I received a letter from a supporter of the convicted sex offender which claimed among other things that everything this sex offender did was in consultation with Daas Torah. In particular that Rav Yisroel Reisman - a well known talmid chachom from Flatbush had approved filing a criminal complaint with the police again me for publishing information about him - after I had been appropriately warned.
I sent a letter to the sex offender and asked him if this were true. This is my letter and below is his reply.
Just got a letter from one of your friends with the following quote:
Instead of having you arrested immediately, Rabbi Reisman suggested you first be warned and told [...] to deal with the issue when he returns to Israel with his family next week (they're supposed to meet him in NY on Friday and stay until Monday night). [...] asks real Daas Torah before he does anything. There isn't a Rov around that would condone hurting little kids no matter who the father is, and they (on both sides of the Atlantic) have already given the green light to press criminal charges.
Are you claiming that Rabbi Reisman gave you permission to call the police? If not Rabbi Reisman then which rabbis (on both sides of the Atlantic) have given you the green light to press criminal charges?
The convicted sexual offender replied
Go to sleep Danny. It's late by you already and you need to wake up refreshed to serve Hashem.=============================================
This same supporter provided me with the phone number of Rabbi Reisman and added the following comment in response to my explanation of my position.
Save your defense for the jury.
What I meant to say was that if you and Horowitz are now working in tandem and he's blabbing like a Babushka it doesn't look like you really care about getting arrested or sued. I don't know about Israel, but if you want to get sucked into the morass of Civil and/or Criminal Litigation make sure your Rebbetzin packs you a sandwich because I'm sure it's quite the 'process' in a 2.5 world country.
You probably aren't learning that much anyway to qualify as a Chareidi, what with your blogging, so you could maybe use a distraction instead of taking from tzedakah in Kollel and the State of Israel in whatever stipends you get. Have a nice life. If you're a good boy maybe I'll send you that
===============================================
I called up Rav Yisroel Reisman - a very busy man - but he was patient and respectful with me - someone he knew nothing about except that I was calling long distance from Jerusalem.
I mentioned that I was calling in regards to this particular convicted sex offender. That I wanted to know whether he had approved that he go to the police to file a criminal claim against me. He answered clearly and unambiguously that he had not given such permission and in fact he did not recall giving anyone permission to go file a complaint with the police. He did say that he had told him to try and clear his name - but had not mentioned the police as an option
Then it got interesting. He asked me why did the sex offender want to go to the police about me? I said that I had put information from newspapers and other sources on the Internet regarding him. He responded that he didn't understand why I wanted to be rodef this sexual offender. "He is not a danger to the community. He has never been rodef after people to abuse them. " He said there was no heter to publicize information about this offender on the Internet. I asked him what was the basis for his claim that the offender was not a danger. What was his qualifications to make such a judgment?
He responded that he had been a pioneer dealing with abuse and came out 25 years ago against child molesters. He said he knew this molester and that aside from the two boys that he molested while giving them bar mitzva lessons - he had not pursued others. That he would have no problem of him being in his Shul or being around children. While he would restrict him having a position of teacher - but otherwise said there is no reason to be rodef the molester. The discussion then got a bit heated - but remained respectful as I expressed astonishment at his position that he was qualified to determine the likelihood of this convicted molester hurting other children based entirely on his insistence that he had no knowledge of other victims and thus there could not be other victims and that there would be no more in the future. But to be fair I must say he could not understand mine either. Of importance here is that he clearly acknowledged the guilt of this particular convicted sexual abuser in molesting two of his students - something I have been told that he has denied in the past.
Finally I mentioned that I had spoken earlier that day to another prominent Brooklyn posek who is a close associate of his. I said that the other posek had emphatically told me that this molester is a dangerous person and that the information about him should be publicized.
Rabbi Reisman said, "That posek is a big person and you can be somech on him. You called me to ask me my view and I told you that I feel that one should not be rodef this person since he is not a danger to the community. You can rely on either view." I asked for confirmation again that he had not given the molester permission to go to the police about me and he repeated that he had not given permission. I thanked him for his time and we said goodbye.
