Jewish Community Watch I know nothing of the organization and this is not to viewed as an endorsement- but the letter seems accurate and to the point.
Please find attached a letter I
submitted to the Jewish Press over 3 weeks ago. To date, I havent heard a
response. I assume its because Mr. Yanover, the author of one of the
articles, is the online editor for the JP. Since sending this letter,
the JP has removed the offending article, without posting a retraction
or apology. You are free to post my letter, along with the text of this
email in order to provide the readers context for the current
submission.
Dear Jewish Press,
In light of the publication of two recent articles in your newspaper[1],
I find myself writing this letter. As an introduction, I am, and have
been, a Deputy District Attorney in Los Angeles County for the past
seven years. During this time, I have handled or been involved with
10,000 – 15,000 cases, including many sex-crimes related cases. I have
interviewed and counseled thousands of victims and witnesses, including
various victims of sexual abuse. I am also a member of the frum
community having studied in a variety of yeshivas ranging from Litvish,
Bobov and Chabad and I have obtained smicha.
As a person whose profession dictates seeking justice, I have found
myself constantly at crossroads with many in the charedi community,
including some of their leaders and rabbis. Many rabbis and members of
our community have limited knowledge or understanding of various
halachic issues pertaining to criminality and particularly sex-abuse,
resulting in a primitive perspective of these issues. Further, due to
the authoritarian structure in place for most of the various
communities, we blindly follow our leadership, regardless of the
negative example they have set pertaining to this specific area.
Many rabbonim, including William Handler, propose respect, honor,
credit and total power be given to individuals who A) possess limited
skill, knowledge or ability to handle these matters; and B) have engaged
in cover-ups, resulting in innumerable harms to our communities.
Nevertheless, he continues to desire that the community trust such
people. We have created a society where the learned become rabbis and
leaders, regardless of acumen, intuition or sensitivity. Our system of
governance is authoritarianism with too much power and credit being
given to our “rabbonim.” I certainly prescribe giving power and
adhering to halachic rulings pertaining to areas of expertise, including
kashrus, Shabbos and various areas of Choshen Mishpat. Notwithstanding
our rabbonim’s expertise in these areas, they have virtually no
expertise in the areas of sex-abuse.
The anatomy a sex-abuse case takes is very complex (and the following
is a general statement regarding composition such a case takes): When a
victim and/or legal guardian and/or mandated reporter initially make a
claim, they are interviewed by a police officer. This officer may or may
not have experience with sex-abuse. Subsequently, a detective trained
in sex-abuse reviews the statement and conducts his own interview of the
relevant parties. The detective may also conduct further investigative
work to determine the veracity of the claims, including checking into
various objective statements. Once the detective determines that there
is sufficient evidence to bring the case forward, he will provide it to
his supervisor for secondary review. If all parties approve, the
detective will then present the case to a District Attorney. The DA is
typically also a trained expert in sex abuse. He will review the case
and determine whether there is sufficient evidence to file a case.
An important tangent: A DA is not allowed to file a case unless they
reasonably believe that there is sufficient evidence to prove the case
beyond a reasonable doubt. I.e., they cannot willy-nilly file a case
just to see how it turns out. It is a violation of prosecutorial
ethics, which can and does result in disbarment. Furthermore, despite
continuous claims by rabbonim and members of the community, of abuse of
this power, no one has illustrated any case revealing a bias and a
motive for a deputy or assistant DA in filing a case. (Regardless of
criticism of Charles Hynes, his office has thousands of cases, and it is
not likely that he reviews the cases that do not receive media
attention. In Los Angeles, the DA is never involved in cases, including
the thousands of sex-crimes cases, unless it is one of major high
profile).
If the reviewing DA determines that the case possesses sufficient
evidence (the DA may have sent the detective for further investigation
numerous times before making this decision), a sex-crimes DA is assigned
to the case. This DA is required to personally interview the relevant
parties to determine the veracity of their claims. If the DA concludes
that there is sufficient evidence, and that the parties are being
truthful, the DA will file the case. Next, the case is thoroughly
vetted by the system. Either a grand-jury is convened or a preliminary
hearing is conducted. This ensures that an innocent person is not
wrongly accused. Rarely, but on occasion, a case is dismissed in its
entirety due to various issues (victim/witness refusal or
unavailability, loss or destruction of evidence, other evidence
pertaining to guilt or innocence is produced, or a person is actually
innocent). Consequently, there are numerous safeguards in place to
ensure an innocent person is not wrongfully accused.
Importantly, all the players in these scenarios are trained
professionals. Mr. Handler’s accusations that they are
pseudo-professionals, notwithstanding. All have gone through a variety
of lengthy and complex training in order to achieve their status and
understanding. A typical sex-crimes DA has attended both university and
law school, a DA training course, experienced multiple low level crimes
for 1-5 years, managed over 1,000 cases, conducted numerous trials, and
received both formal and informal training relating to sex-crimes.
Additionally, sex-crimes DA’s are continuously required to attend
various trainings to assist in effective prosecution. No DA office
simply throws some inexperienced individual into the fray of sex-abuse
and tells them to figure it out. Contrast that with the deafening lack
of training by our rabbonim.
