr. Sandusky’s trial will focus on alleged abuse that took place between 1994 and 2009. Lawyers have heard from at least one alleged Sandusky victim who can’t sue because he missed the statute of limitations cut off by nine months.

Pennsylvania actually has a relatively lenient age limit for filing child sex abuse charges—30 for civil cases and 50 for criminal cases. In New York, a victim only has five years after his or her 18th birthday to lodge a complaint. Turn 23, and the justice system shrugs.

The Times Magazine recently published a story on child sex abuse at the Horace Mann School in New York City. Most of the accused teachers are dead. But since the incidents took place in the 1970s and 1980s they would not be subject to criminal prosecution or civil suit anyway.

Statutes of limitation exist for sound reasons – after the passage of many years evidence can be hard to come by and memory isn’t always reliable. But we can’t treat child abuse exactly like other crimes. We can’t expect an 11-year-old boy to report what was done to him quickly, or even before he turns 23, especially if he has to reckon with a powerful institution—like Penn State, or the Roman Catholic Church—with an interest in covering up possible crimes.

A few states are revisiting deadlines for child sex abuse cases. We noted on the editorial page that Hawaii recently extended its statute of limitations on civil lawsuits. So did Delaware and California.

Reformers have introduced extension legislation in New York as well, but New York’s Cardinal Timothy Dolan is doing his utmost to ensure that it never becomes law. He said the measure unfairly targets the Catholic Church and would be “devastating for the life of the Church.” It seems the cardinal wants to protect the “life of the Church” while denying justice for children who were abused while under its protection.

SOURCE:
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/11/humiliation-shame-and-fear/?hp

Letters:

Hold faith leaders accountable for abuses

During a 40-hour training program to qualify as a volunteer hot-line crisis advocate for sexual assault victims, I was told "rape was an unfinished murder." That statement resonated with me as I read the article "Philadelphia trial revives Catholic Church sex-abuse crisis." The article, about the trial of a priest charged with child endangerment, reported that since 1950, there have been "more than 16,000 (reported) victims" of child sexual abuse perpetrated by a faith leader. In this particular case, Roman Catholic faith leaders.

Sadly, statistics reveal that this kind of abuse of power is not limited to Roman Catholic leaders. Peruse the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests website or The Hope of Survivors website to see how pervasive clergy sexual abuse is. Furthermore, victims are often adult women, but news reports typically focus on child victims.

What would our political leaders do if more than 16,000 children had died from some other negligent behavior perpetrated by an adult? I am sure they would create laws to better protect children from an unnecessary death. Predatory faith leaders prey on the vulnerable: young and adult. The perpetrators need to be held accountable.

Thank you for keeping this issue in the forefront of news coverage; we cannot eradicate this social problem if it remains hidden.

Suzanne Cyr; Rye, N.H.


Hypocrisy of Catholic Church

I was fascinated by two pieces Friday featuring the Catholic Church, one article about the trial in Philadelphia of a priest charged with child endangerment, and the editorial on the contraception mandate ("Editorial: In contraception battle, both sides overreach").

The trial brought up the Catholic clergy's abuse of children and the church's misogynistic stand on birth control. A bunch of elderly, celibate men tell women not to use contraceptives, but they try to protect pedophile priests! I left the Catholic Church 50 years ago because of the hypocrisy. I have lost all respect for the Catholic clergy.

Further, neither birth control nor pedophilia is a religious issue! They don't deserve First Amendment protection. Contraception is a public health issue, and we should provide free birth control to all women who want it. Pedophile priests are criminals and should be defrocked and turned over to civil authorities. With all the hunger, poverty, war and overpopulation, the church should be concentrating on larger moral issues.

Bernice Durbin; Crossville, Tenn.

Orthodox NYC counselor on trial in sex abuse case

Posted at: 06/11/2012 3:06 AM

(AP) NEW YORK - The abuse went on for nearly three years before the schoolgirl told anyone that her spiritual adviser was molesting her while he was supposed to be mentoring her about her religion, authorities said.

But in Brooklyn’s ultra-orthodox Jewish community, 53-year-old Nechemya Weberman has been embraced and defended as wrongly accused. The girl has been called a slut and a troublemaker, her family threatened and spat at on the street.

The rallying around Weberman, who goes on trial this month, and ostracizing of his accuser and her family reflects long-held beliefs in this insular community that problems should be dealt with from within and that elders have far more authority than the young. It also brought to light allegations that the district attorney was too cozy with powerful rabbis, a charge he vehemently denies.

"There are other people that claim misconduct and they can’t come out because they’re going to be re-victimized and ostracized by the community," said Judy Genut, a friend of the accuser’s family who counsels troubled girls.

Brooklyn is home to about 250,000 ultra-orthodox Jews, the largest community outside of Israel. Step onto a Williamsburg street and tall guys in skinny jeans and tattoos are mingling with a flush of men in dark coats and hats carrying prayer books and speaking Yiddish. The Hasidic Jews appear to outsiders as though they come from another time; embracing centuries-old traditions, they wear black clothes, tall hats, long beards and earlocks. Women wear long skirts and cover their heads after they marry.