If this sex offender can can be so chitzpadik towards someone (aka you in this case), personally put them down, bring your wife into the conversation, and try to discredit your avodas Hashem, then sex offender or not, I would never want him around my children or family.
ReplyDeleteHis lack of middos, leitzanus, and blaten gul is enough to make me wary of his terrible influence.
...
The Rabbi Reisman contradictions completely confuse me, as I have a lot of respect for the man's fine middos....
There is only one "sex offender" I know who has made a complete turn around, and it would be assur, IMO, to lost up anything about him or his last.
He was 18, she was 16 or 17.... Their relationship was consensual, yet her parents (high profile people)/did not approve of their relationship and with their influence and money, had him legally prosecuted as a sex offender and he is registered for life. (The great American judicial system)....
However, the cases are obviously very different between a guy giving bar mitzva lessons and molesting 12 y/o boys and the case I know....
Something does not add up.
Is there a reason why you left his number up? You may not agree with him, but he definitely does not deserve to be hrassed by irresponsible people.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it's so complicated. He believes, like I do, that when someone pays their debt to society, it's over. Just because the American Judicial System decides to harass the guy his whole life, it doesn't mean that Israeli system has to do it as well.
ReplyDeleteRiddle me this: what's the purpose of prison time for offenders?
Your example is a case in point in defense of this position:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.frumcounselor.com/2016/05/to-protect-our-children-get-rid-of-sex.html
Very interesting indeed. Thank you for posting.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean by debt to society. Sitting in jail for x number of years is paying a debt?!
ReplyDeleteDo you consider my call to him to clarify where he stood - harassment? Why do you consider that if other people call him to find out his views on this subject as harassment? He is an influential public person.
ReplyDeletethe key word here is irresponsible people. I don't consider you an irresponsible person
ReplyDeleteWhat then, is the purpose of incarcerating them?
ReplyDeleteDo you believe that sexual molestation is an offense that is impossible to repent for?
Paying debt with your tax money.... Irony
ReplyDeleteRDE, who was the other posek you spoke to that day?
ReplyDeleteThere is no need to play stupid when someone asks you are legitimate question. No, calling him politely to ask for clarification and to publicize his response is not harassment. But you know quite well that many so called activists are not so polite. It is also generally accepted to be inappropriate etiquette to publish someone's phone # on the internet. So my direct question to you is: Why did you feel it was necessary to publish his # when you could have provided all the details of your conversation without doing so?
ReplyDelete18 year old with 17 year old that is consensual is not considered to be an offender under the law. (Otherwise most public high school boys would be in jail.)
ReplyDeleteSomeone innocent, who has paid their debt to society does not need to resort to mockery, disrepsect, and forgery to do so.
ReplyDeletePaying your debt to society is ALSO accepting the responsibility of the lo g lasting impact of your actions.
Has this sex offender paid money for the therapy those boys need?
Has he admitted to his mistakes, and expressed remorse and regret?
Has he given lectures to society about the TERRIBLE and harmful acts and affects child molestation can cause? Has he become an activist against the horrendous issue of abuse?
Once he does that, then maybe, you can argue that he had began to repay his debt and started down the path of teshuva....
If a guy steals a million dollars, or even one dollar, can he claim to have done teshuva until be pays back what he stole?
And the answer to your riddle is that prison is where criminals go so the rest of society can sleep safer at night. The ultimate purpose is for the criminal to have a chance to rectify and fix whatever issues they have so that when are released they won't commit the same crime.
But like all organized facilities and organizations the prison system has its flaws. Just like not all students come out of school educated, not all prisoners come out of prison transformed.
Interesting article.... Good food for thought. Thanks
ReplyDeleteThe threat of a criminal complaint should have tipped you off that this guy was a fake. As far as I know, there is not criminal liability for publishing information about someone. Criminal libel went out a long time ago. (There is still civil libel, of course, but extremely difficult to prevail in the U.S.)
ReplyDelete“Then it got interesting. He asked me why did the sex offender want to go to the police about me? I said that I had put information from newspapers and other sources on the Internet regarding him. He responded that he didn't understand why I wanted to be rodef this sexual offender.”
