Chaim Walder dies

[VacationLover]

As for worldwide publicity. I don’t know. But again I see you are coming around to the fact that there is an unfortunate reality that when someone is accused people do often need to be informed on some level even before the matter is verified. It’s weighing two terrible choices. What’s right? I don’t know.

Can we agree that (at least, and unless stated otherwise by BD) whoever is not directly involved shouldn't spread the information? If you only heard as a rumor it shouldn't be your responsibility to spread names. Makes sense?

[AsherO]

Can we agree that (at least, and unless stated otherwise by BD) whoever is not directly involved shouldn't spread the information? If you only heard as a rumor it shouldn't be your responsibility to spread names. Makes sense?

You can't even agree on the definition of only a rumor.

Not posting as a mod, but I don't understand why this topic which has clear and important objectives everyone can agree upon has to be sidelined with this subtopic about publicizing information and potentially besmirching someone's reputation if the allegations are false. There's a separate thread for that.

[avromie7]

Not posting as a mod, but I don't understand why this topic which has clear and important objectives everyone can agree upon has to be sidelined with this subtopic about publicizing information and potentially besmirching someone's reputation if the allegations are false. There's a separate thread for that.

Because it's all interconnected.

[YossieW]

This may very well be true, but once the job of protecting the community is done, you don't have a halachik right to destroy his livelihood because it hurts the survivors. I feel terribly for the survivors, and if I was in their situation I would probably want to destroy their livelihood as well, but it doesn't make it ok halachikly.

it depends on what they do for a living, if they are a musician that plays at events where they can potentially find more victims do you really want them continuing that?

[drosenberg88429]

it depends on what they do for a living, if they are a musician that plays at events where they can potentially find more victims do you really want them continuing that?

That seems like a very weak target development funnel.

[AsherO]

Because it's all interconnected.

If the voices that keep harping on this distraction would equally push for the other objectives, then that would be fair.

[Yehuda57]

target development funnel.

I guess that's one way of describing child abuse victim grooming

[AsherO]

I guess that's one way of describing child abuse victim grooming

It’s so sterile/clinical, like how’d someone would describe a business model/process.

[VacationLover]

You can't even agree on the definition of only a rumor.

Not posting as a mod, but I don't understand why this topic which has clear and important objectives everyone can agree upon has to be sidelined with this subtopic about publicizing information and potentially besmirching someone's reputation if the allegations are false. There's a separate thread for that.

If you would only agree, or try put some emphasis on my point, or at least say AYLOR, we wouldn't be debating the rest, and certainly not waste time and dozens of pages of this topic.

I fully agreed to what you and others stressed regarding abuse and the need for much more awareness etc.

However, due to the appearance that the majority here is ignorant about what I brought up, I felt the need to raise this before someone takes the "awareness" in his own hands and starts publicizing names of unverified... for the sake of awareness and to protect the masses.

And yes, it is intertwined with this discussion.

The other thread is for "false". We are debating unverified. Please feel free as a mod to change that title to "unverified accusations"

[VacationLover]

If the voices that keep harping on this distraction would equally push for the other objectives, then that would be fair.

Pushing that Amudim etc. Should open or vouch for an investigative branch is not sufficient?

I didn't see the need to push for the other objectives as 95%+ here already did that.

[aygart]

Agreed, but the immediate context seemed to be about how far we go to accommodate survivors, and in that context (where there are survivors) he's guilty.

My understanding is that @avromie7 's point is that before we totally vilify him, a full investigation needs to be complete. @Yehuda57 mentioned the feelings of survivors in that context. Seemingly, that refers to "claimed" survivors as long as the person remains an "alleged" abuser. If he meant only after the allegations were proven to whatever standard we consider that to be, then I am not sure they are disagreeing at all and there are separate parallel conversations going on.

[AsherO]

If you would only agree, or try put some emphasis on my point, or at least say AYLOR, we wouldn't be debating the rest, and certainly not waste time and dozens of pages of this topic.

I fully agreed to what you and others stressed regarding abuse and the need for much more awareness etc.

However, due to the appearance that the majority here is ignorant about what I brought up, I felt the need to raise this before someone takes the "awareness" in his own hands and starts publicizing names of unverified... for the sake of awareness and to protect the masses.

And yes, it is intertwined with this discussion.