They have their own ambulances and schools, called yeshivas, their own civilian police and rabbinical courts. Members are encouraged to first speak to a rabbi before going to secular authorities _ and as a result, cases rarely make it to outside law enforcement.

The topic has been studied and reported in the Jewish media for years and has recently made headlines in New York papers.

"They think that anyone who turns over anyone to the outside authorities is committing a transgression to the community at large," said Samuel Heilman, a professor of Jewish studies at Queens College.

The girl, now 17, was sent to Weberman at age 12 because she’d been asking theological questions and he had a reputation for helping people back on the spiritual path. He often counseled people, though he had no formal training. But during sessions, authorities say, he forced the girl to perform sex acts.

The girl started dressing immodestly, was deemed a troublemaker and removed from her school _ one Weberman was affiliated with _ and sent to another, family friends said. The allegations surfaced in 2011 when she told a guidance counselor there she’d been molested.

The Associated Press typically doesn’t identify people who say they are the victims of sexual assault.

Weberman has pleaded not guilty, and articles in Hasidic newspapers have proclaimed his innocence and begged the community for support. More than 1,000 men showed up for a fundraiser aiming to raise $500,000 for his legal fees and, if he’s convicted and jailed, money for his family.

It’s very hard for the town to believe the things that he’s being accused of because he has a reputation of doing good and being good," Genut said.

George Farkas, Weberman’s lawyer, said his client isn’t guilty but is damned regardless because the allegations will taint his reputation.

The family has said they would’ve preferred to handle the allegations within the community. But when accusations are managed from the inside, victims are rarely believed and abusers aren’t punished _ in part because the word of an elder is respected over the word of a child, victims and advocates say.

Joel Engelman said he tried to work with yeshiva officials, finally confronting them at age 22 about a rabbi who abused him as a child. Engelman was given a lie detector test and encouraged to keep quiet about the allegations, and the rabbi was temporarily removed _ long enough for Engelman to turn 23, making him too old under state law to file a complaint.

"It’s that they don’t want to believe that the rabbis that they’ve been raised to respect could be so cruel and could be so criminal," said Engelman, now 26.

His mother, Pearl, herself an activist, said the community is overwhelmingly good and believes people must be educated about the crime to start standing up for the victims.

"I’m not an anarchist, I’m not a rebel," said the 64-year-old mother of seven. "I love this community, and I want to change it for the better and make it safer for children."

Outside law enforcement has also had a difficult time. Before 2009, only a handful of sex abuse cases were reported within the ultra-orthodox community. Then, District Attorney Charles Hynes created a program called Kol Tzedek (Voice of Justice) aimed at helping more victims come forward about abuse, an underreported crime everywhere.

Part of the deal, along with a designated hotline and counseling, is that prosecutors don’t actively publicize the names of accused abusers. The cases are still tried in open court, where the names are public.

Before Kol Tzedek, Hynes said, he struggled to mount a successful prosecution. "As soon as we would give the name of a defendant ... (rabbis and others) would engage this community in a relentless search for the victims," he said. "And they’re very, very good at identifying the victims. And then the victims would be intimidated and threatened, and the case would fall apart."

Since then, 100 of the total 5,389 cases in the borough have come from the ultra-orthodox community, the district attorney’s office said. Hynes also started a taskforce to combat intimidation attempts _ and has said rabbis have a duty to come forward if they have been told of abuse.

But victims’ rights advocates say Hynes has purposefully ignored some cases and hasn’t pushed as strongly for full prosecutions of others _ bowing to powerful rabbis in exchange for political support, a charge he strongly denies.

"He doesn’t take care of victims," said Nuchem Rosenberg, a rabbi who says he was ostracized for speaking out about abuse. "He takes care of those in power, so they can all keep power."

Genut said the accuser is ready to testify. Her family, though, is looking for a higher judgment than criminal court."They believe that God’s going to take revenge on him," she said. "They’re suffering a lot and they say one nice day God’s going to show us that he did stick up for us."

SOURCE:
http://wnyt.com/article/stories/s2650562.shtml?cat=300

"The Good Guys Are Criminals & Sex Offenders"

THEY GET RAPED 3 TIMES! WE WILL NOT QUIT....ELIMINATE THE GATEKEEPERS...

(ALL) Adults who fail to report it could face up to five years in prison or a $10,000 fine if convicted.

"So we decided to amend the law and create this new provision that said, 'Listen, if you see a kid being sexually abused, you have an absolute, ironclad responsibility to report that to the legal authorities immediately,'" he said.

BATON ROUGE, La. (AP) — A sexual abuse scandal that rocked Penn State University has resulted in new laws in Louisiana to penalize those who fail to report allegations of child sex abuse and protect those who do.

Three of the bills have been signed by Gov. Bobby Jindal. The Republican governor said he intends to sign the fourth.

One measure protects whistleblowers who report child sex abuse from employer retaliation, while two others penalize those who fail to report to law enforcement. A fourth adds certain classes of athletics coaches to the list of individuals required to notify authorities if they suspect child sex abuse.

Sen. J.P. Morrell, D-New Orleans, sponsor of two of the bills, said they would close an unintended loophole in Louisiana law that that didn't make it mandatory for all people to report child abuse if they see it.