ReplyDeleteBaba Kama 35a:
Mishnah. If an ox was pursuing [rodef] an other's ox which was [afterwards found to be] injured, and the one [plaintiff] says, it was your ox that did the damage, while the other pleads, not so, but it was injured by a rock [against which it had been rubbing itself [Denying thus any liability]. The burden of proof lies on the claimant. [so also] where two [oxen] pursued one and the one defendant asserts, it was your ox that did the damage, while the other defendant asserts, it was your ox that did the damage…
From the gamara we see that merely to pursue (rodef) means nothing. The evidence, witnesses, testifying that that one ox pursued (rodef) a 2nd ox means nothing without evidence that the 1st ox caused the injury. The 2nd ox is found afterwards injured. I pray that this unfortunate convicted sex offender suffers no injury. For him to win in gamara case, he would have to prove inury and then prove that our dear-highly respected Rabbi Eidensohn direcly caused that injury, Heaven forbid.
The world has gone completely mad.
ReplyDeleteReceived this reply from someone who is very well acquainted with this issue.
ReplyDelete========================================
I half agree, but half not.
Even someone convicted of an offense may not be a serial offender, and poses no risk to others. For that individual, I am not completely comfortable with the conviction and incarceration as a consequence, although if someone does the crime, it stands to reason they ought to do the time. But I am not about punishing. I am concerned with the level of risk, and would certainly err on the side of caution. I am familiar with offenses that were single episodes, or even multiple episodes with a single victim, based on a relationship that was out of bounds. These people need treatment, and something to smack them on the wrist. I favor taking all the precautions needed to insure that they will not re-offend. But the notion that they are classified as serial offenders when that is simply not true is a terrible mistake. It damages someone unnecessarily. I do not need to be considered sympathetic to molesters if I see this. In fact, I believe that much of this is to placate the fanatics who do more harm to the entire subject than good.
The case we are discussing is quite different, and here is where I take issue with R’ Reisman. This individual has a record with crossing boundaries numerous times, obsessing about the subject, and taking great liberties (legal, moral, and halachic) in order to gratify himself. Yes, the court system was correct in considering him a high risk for re-offense. No, he never ran after someone in the street. He operated a bit more subtly. He placed himself in a position of authority with vulnerable kids, repeatedly, and did not limit his scope in offending. He should be viewed as a serial offender, and treated as such everywhere. The professionals in the court system recognized this in his classification. I disagree with R’ Reisman.
It can be when the parents of the 16/17 y/o have money and power and can convince the prosecutors (with dollar signs) that the boy was abusive, forced his way and pressured her into giving herself up. When they manipulate the fact that her excellent school performance and attendance dropped due to his abuse and pressure, when in fact it dropped simply due to her not caring anymore what her controlling parents wanted and as a personal rebellion against them.
ReplyDeleteYou're right that most 18 yo boys are not deemed sex offenders for dating a 17 yo. But most high school boys also do not date the daughters of rich, influencial, powerful, controlling, and emotionally abuse parents.
Is there repentance for murder? Is there a repentence for spiritual murder?
ReplyDeleteCan one do any repentence for a sin against his fellow man without receiving mechila and paying compensation for the damage caused by the sin?
Why are you mixing apples and oranges? If society has found fit to place someone on a sex offender list for his crimes, what does repentance have to do with it?
ReplyDeleteAnd Kiwi is right: get them away from society....that's why we incarcerate them.
Oops, looking for you ! time out and unrelated to this thread. Did you post a link a while ago that divorce is mostly initiated by women, whilst in unmarried couples the cause of breakups are equal between the genders? Thanks
ReplyDeleteDifferent criteria when it comes to answering to Hashem, regardless of whether בית דין can punish you. And in general you can't bring a psak from היזק to לשון הרע.
ReplyDeleteThis psak is really confusing.
ReplyDeleteThe molester did it. Rabbi Reisman is not debating that. He did it whilst doing Bar Mitzva lessons, He should not be allowed to give Bar Mitzva lessons, nor should he be allowed to be a teacher. But anything else he can do and one can't publicize his past.
A few points:
1. How the BLEEP can the Oilam know that he can't give bar mitzva lessons and can't teach if the Oilam isn't made aware of his past?