The other thread is for "false". We are debating unverified. Please feel free as a mod to change that title to "unverified accusations"

AYLOR. There, I said it, can you please leave this topic now?

[ExGingi]

In a case where the abuser is sentenced to jail, is it right for the victim to request for his identity to be publicized (as part of her healing), or is it just vengeance that will add unnecessary pain and suffering to the abuser's family?

[AsherO]

In a case where the abuser is sentenced to jail, is it right for the victim to request for his identity to be publicized (as part of her healing), or is it just vengeance that will add unnecessary pain and suffering to the abuser's family?

This is where AYLOR might be relevant, but since you’re asking “is it right” or “is it just vengeance” I’d say the survivor and their therapist is probably best positioned to answer your question.

[ExGingi]

This is where AYLOR might be relevant, but since you’re asking “is it right” or “is it just vengeance” I’d say the survivor and their therapist is probably best positioned to answer your question.

I am asking because in a recent case the survivor insisted on the abuser's name being publicized. He tried to stop that but the court ruled in her favor.

His family is obviously going through a very difficult time, and it is 100% his fault. But since he's getting his punishment, is it right to inflict additional pain on the family? Is there indeed something more in it that helps the victim?

[justaregularguy]

Can we get like a summary of the convo every 50 posts or so so I know where this thread is up to?

[gozalim]

Typo, I presume?

Right, I said the protection wasn't considering the other implications, because I'm not so sure about them. But it's not about "destroying his livelihood" just for vengeance, but if a survivor can't go to weddings because there's a good chance he'll have a panic attack if he sees an abuser's name plastered all over the stage, that's something to consider, no? Survivors don't go to shul because it's too traumatic for them because they were groomed there or they saw their abuser get honored there. (honor doesn't have to be Gala dinner honoree, it could be something as simple as getting an aliyah, being chazan, or even everyone laughing at his jokes at the kiddush). Should we not prioritize their feelings and ensure they always feel safe and secure in our mosdos?

for arguments sake:
let's say the victim is welcomed to speak up, that we do everything in our power to keep from potential danger and positions of grooming potential etc.
let's say further, that the mere specter of accusation precludes us from giving any outright honors to the alleged perp.

what level of secondary and tertiary 'honor' is considered triggering enough to potential victims? should the person not be allowed in shul? in the grocery? on the street? are they permitted to be gainfully employed? or is anything short of putting them on welfare considered 'enabling'?
I'm not talking about confirmed allegations (DA, BD or whatever). I'm talking specifically uncoroborated allegations, where the perp obviously claims it's baloney.
In situations where the victim is not willing/able to 'come forward' and press the story, what level of excommunication do victims honestly expect prior to confirmation?

[WonderingYid]

Ok, so we should inform the people in the neighborhood, this still doesn't require worldwide publicity on social media. I didn't exclude this in my OP, I just listed a few ideas off the top of my head.

The problem is people who brush it under the rug, the solution is not to blast it on social media.

I'm not familiar with the details, but I think you are. There was an issue in the arlington area. A meeting was called for all parents in the neighborhood, but it wasn't blasted on social media. I still don't know who the suspect is there.

Then he moves to Lakewood/Brooklyn...

[AsherO]

I am asking because in a recent case the survivor insisted on the abuser's name being publicized. He tried to stop that but the court ruled in her favor.

His family is obviously going through a very difficult time, and it is 100% his fault. But since he's getting his punishment, is it right to inflict additional pain on the family? Is there indeed something more in it that helps the victim?

You can’t imagine the victim could get closure from it? Whether that’s justified, moral, or healthy is another question.

[avromie7]

for arguments sake:
let's say the victim is welcomed to speak up, that we do everything in our power to keep from potential danger and positions of grooming potential etc.
let's say further, that the mere specter of accusation precludes us from giving any outright honors to the alleged perp.

what level of secondary and tertiary 'honor' is considered triggering enough to potential victims? should the person not be allowed in shul? in the grocery? on the street? are they permitted to be gainfully employed? or is anything short of putting them on welfare considered 'enabling'?
I'm not talking about confirmed allegations (DA, BD or whatever). I'm talking specifically uncoroborated allegations, where the perp obviously claims it's baloney.
In situations where the victim is not willing/able to 'come forward' and press the story, what level of excommunication do victims honestly expect prior to confirmation?

The same should be asked about verified abusers too.