"The concern I had was, after the Penn State scandal, there was a lot of allegations regarding individuals who may have had knowledge of the sexual abuse but never disclosed it," Morrell said.

Morrell said many of the employees who might have seen sexual abuse were afraid to report it for fear of losing their jobs, and one of his bills protects whistleblowers from being fired, suspended or demoted when they report allegations.

Last November, the sex abuse scandal involving football assistant coach Jerry Sandusky exploded at Penn State after he was initially charged with sexually assaulting eight boys over a 15-year period.

Among the allegations was a 2002 incident in which then-graduate student Mike McQueary claims he saw Sandusky sexually assaulting a naked boy in a locker room shower. McQueary said he reported the incident to Sandusky's former boss, head football coach Joe Paterno, who then told the university's athletic director.

Pennsylvania's attorney general said despite state law, it was not reported to any law enforcement or child protective agencies. Sandusky now faces 52 criminal counts. He has denied the allegations.

Under previous Louisiana law, child care providers, members of the clergy, mental health workers, elementary and secondary school teachers and others listed in the state children's code were required to report any abuse or neglect they encounter. But Morrell said if you're an average citizen and discover child abuse, the law did not force you to report it.

"So we decided to amend the law and create this new provision that said, 'Listen, if you see a kid being sexually abused, you have an absolute, ironclad responsibility to report that to the legal authorities immediately,'" he said.

Adults who fail to report it could face up to five years in prison or a $10,000 fine if convicted.

Judy Benitez, executive director of the Louisiana Foundation Against Sexual Assault, said she understands why lawmakers would want to respond to the Penn State scandal, but the issue is really about morals. Often, she said, when people witness child sex abuse, they perpetrator will be a family member, boss or partner.

"People fail to realize how overwhelming such a realization can be, besides the fact it's shocking to walk in on something like that. I think really what a lot of what's going on to change has already happened in terms of people discussing it," she said.

Her organization cites statistics from a 2000 national report by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention that says juveniles make up 71 percent of all sex crime victims. Benitez also says it's very hard to aggregate statistics on sexual assault because many victims don't report it.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published a study in 2006 on childhood maltreatment and found that adverse childhood experiences were common; 20 percent of participants reported that they had been sexually abused as a child.

Additionally, the Obama administration updated the FBI's decades-old definition of rape in January to include men and children. Benitez says broadening the FBI's previously narrow definition will change the numbers dramatically.

Rep. Walt Leger, D-New Orleans, who sponsored the measure mandating that coaches report any signs of sexual abuse, said he found the facts surrounding the Pennsylvania case so offensive that he had to come up with a way to strengthen laws that protect children.

"That's where this piece of legislation really came from, it was a reaction to that and the desire to make sure that our laws were strong enough to protect our young people," he said. "I'm glad to see that coaches across the state are going to now understand that when they witness abuse, they need to report it."

Online: House Bills 166 and 577 and Senate Bills 4 and 158 can be found at http://www.legis.la.gov/



READ ENTIRE ARTICLE:
http://www.necn.com/06/09/12/Penn-State-sex-abuse-charges-inspire-new/landing_nation.html?&apID=0e9b22701e014da7bb6162640c482fbc

A Troubled Silence!

THE revelation this week of alleged widespread child abuse at the elite Horace Mann School in New York City, most of it occurring during the 1970s and ’80s, is only the most recent instance of men coming forward, many years after the fact, with horrific stories of sexual molesting from their childhood.

Most of those accused of the abuse in the Horace Mann case are dead, but under New York State law, if alive they would most likely be safe from justice. The state’s statute of limitations on child abuse is five years from the victim’s 18th birthday. After age 23, the victim has no recourse.

Yet young adults, particularly men, who suffer the aftereffects of abuse are rarely in an emotional state to bring charges. Given what we now know about why it takes victims so long to come forward, the law needs to be changed.

Many people cast a skeptical eye on those who wait so long to reveal instances of child abuse, particularly when it happened to them as teenagers. They assume that accusers are making it up, blaming what were at most minor incidents for their troubles.

But in my decades of experience working with abuse victims, I have found that men spend years putting their emotions in a deep freeze or masking post-traumatic reactions with self-defeating behaviors like compulsive gambling and substance abuse. Eventually, they are forced by internal or external events to find treatment.

I once conducted a training seminar about how to treat men with histories of sexual abuse. One student, a semiretired social worker in his 70s, asked a barrage of questions and was consistently derisive of what he saw as other people’s overly emotional reactions to the horrifying histories.

Another participant finally criticized him for derailing the conversation. He was silent for a long moment. Then he began to weep.

Between sobs, he poured out the story of his own childhood sexual trauma. In the 60 or more years since, he had barely hinted about it to anyone, and the years of silence had left him isolated in unemotional, unsatisfying adult intimate relationships.

He was, sadly, typical of male abuse victims. Even in 2012, we are socialized to think that “real men” should be resilient, and certainly not victims. For a man to acknowledge sexual victimhood, even to himself, is to say he is not really male.

What’s more, conventional wisdom says abuse turns a boy gay, despite strong evidence to the contrary. Straight boys wonder why they were chosen for sexual victimization, afraid they might be gay. Gay boys may feel rushed into defining themselves as gay or decide that abuse caused their orientation, complicating their ability to develop positive identities as gay men.