2. So he is only a threat when giving Bar Mitzva lessons? Where is that in the DSM? How does being a "pioneer" or "coming out against molesters" enable you to know what does or doesn't make this man a danger to others?
3. "He has not pursued others" - That's proving a negative. Sorry, but lack of evidence does not indicate evidence to the contrary. OR TO BE MORE BLUNT, JUST CAUSE ONE REFUSES TO ACKNOWLEDGE NEW ALLEGATIONS DOESN'T MEAN THEY DON'T EXIST.
4. "He has not pursued others" - What is defined as pursued? Just because he isn't trying to abduct, doesn't mean he isn't pursuing. Perhaps the Rabbi should become acquainted with the concept of grooming.
I just asked a 7 y/o "why do is it fair that bad people go to jail"
ReplyDeleteThe seven y/o responded:
"So that they don't do something bad in the street"
Apparently, it's not rocket science: Criminals get locked up so they don't continue to hurt innocent people.
Here the 'nimshal' is the public's 'right' to know and avoid one (or two) oxen. By advertising a dangerous ox / person.
ReplyDeleteWhether or not 'muad' habitual.
What's this YTV? One RY with a terrible reputation of protecting molesters passes away, another RY has to take his place?
ReplyDeleteSo life imprisonment it is?
ReplyDeleteSociety also dictates, that men can choose to be women and vice versa. Societies current whims do not create correct moral standards
Do murderers have to be on a special lost as a? Repentance inthis case, is not a religious concept. I'm referring the fact that he served time. That's the end of it
ReplyDeleteDo you then advocate for the removal persons who have done their very best to seek forgiveness?
ReplyDeleteIt appears to be that there are 2 dinim: repentance - done with the heart......and action - done with protection and prevention. .....with the latter being the prime issue that we are dealing with. ....
ReplyDeleteIn Halacha we require an interpersonal offender to receive forgiveness from the person he hurt. In addition, he needs to do Teshuva to Hashem. In fact, a thief who is Posel L'Eidus does not even become Kosher again if Beis Din forces him to pay back the money; he has to pay back voluntarily. Someone needs to do willing Teshuva before we consider him Kosher again, forced discipline does not fix them.
ReplyDeletehttp://daattorah.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-shidduch-crisis-spiritual.html
ReplyDeletesee Yehuda post. That is not the Torah concept of repentance. Furthermore even if he sincerely apologizes there is no requirement in halacha for the victim to forgive him
ReplyDeletewe are concerned about the Torah position on the matter - you are presenting a liberal secular point of view
ReplyDeleteThe victims feeling have not nothing to do with this. As a society, after incarnation, (or whatever the justice system decides) the matter is closed.
ReplyDeleteNo, I'm not.
ReplyDeleteYou seem to want it both ways. Either we accept the secular version of things and say "he paid for his crimes" AS IS TRUE FOR ALL OTHER CRIMES,.or we stick to the torah way which would NEVER allow someone's life to be destroyed without true evidence.
My point is, that if you allow the secular Society to dictate to your point of view on the onset, please follow through to its obvious completion. Once the punishment is complete, he returns to society
Please see my response to Rabbi D. Above.
ReplyDeleteagain you are missing the point. The issue is protecting society from harm. A person who is listed as a level three sex offender is someone who is presumed to be a danger to society and necessary precautions need to be made. If he had AIDS you would say - why should he be ostracized - he has done nothing wrong?
ReplyDeleteBottom line - we are required to protect ourselves and others against possible danger. The fact that the suspected danger has negative consequences on an individual is not our problem and is not a reason to endanger society to make him feel more comfortable.
If a person can't see properly we deny him a driver's license. Poskim say if you know that a person is driving despite having defective vision - he is a rodef and you should report him to the police. Same if he is a reckless driver.
No it is not. A peson who served time for serious crimes has that as part of his record and has consequences for the rest of his life. Ask any ex-con whether finishing a jail term is the end of the consequences for their crime and they go back to what they were before.