Mr. Handler’s frantic and hysterical portrayal of governmental
systems is designed to undercut the truth and portray a cruel, malicious
and vindictive organization. His purpose is to legitimize predators.
His purpose is not to protect victims. He writes these accusations
despite numerous rabbonim and battei dinnim ruling that a victim should
go to the police (and agreeing that rabbonim lack the training and power
to make decisions in this area). He writes despite numerous Torah
sources, both modern and ancient, that dictate reporting to the police
and maintaining a civilized society.
This brings me to the article written by Yori Yanover.[2]
In an appalling article, Yanover attempts to claim that it’s quite
likely the victims are lying regarding an accused predator. Mr. Yanover
has no training in any of these matters; rather, he relies on his own
perceived common-sense. His proof that the victim claims are likely
false is based on a chilling documentary known as “Capturing the
Friedmans” – a single case from 25 years ago, that was the result of
improper investigative techniques. Amazingly, he is unaware of
incredible strides taken in training and interviewing techniques,
particularly in sex-abuse scenarios. He is not an expert on sex-abuse,
criminal justice, suggestive interviewing, or any other matter
pertaining to the case. The entirety of his expertise is that he taught
1st and 2nd grade for a total of two years.
Finally, both authors attempt to falsely portray that the system is
out to get Jews and religious Jews in particular. This sort of hysteria
is counter-productive and ill-conceived. It further puts our
communities in an incredibly negative light. Ultimately, it is a
transparent attempt to protect the predators and the rabbonim who
sheltered them.
In light of the many recent events revealing that our community also
is affected by sex-abuse, it is time that we stop putting our faith into
the rabbonim and rather put our faith into actual experts on these
matters.
Sincerely,
Benny Forer
[1] http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/molestation-cases-must-be-handled-by-gdolim-not-by-experts/2013/05/26/
http://www.jewishcommunitywatch.org/jewish-teacher-charged-with-molestation-and-fired-on-dubious-grounds/
http://www.jewishcommunitywatch.org/jewish-teacher-charged-with-molestation-and-fired-on-dubious-grounds/
[2]
http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/jewish-teacher-charged-with-molestation-and-fired-on-dubious-grounds/2013/05/13/0/
– The Jewish Press has since removed this article, however, they failed
to apologize or issue any sanction for the editor of this article.
thank you for publishing this letter to the jewish press. I hope it will be published widely on the internet, so that the jewish press will be shamed into publishing it too.
ReplyDeletefortunately, we have internet to balance censorship in the jewish, and more precisely in the hareidi press..
The Jewish Press did publish a superb rejoinder by Rabbi Yosef Blau. Better yet, while Handler's post was only on the electronic version of the JP, Rabbi Blau's was on the print version as well.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/responding-to-abuse-should-we-ask-gedolim/2013/06/06/
I have been in communication with Mr. Forer. This letter is authentically his.
while i generally agree with the point of this post, the claim that
ReplyDelete"A DA is not allowed to file a case unless they reasonably believe that there is sufficient evidence to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. I.e., they cannot willy-nilly file a case just to see how it turns out. It is a violation of prosecutorial ethics, which can and does result in disbarment. "
is completely false. unless a case gets excessive publicity, no DA would be disbarred. (maybe in california, or the duke lacrosse case, which involved a contempt conviction against the prosecutor), unless the DA (or any lawyer) takes $ from an escrow account or is convicted of a felony. otherwise, an DA (or lawyer) can do what he wants with little, if any oversight.
and besides, the accused is already smeared. (would you let your daughter / your school near the duke lacrosse players?)
a partial solution would be training for rabbonim (or a select group of them). however, they will have a reflexive reaction of innocent, unless a credible bet din type org is formed, with proper views. unfortunately, such a group will not be formed (someone tried to form one a couple years ago, and a rabbi dr involved was promptly threatened with shidduchim issues for his grandaughters, etc.)
The Jewish press REFUSES to write about the 25 years of abuse inflicted on Many young JEWISH MEN by George Finkelstein,at YU/MTA. There are over 20 victims who are suing YU. Yu's response is to hire 2 well connected law firms that are simply causing more pain to the many victims. YU has put a GAG order on all employees in regards to the Finkelstein affair
ReplyDeleteMimedinat HaYam,
ReplyDeleteYou write, "a partial solution would be training for rabbonim..."
Perhaps while we are at it, since some surgeons make bad diagnoses that lead to needless chillul shabbor or even sakanos nefashos you would say, "A partial solution would be training for rabbonim to be surgeons..."
I don't get it. As Rabbi Yosef Blau points out,
"The Talmud in Yoma (83a) discusses the role of doctors in determining whether a person is permitted to eat on Yom Hakippurim. It’s clear the Talmud recognizes expertise and trusts the knowledge of a person in his field."
It is quite clear, that whatever the shortcoming of prosecutors or any other sort of expert, when there is a reasonable level of expertise and integrity, all alternatives are worse. We are now decades into the failure of the approach of letting a rabbi decide.
Our children deserve better. When the average haredi is ready to let his average rabbi do open chest surgery on him I am ready to re-engage with the argument about letting rabbis make forensic, prosecutorial and therapy decisions about molesters.
To date, with only a few notable exceptions, "ask a rabbi" is a synonym for "cover it up."