Even worse, perhaps, and again without evidence, common folklore tells us that sexually abused boys almost inevitably grow up to be sexually abusing men. This terrifies a male victim, even if he has no thought of becoming a sexual predator. He worries he may become predatory without volition or warning, or that others will assume he is an abuser if they know his history.

Finally, since boyhood abuse was not part of the public conversation until recently, many boys and men assumed their experiences were repulsive and aberrant. And a man who has not talked about it might feel it would be humiliating to first disclose it in middle age or later.

Needless to say, the decades spent trying to bury the memories rarely work. The man in my seminar is a prime example of how sexually abused men who remain mute become isolated, frightened of emotions and hypervigilant.

Things may be changing, thanks, in part, to the recent spate of abuse revelations. Many older victims have gained the courage to come forward. In my own practice, I received almost as many calls from sexually abused men in December and January, soon after allegations surfaced about abuse by the former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky, as I usually get in a year. With Mr. Sandusky’s trial set to begin next week, I expect to get even more calls.

But more needs to be done. Every year since 2005, Margaret M. Markey, a New York State assemblywoman, has introduced a bill to extend the statute of limitations for five more years, a modest increase; it would also create a one-year window for adults up to age 53 to bring charges against alleged abusers. The bill has passed the Assembly four times but has consistently been blocked from coming to the floor of the Senate, largely thanks to fierce lobbying by the Roman Catholic Church. Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo has yet to take a position on the bill.

The stories of abuse at Horace Mann and elsewhere are truly horrifying. But the victims will have done a great service if their actions persuade others to come forward — and the State Legislature to, at long last, set a realistic statute of limitations for going after their abusers.

Richard B. Gartner is a psychologist and psychoanalyst and the author of “Beyond Betrayal: Taking Charge of Your Life After Boyhood Sexual Abuse.”

SOURCE:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/08/opinion/in-light-of-child-abuse.html?ref=opinion

Questions For the Gedolim - What’s an ‘ephebophile’?



I Bet You Were A Beautiful Baby!



2 - Do all parties in a conspiracy have to know they are committing a crime?
3- Explain the meaning of "agree" in a conspiracy.
4 - Do all parties in a conspiracy have to know they are committing a crime?
5 - Does a marker board and an easel have to be toiveled before use?

After spending two days inquiring about complex legal terms, jurors at the clergy-sex abuse trial appeared to struggle Wednesday to agree on the meaning of "agree."

That was one of words they asked Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina to parse for them. The panel also wanted definitions of "pedophile" and "ephebophile." And they asked to see evidence related to 13 accused priests who had been mentioned during the landmark trial.

The requests marked the third time in as many days of deliberations that the panel of seven men and five women sought guidance or evidence in the child endangerment and sex-abuse against Msgr. William J. Lynn and the Rev. James J. Brennan.

They got some answers, but ended the day without signs they were near a verdict.

The lawyers agreed that pedophiles generally refer to adults who are sexually attracted to children and that ephebophiles are drawn to adolescents.

But Alan J. Tauber, one of four lawyers for Lynn, noted that neither side offered an expert during the trial to define the terms. He said it would be wrong to do so now.

"The parties chose how they were going to present the case," he said. "I think (the jurors) have to rely on the evidence."

Assistant District Attorney Patrick Blessington agreed. "The words have both medical and common definitions," he said.

Jurors also asked the judge to explain the meaning of "agree" in a conspiracy. She reread them her jury instruction, which described such a pact as "a common understanding."

Minutes later, they had a follow-up question: Do all parties in a conspiracy have to know they are committing a crime?

No, the judge replied in a written note.

The stream of questions had the defendants, their lawyers, reporters and others parading back and forth to the courtroom throughout the day.

As she walked off the bench after toward the end of the day, Sarmina quipped to the lawyers: "So, I guess I'll see you all at the next question."

That next one became the last one: The jurors asked if they could have a marker board and an easel.

They'll get it when they return Thursday morning, Sarmina said. Then she excused them for the day.

Lynn, the former clergy secretary for the archdiocese, is accused of conspiracy and endangering children by recommending a priest, Edward Avery, for assignments in the 1990s despite alleged signs they might abuse minors. Avery, who has since been defrocked has pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a 10-year-old altar boy in 1999.

Brennan is accused of trying to rape a 14-year-old boy in 1996, and of endangering other unnamed children when he served as a parish priest in the ensuing years.

SOURCE: (EXCEPT THE LETZONUS)
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/157529345.html

Prep School Predators!

The Horace Mann School’s Secret History of Sexual Abuse

..."Speaking calmly and staring into the flames, he told us that when he was in eighth grade, Wright sexually assaulted him. “And not just me,” he added. “There were others.” First Wright befriended him, he said. Then he molested him. Then he pretended nothing happened.

No one knew what to say, at least at first. But then slowly, the rest of us started telling stories, too. One of the guys talked about a teacher who took him on a field trip, and then invited him into his bed in the hotel room they were sharing. (My friend fled, walking in the rain for hours until the coast seemed clear.) Another told a story about a teacher who got him drunk and naked; that time, no one fled. We talked about the steakhouse dinner, which was a far cry from abuse, but an example of how easy it can be for boundaries to blur and how hard it can be, in the moment, for students to get their bearings. Finally, we all went to sleep.