ReplyDeleteI assume according to your reasoning that if a person convicted of murder, rape or abusing children came to apply for a job or move into your neighborhood - or wanted to be your son-in-law you would say "he already paid his price I will not take his past into consideration"????? If you knew someone had molested children and was applying for a teaching job without revealing his past - you would not inform the school?? If you really believe the past is irrelevant because he already paid his price - then there is no point in further discussion. I feel sorry for anyone who relies on your flawed judgment.
no it is not - suggest you speak to a rabbi or judge or anybody with elementary sechel about the basic needs of society
ReplyDeleteThere is no comparison.
ReplyDelete1) He is not denying the creep's guilt.
2) He is not proactively going out to bat for him. If he is asked a question, he answered it. (That his understanding is that this guy is only a threat when he is in a situation where it is easy for him to do it.)
3) He readily agreed that if a responsible poseik disagreed with him, you may follow that posek's psak.
How exactly does this compare to the actions of the other RY?
May I present some personal information here? It is based on reflecting on my experiences.
ReplyDeleteI've been a teacher to young students.
I don't think I ever considered molesting any of them.
Question: is that because I'm some Super-Moral-CleanMinded-UberEducator? Or is it that on some base sub-conscious level I did have a glimmer of a though to molest, but that the knowledge of the consequences quenched the flame before my desires caught fire?
At this point, I'm not sure. But it could be that the knowledge that people go to jail for molesting played a role in my doing the right thing.
Something to consider.
wow hidden cameras in her bedroom! That's sick...but I'm sure they made "excellent" (rich or choshuv) shidduchim for their other children.
ReplyDeleteLol, seriously??
ReplyDeleteWhat's your motto?
"Jail fixes middos!" ?
Or "jail time, fixes all deep rooted issues." ?
Taivos are not fixed by sitting in time out.... Therapy, remorse, paying back willingly for caused damages, are what real teshuva and fixing ones mistakes are all about....
Jail is where they go as a punishment so they can simply keep society safe... Jial does not make you a changed man.
Had "time out" ever fixed a 5 yo? Of did it give them time to calm down and think about what they did wrong? And let's say the said 5 yo wrecked their room and hit a sibling. Do u suggest the time out is good enough? Should they still not have to fix their mess (help at least), and apologize to the hurt sibling?
In our house we were even told to "make your sister feel better if you just hurt her". We usually gave up a precious toy for some time or shared a snack, but the lesson of 'take responsibility for your damaging' stuck for life.
I feel sorry for you if you believe jail makes a criminal a changed man.
Lol, what society are you from?
ReplyDeleteI grew up in that shul while the story was going on and I was told not to get close to him. RR never said he did it for sure. All he said that he wasn't there so he can never say for sure that he did not. He also said he told him to clear his name. But if he thinks going to the Police is going to do that he's obviously cracked in the head.
ReplyDeleteI believe the comparison zeroed in on the fact that we have yet another high profile, respected Rosh Yeshiva who still doesn't get the absurdity of saying "but he didn't do it any other times."
ReplyDeleteSuch an attitude seems to be born of someone with an absurdly oversimplified (or non existent) understanding of the difference between suspicion and guilt. And when that lack of understanding creates a threat to the children of our community, it makes the comparison that much more compelling.
Oh, and one last equivalence: that this ignorance resides in someone whose profession is to educate children...would be comedy if it weren't so dangerous and ironic.
1. Define very best...
ReplyDelete2. It depends on the nature of the crime and circumstances behind the crime.
If an impoverish man who steals a loaf of bread because he is hungry is not the same as a wealthy man who scams others.
Have both stolen and technically committed the same sin, but the consequences for each, and the repentance for each are vastly different.
I can not answer your question without knowing the background of the incarcerated individual and what their very best consisted of.
Correct.
ReplyDeleteI believe the comparison zeroed in on the fact that we have yet another high profile, respected Rosh Yeshiva who still doesn't get the absurdity of saying "but he didn't do it any other times."
ReplyDeleteAbsurdity? If you do not have the capacity to even understand his point of view, then it is quite absurd for you to comment about it. Why don't you understand his position and thereafter, argue with it.
Oh, shall we miss those fights between you and RMT.
RDE - I am little confused by your post. "The Rav was well aware that the convicted molester was sexual attracted to boys" "The Rav himself did not warn anybody or ensure that the convicted abuser would not be alone with boys - either in shul or elsewhere." Both of these imply that the predator was a convicted abuser/molester, the Rav knew that fact and still did nothing and as a result two 13 year old boys got abused.