Then we went home, and another 20 years slid by.

When the Penn State scandal came out last year, I kept getting tangled in the questions everyone else was getting tangled in: How does an institutional culture arise to condone, or at least ignore, something that, individually, every member knows is wrong? Andrew’s story came back to me in a rush. The questions of Penn State, I realized, are the questions of Horace Mann and perhaps every place that has been haunted by a similar history.

I called Andrew. He was thinking about Horace Mann, too — about his own experiences and those of his classmates. And about Mark Wright.

In many ways, Wright was the ultimate Horace Mann success story. People who knew him remember him as tall and extroverted, with an easy smile and a huge laugh. He graduated in 1972, a time when African-American students like him were a rarity, then went to Princeton, where he majored in art and archaeology and played right tackle for the football team. A glowing article about him in The Daily Princetonian described him as “a Picasso in cleats,” and speculated on whether he could have gone pro or would get a Ph.D. “I think Mark lives life to the fullest,” the head of his department told the paper, noting that he “exudes enthusiasm and versatility.” After college, he came back to Horace Mann to teach art and to coach football.

“I first had him as an art teacher,” Andrew told me, in the steadied voice of someone who had worked through the story in therapy. “He was a great guy. Funny, gregarious, everyone loved him. He had this aura of success around him, and I was so happy that someone like him would take an interest in a skinny underclassman like me. I felt special.

“One night he called my house and asked my parents if he could take me to the museum,” Andrew continued. “My parents were so excited that a teacher would take such an interest in me.” And this being Horace Mann, he added, “it didn’t hurt that he had also gone to Princeton.” Still, Andrew didn’t feel comfortable hanging out with a teacher on the weekend, so he turned down the invitation. A little later Wright had another idea: he asked to draw a portrait of Andrew.

“It was the night of the eighth-grade dance,” he told me, “and instead of going to the gym, I went to meet him in his art studio on the fourth floor of Tillinghast. He locked the door and told me to undress.” As he got to this part of the story, Andrew’s pace slowed and his voice lowered....."

READ ENTIRE MAGAZINE ARTICLE: CLICK: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/10/magazine/the-horace-mann-schools-secret-history-of-sexual-abuse.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&nl=afternoonupdate&emc=edit_au_20120606

The Prevalence of Clergy Sexual Misconduct with Adults: A Research Study

This research study involved two companion projects: (1) a national random survey to determine the prevalence of clergy sexual misconduct (CSM) with adults; and (2) a qualitative study of three groups of women and men: (a) those who self-identified as survivors who had been the objects of CSM, (b) family or friends of survivors, and (c) offenders who had themselves committed CSM. The goal of both projects was to define the scope and nature of CSM, so that effective prevention strategies can be proposed for the protection of religious leaders and congregants.

General Statistics of the Research:

•national, random survey conducted in 2008 with 3,559 respondents

•phone interviews with 46 persons who had experienced clergy sexual misconduct as adults, representing 17 different Christian and Jewish religious affiliations

•phone interviews with 15 persons who were second-hand victims of CSM (husbands, friends and other church staff members); and with 21 experts (non-offending religious leaders, researchers, and professionals who provide care for survivors and offenders)

The Prevalence of CSM

We used the 2008 General Social Survey (GSS) to estimate the prevalence of clergy sexual misconduct. This is an in-person survey of a nationally representative sample of noninstitutionalized English- or Spanish-speaking adults, conducted by National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago. The 2008 survey included 3559 respondents. Although the GSS is an in-person interview, the questions we developed specifically for this project were self-administered, making it easier for respondents to report potentially painful or embarrassing experiences.

Clergy sexual misconduct was defined in this study as:

Minister, priests, rabbis, or other clergypersons or religious leaders who make sexual advances or propositions to persons in the congregations they serve who are not their spouses or significant others.

Of those surveyed:

•More than 3% of women who had attended a congregation in the past month reported that they had been the object of CSM at some time in their adult lives;

•92% of these sexual advances had been made in secret, not in open dating relationships; and

•67% of the offenders were married to someone else at the time of the advance.

•In the average American congregation of 400 persons, with women representing, on average, 60% of the congregation, there are, on average of 7 women who have experienced clergy sexual misconduct.

•Of the entire sample, 8% report having known about CSM occurring in a congregation they have attended. Therefore, in the average American congregation of 400 congregants, there are, on average, 32 persons who have experienced CSM in their community of faith....

We used the software package Atlas-Ti to code the interview transcripts and then to identify six common themes that describe the social characteristics of the congregations in which clergy sexual misconduct (CSM) occurs. Those themes include:

1.Family members, friends, and victims ignored warning signs. Religious leaders acted inappropriately in public as well as private settings, but in a culture that has no cognitive categories for understanding or explaining clergy misconduct as anything other than an "affair," observers mistrusted their own judgment, perhaps considering themselves "hypersensitive," particularly since the behavior was committed by a trusted leader. First indicators of CSM were thus ignored.