ReplyDeleteAre you saying that the Rav of the shul knew about the predator's sexual attraction to young boys before the two 13 year old boys came forward? Prior to the children coming forward and the subsequent conviction, was there a reason to warn people? Was the possible reason based in fact (at the time) or speculation? And the predator in question now lives in Israel - so with regards to your points in #3 - #6, is the Rav of his old shul in Flatbush still involved in this somehow? That Rav probable does not have email or internet connection, so is he talking with you by phone?
R' Reisman is a very chashuve person, but his involvement in this case
ReplyDeleteis very questionable. At the trial, he and his wife brought down the members of his shul to protest. They claimed the guy was innocent. The judge laughed them out of court, b/c his guilt was so obvious. Huge chilul Hashem. They were shaming the people who came to testify. In fact, there are other victims, but they were scared off, by the shaming tactics, and by the lawyers for the molester, who tore the kids apart on the stand to intimidate them.
R' Reisman has been involved in this case from day one;
there's some closeness between the families evidently. I've also heard from a very reliable source that it was through his hishtadlus that the molester got out
of jail early.
Thank you so much!
ReplyDeleteHere you are saying that we punish him by making him give back to society the concept of prevention. Again, I think (and as you seemed to agree) that they are 2 dinim, teshuva is between him and himself, same as saying between him him and G-d, safety, is not necessarily for his tikkun per se, but rather a concern that has evolved out of his past,with society's concerns taking preference over his......
ReplyDeleteI was simply reading the letter yehuda schwarts very carefully and am asking him if what I deduced, conjectured and elaborated is in fact correct
ReplyDeleteOk - just to be clear, Yehuda wrote RR said and then made certain statements. He did not say that the Rav of this shul said to clear his name, go to the police or that he never did it.
ReplyDeleteYehuda also did not say when the people of the shul said to stay away. there was significant time between the first public accusation, the trial and the ultimate conviction. i have no idea what the Rav's reaction to the accusation was when it first came out, nor any idea that the Rav had prior knowledge or is still somehow involved. Your questioning statement cast negative aspirations on this Rav with no basis
Correct. I believe jail is more a consequence for not behaving in society: criminal terrorized society, so lets put criminal away from society to help keep society safe.
ReplyDeleteWhile in prison, hopefully the criminal will rethink his actions, and ultimately come out a changed man.
That's the secondary goal.
But as you said, there are two parts to rectifying ones' missdeads. Besides for being banished from society initially, one needs to restore the disorder they created once they come back to society.
If he stole, let him pay back his debt.
If he acted irresponsiblely as a youth, let him teach others responsibility by being a leader and a voice against the crimes he committed.
And sometimes abstance from the situation that got one in trouble can be, and should be part of the rectification of the disorder the criminal created.
An alcoholic should obtain from alcohol, and a molester should obstain from working with children.
Your comment is a textbook example ofTMI.
ReplyDeleteGood grief.
can I ask how you know this information. Are you a member of Rabbi Reisman's shul
ReplyDeleteExplain it to us, then.
ReplyDeleteAnd I have no clue what your last sentence meant, and who RMT is.
No, but my recollection of the story was that the bar mizva lessons did not take place in Rabbi Reisman's shul
ReplyDeleteYou're very welcome!
ReplyDelete1. Question: how does YTV attract these questionable people.
ReplyDelete2. Shouldn't their RY figure this is not a good part of the rabbi, that they shouldn't be in, given their past history.
3. Why not farm out this part of the rabbi business to someone else, not affiliated with TV, andsave face themselves.
4. Having said all the above, i do recognize their trying to advocate for (i presume) a former dtalmid' studen. Nowadays, few rabbonim try to help a 'constituent'.
Could be you are right.
ReplyDeleteBut have you been involved in any teaching of students Iately? When my Black friends confide in me how they have to second-guess the police all the time, I get a glimpse into what they have to go through every time they walk outside their house or drive a car. It could be the police in our community are fair minded and law abiding. That doesn't detract from my friends' feelings.