2.Niceness culture: American culture expects persons to be "nice" to one another, particularly those we know and respect, and particularly in a congregation. "Nice" means not being confrontational, giving the other the "benefit of the doubt," and overlooking social indiscretions in order to avoid embarrassment. Even when family members, friends, and victims knew about or suspected CSM or behavior leading to CSM, they did not speak about their observations.

3.Ease of private communication: E-mail and cell phones have replaced mailed letters and phone calls to the family household. An intimate relationship between leader and congregant can develop via e-mail and cell phones with complete invisibility to family and community.

4.No oversight: Religious leaders often answer to no one about their daily activities and are free to move about the community and to maintain an office that is isolated from observation.

5.Multiple roles: Religious leaders engage in multiple roles with congregants in addition to their role as leader, including counselor and personal friend. They obtain knowledge about congregants' personal lives and struggles that can make the congregant vulnerable and dependent.

6.Trust in the sanctuary: Congregations are considered sanctuaries-safe places-where normal attentiveness to self-protection is not considered necessary. Because of this perceived sanctuary, congregants share life experiences and private information with religious leaders that they would not share with others.

READ ENTIRE STUDY:
http://www.baylor.edu/clergysexualmisconduct/index.php?id=67406

Brooklyn DA is talking the talk on enablers of child abuse in ultra-Orthodox community...

But Charles Hynes must walk the walk as well!

Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes must prosecute sex-abuse cases more vigorously.

To hear District Attorney Charles Hynes now tell it, members of Brooklyn’s ultra-Orthodox Jewish community have criminally protected child sex abusers by bullying victims and their families into silence.

“I haven’t seen this kind of intimidation in organized-crime cases or police corruption,” Hynes declared in an interview with the Daily News.

So whom among these obstructors of justice did Hynes prosecute? Virtually no one. And whom among the predators did he send to prison? Far, far fewer than he should have across the first 19 of his more than 22 years in office.

As Hynes stunningly admitted to the Jewish Daily Forward, for almost two decades he was “completely unsuccessful” in prosecuting sex abuse by ultra-Orthodox Brooklynites, a group that was politically important to him and whose leaders discourage, as a matter of religion, involvement with civil authorities.

Hynes disputes that he was passive in the face of victimization — which is no more prevalent in this constituency than in any other — but the evidence is overwhelming that he took a destructively accommodating approach to sex crime prosecutions involving the ultra-Orthodox.

In 1998, Hynes let David Zimmer, accused of groping a 9-year-old girl and raping a 10-year-old, plead guilty to a single count and a sentence of probation. Zimmer was represented by the husband of Hynes’ Jewish community liaison. Zimmer has since been charged in a series of molestations.

The 9-year-old’s father told The New York Times: “If they don’t want to prosecute, what are you going to do?”

In 2008, Hynes entered a plea bargain with Rabbi Yehuda Kolko, a teacher with a 30-year history of abuse complaints. Charged with two felony counts, he pleaded to a misdemeanor, over the objection of a victim’s father, and escaped jail time.

“I believe they were looking for angles out,” the father told the Jewish Week newspaper.

In 2009, Hynes launched a program called Voice of Justice that was billed as a “culturally sensitive” approach to community resistance to reporting child abuse.

A few months later, the Forward reported the organizing body of Modern Orthodox rabbis had affirmed that rabbinic courts should decide whether to bring sexual abuse allegations against Jews to law enforcement.

In May 2011, The Forward reported that Agudath Israel of America, a leading ultra-Orthodox advocacy group, had also told followers that they could go to law enforcement only after consulting a rabbi, even if they were in professions mandated by state law to report abuse.

Rather than protest that religious authorities have no place interfering in criminal justice, let alone counseling to violation of law, a Hynes spokesman said: “If anyone asks us, we tell them to call police or the DA’s office.”

Last summer, Agudath Israel executive director Rabbi David Zwiebel told Hynes his organization was directing followers that they could report sex abuse only after a rabbi weighed the credibility of allegations.  
Zwiebel told the Times that Hynes “expressed no oppostion or objection.” That came to light in a report that also described how the community cowed victims from testifying by expulsion from religious schools and synagogues and even eviction from apartments. The report became a tipping point for Hynes.

First, he wrote in a Daily News Op-Ed: “Although I would not interfere with anyone’s decision to speak to their religious leader, I also expect allegations of criminal conduct to be reported to the appropriate law enforcement authorities.”

Under severe criticism, he then escalated to warning that rabbis could be obstructing justice when they insist on talking to victims first.

He also defended his record over the past three years with statistics showing prosecutions by his Voice of Justice program, but he held to the misguided policy of refusing to disclose names of accused ultra-Orthodox offenders.

Hynes has also called for state legislation to mandate abuse reporting by clerics and formed a task force to address the witness intimidation that he compares to the tactics of organized crime.

He need only do the one thing he should have done since he was first elected in 1989: Prosecute.

SOURCE:
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/brooklyn-da-talking-talk-enablers-child-abuse-ultra-orthodox-community-article-1.1088575

Does Talmudic Law Require Jews To Report Sex Crimes?

The case of Nechemya Weberman, an ultra-Orthodox Jewish man accused of sexually abusing a young woman, has not just spun a secretive community into international spotlight: It's also prompted questions about how Brooklyn's ultra-Orthodox and Hasidic communities handle sex offense accusations, since victim and witness intimidation and shaming are common.

Indeed, even Charles Hynes has come under intense scrutiny, after reports came to light indicating the Brooklyn District Attorney's "apparent complicity in an effort by Brooklyn's Ultra-Orthodox and Hasidic leaders to cover up sex abuse in their communities."

So you might wonder: Is this seeming cover-up culture part and parcel to Judaism?

The answer is quite complicated. [NOT REALLY]

The Voice reached out to Michael Broyde, a rabbi and associate professor of law at Emory Law School and the academic director of the university's Law and Religion Program.

He's one of the leading authorities on this topic -- the intersection of secular and Talmudic law, that is. In Jewish texts, the topic in question is called "informing" (mesira in Hebrew). Broyde authored a lengthy opinion on the issue.

Historically, there is a Talmudic prohibition against snitching on fellow Jews to non-Jewish law enforcement authorities, but only when it comes to non-violent crimes.

This policy stems from the Middle Ages, when non-Jewish authorities could not be expected to treat the community fairly:

"Jews have generally lived in situations where government was unjust (or unjust towards Jews) or bandits formed the basis for government, and telling the abusive government that a Jew had money or that a Jew had broken the law was a dangerous act. Indeed, this conduct clearly, readily and directly caused people to have their money taken, themselves beaten or tortured and sometimes simply murdered. The Talmudic Sages had no choice but to enact rabbinic decrees prohibiting such informing."

The question, of course, is: What happens when Jews live in governments that generally do treat people fairly, like America?

Broyde had a bit to say on this. For starters, even in unfair governmental contexts, Talmudic law requires that they inform on each other to whomever necessary in the case of a violent crime -- like a murder or sex offense -- so that justice is served.

But even with non-violent crimes -- such as smoking pot or tax fraud -- most modern interpretations still require that Jews go to the authorities.

So we asked Broyde what the deal is, since unwillingness to do this seems to persist in Brooklyn's Hasidic and Ultra-Orthodox communities.

"The overwhelming consensus of Jewish law authorities require that one reports when secular law mandates that you report, or in situations when non-reporting produces a physical threat to the well being of another," he said.

However, "implementing mandatory reporting remains very complicated not just in a Jewish society but in every society. People don't like mandatory reporting...People don't always do what the law requires of them."

So yes. The Talmud says one thing. Modern interpretation says another. And though most Jews in the U.S. would readily inform, some apparently would not.

READ MORE:
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2012/05/jews_sex_crimes_talmud.php

Public Secrecy About (Jewish) Child Sexual Abuse!

Attorney and author Michael Lesher made oral arguments on February 14 before New York State’s Court of Appeals in his longstanding Freedom of Information (FOIL) lawsuit against Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes. Lesher’s lawsuit aimed to push the district attorney to provide some much needed transparency regarding cases of child sexual abuse in fervently Orthodox (sometimes referred to in media reports as the “Haredi” or “ultra-Orthodox”) communities.

Hella Winston, a Senior Fellow at the Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism, wrote about what was at stake in the February 14 hearing, and how the Court decided the case on April 3.

Freedom of Information—On Trial

The Court decided not to require the Brooklyn district attorney to release the documents. According to The New York Jewish Week, Robert Freeman, the executive director of the New York State Department of State Committee on Open Government, called aspects of the decision “troublesome.” in this case will have a significant impact on the public’s access to information about what the government is doing in citizens’ names.

READ ENTIRE BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM PIECE:
http://www.brandeis.edu/investigate/political-social-justice/public-secrecy-about-child-sexual-abuse.html

Yeshiva of Brooklyn Sex Abuse Victim Comes Forward!

BROOKLYN, NY (PIX11)— The family of a Brooklyn man being treated for drug addiction in California traces his problems back to sexual abuse by a yeshiva teacher, when he was just 9 years old. "I do recall the rabbi being over here, trying to hush up my dad," Yosef Werner--the abuse survivor's brother--told PIX 11 Friday.

20 years ago, Daniel "Benji" Werner came home from the Yeshiva of Brooklyn one day and started confiding in his mother at their Midwood home. "He told me the rabbi was touching him," Yehudis Werner told PIX. "And I said, 'What??!!"

Benji Werner told his mother the teacher would call him up to the front of the class, take the boy behind the desk, place Benji on his lap, and then put his hands in the boy's pants and molest him.

Mrs. Werner said she called her husband, Aaron, and he started contacting other parents from Benji's class. She told PIX several parents had heard the same thing from their children. Soon after, she said the family received calls from religious leaders. "They called up my husband and said 'if you continue to call parents, we'll make your name mud.'"

Yehudis Werner told PIX that because the family with eight children had recently emigrated to Brooklyn from Israel, they didn't want to rock the boat back then by going to police.

The Werner family decided to talk to PIX 11 now, because of recent publicity surrounding the District Attorney's office and how it's handled sexual abuse cases in the Orthodox Jewish community. The Kings Country District Attorney, Charles Hynes, told reporters this week he's ready to put handcuffs on any religious leader who threatens witnesses in the ultra-Orthodox neighborhoods.

Back in 1992, Benji Werner's parents took him out of the yeshiva and transferred him to a school on the lower East Side of Manhattan. But within a couple of years, Yosef Werner recalls his kid brother was getting into trouble, at the age of 11. "I know he was popping Ecstasy pills at a very early stage," Yosef Werner told PIX.

From rehab in California, Benji Werner told PIX 11 by phone Friday, "I basically isolated myself. I was depressed. After two years in my new school, one of the kids introduced me to marijuana. I smoked it and it would deaden my feelings." Werner acknowledged he later took Ecstasy and acid. At one point, he said, he struggled with anorexia, the eating disorder.

Through tears, Benji Werner's mother told PIX, "My only regret? I wish I got him counseling at the time." She told PIX her son tells her not to feel so badly. "He said, 'At least you did better than other parents. You put me in a new school.'" Yehudis Werner said she recently told her son, "Benji, thank you for confiding in me."

When PIX 11 contacted Yeshiva of Brooklyn Friday, a man who answered the phone said he was the principal. When I identified myself and asked if Benji's rabbi was still working at the yeshiva, the man told me, "No, he is no longer here." When I asked why, he responded, "None of your business. This is a private school."

Six years ago, Benji Werner and his brother paid a visit to the Kings County District Attorney's office. But Benji Werner was already 24 years old, so too much time had passed; under state law, there could be no prosecution, because of the statute of limitations.

Yosef Werner, a teacher, said he was working with a liason in the Orthodox Jewish community to get an apology from Benji's old teacher. But it never happened. "I did get a bottle of Chivas Regal from this individual who was trying to bribe me to shut my mouth up," Werner said.

Werner's father, Aaron, is dead now, and Yosef Werner said Friday, "I want people to see this story, because my father wanted this to come out in the 1990's."

When PIX 11 asked Benji Werner if he will get over his trauma, he replied, "Yes, I will, because I'm talking about it now. For years, I didn't talk."

Benji Werner expects to be in rehab for at least another, three months.

Article submitted by Hella Winston.

WATCH VIDEO: http://www.wpix.com/news/wpix-victim-speaks-out-in-yet-anothe-20120601,0,4755459.premiumvideo

 READ: http://www.wpix.com/news/wpix-new-york-orthodox-sex-abuse-case,0,5559513.story

DIRECTIONS TO SHATNEZ CTR. OF BOROUGH PARK - AVOID THE BASEMENT  -  CLICK LINK: http://www.merchantcircle.com/business/Nussbaum.Yehuda.Rabbi.718-871-3926/map?novum=1

UOJ ARCHIVES: NUSSBAUM GOING JUDGMENT PROOF?
http://theunorthodoxjew.blogspot.com/2006/12/rabbi-nussbaum-from-yeshiva-of.html

Clergy Need To Become Mandated Reporters - Hiding an abomination is an abomination itself!

Organized religions are responsible for many wonderful things, too numerous to mention here.

But they also have a responsibility to safeguard against terrible things that are done in their name.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in two current controversies,  one involving the Catholic archdiocese in Philadelphia, and the other an ultra-Orthodox Jewish congregation in Brooklyn.

Jurors are scheduled to hear closing arguments today in the child-endangerment trial of Monsignor William Lynn involving his handling of several priest-abuse complaints.

Lynn, 61, was the Philadelphia archdiocese secretary for clergy from 1992 to 2004. Dozens of priests have been accused of raping or molesting children in the archdiocese, yet were not reported to the authorities by the church and were allowed to continue to interact with young people.

Lynn testified that he was prevented from getting accused priests into treatment programs or removing them from parishes by the late Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua.

Lynn said that unless a priest was a diagnosed pedophile, Bevilacqua would not remove him.

Lynn testified that in 1994 he gave a list of accused priests to Bevilacqua and that the cardinal destroyed it soon after reading it.

A similar despicable situation exists in the Orthodox haradi congregation of Agudath Israel, where abuse victims are discouraged and often ostracized for reporting incidents to police.

Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes has told Agudath Israel's leaders that police rather than rabbis should be the first ones notified in suspected child-abuse cases.

Agudath's executive vice president, David Zwiebel, has insisted that sex-abuse cases should be reviewed by rabbis before they are reported to police.

We understand that this policy is the result of centuries of warranted mistrust of authority in other countries by some Orthodox communities, but today, in the United States, this is terribly misguided.

Yet Zweibel said his group will continue to require that parents get permission from a rabbi before contacting police.

While religious rights are precious and should be safeguarded, the Catholic Church and Agudath must understand that children must be protected. Nothing is more important than that.

Every state has "mandatory reporter" statutes identifying professions required to report child maltreatment under specific circumstances.

In New York, they include various medical personnel, including physicians, medical examiners, coroners, dentists, registered nurses, emergency medical technicians and social workers.

Also, teachers, counselors, other school employees, day care providers, overnight camp directors, substance abuse counselors, district attorneys and law enforcement personnel.

But not clergy.

Police, not priests or rabbis, are the experts in dealing with child-abuse claims. Hiding an abomination is an abomination itself.

It is long past time for the New York Legislature to include clergy and others in religious organizations as mandatory reporters of child abuse.

SOURCE:
http://thedailystar.com/opinion/x1595585534/Clergy-need-to-become-mandatory-reporters