You'd be amazed at some of the insensitivity I've encountered from perhaps well meaning, but misguided staff. When someone who would like to think of themselves as honest is surrounded by suspicious, they do some soul searching.
And I think this ultra-vigilance is good during this phase as the larger community begins to recognize the dangers lurking in schools, Shuls, camps, etc. And it's good precisely for the reason I stated: that every teacher is a potential molester in the sense that many of the sins listed in the Torah are within the grasp of everyone. Did you ever know someone who was so angry he wanted to kill someone? Was it the reports of people receiving the death penalty that got him or her past the flashpoint of anger?
So this blog is great: people hear and fear.
Don't trust yourself till your last day, Kish. That's my attitude. You are welcome to think my techniques are coarse and disgusting. But if someone had had this kind of discussion with real molesters when they were teenagers, maybe they would have learned how to watch and guard themselves better.
So, sorry I overloaded your senses with my comment. Does this mean my other comments are JEI (Just Enough Information)?
And public high school girls.
ReplyDeleteAnd elite private high schools too.
RDE, who was the other posek who disagreed with his close associate Rabbi Reisman? And why the coyness in not mentioning who it is?
ReplyDeleteI DIDNT ASK HISt PERMISSION to pubicize his views
ReplyDelete“Rav Yisroel Reisman's psak: It is redifus to publish information about this particular sex offender - he is not a danger to the community”
ReplyDeleteI read closely the post. Rav Yisroel Reisman's psak: preposterous ridiculous, ludicrous; illogical.
“I received a letter from a supporter of the convicted sex offender which claimed among other things that everything this sex offender did was in consultation with Daas Torah. In particular that Rav Yisroel Reisman - a well known talmid chachom from Flatbush had approved filing a criminal complaint with the police again me for publishing information about him - after I had been appropriately warned… This same supporter provided me with the phone number of Rabbi Reisman… Then it got interesting. He asked me why did the sex offender want to go to the police about me? I said that I had put information from newspapers and other sources on the Internet regarding him. He responded that he didn't understand why I wanted to be rodef this sexual offender. "He is not a danger to the community. He has never been rodef after people to abuse them. " He said there was no heter to publicize information about this offender on the Internet.”
Surely Rav Yisroel Reisman knows you and your blog extremely well. Rav Yisroel Reisman could always say: He has never been rodef after people to abuse them. You Rabbi Eidensohn are the expert. Sex offenders are of many types. Some are rodef after people to abuse them and some are not. I agree with:
“Finally I mentioned that I had spoken earlier that day to another prominent Brooklyn posek who is a close associate of his. I said that the other posek had emphatically told me that this molester is a dangerous person and that the information about him should be publicized.”
The issue is: should information about the convicted sex offender should be publicized? Rav Yisroel Reisman makes the issue: should you rodef this particular person? Rav Yisroel Reisman's psak: preposterous ridiculous, ludicrous; illogical.
Why not?
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you just ask him now?
I DONT WANT TOENABLE A public dispute between these two rabbis that will only serve to muddy these issues
ReplyDeleteWhy would a halachic disagreement constitute to be a "public dispute"? Poskim who respect each other all the time disagree with each other on many things. Besides, you already told him that the other posek disagrees so they know. What's the big deal if others know they disagree?
ReplyDeleteInteresting that you have no compulsions about you making a public dispute with Rabbi Reisman, while using your anonymous rabbi as your tool or whip.
ReplyDeleteI'm asking based upon your logic, as I think that differing halachic positions should be made known. But it would be of super importance to know who these people are.
Let's just clarify:
1) It's OK for you to publicly argue with Rabbi Reisman.
2) It's OK for you to quote that another rabbi disagrees with Rabbi Reisman.
3) It's not OK to mention the rabbi's name. (Besides the fact that Rabbi Reisman said that it's OK to rely upon him).
What am I missing?
Daas Torah says “I DONT WANT TO ENABLE A public dispute between these two rabbis that will only serve to muddy these issues”
ReplyDeleteI agree. I say preposterous --- what Rabbi Reisman says here “He responded that he didn't understand why I wanted to be rodef this sexual offender.” See
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/22701
“This feels like fiction, the preposterous notion that an unnamed White House official has spilled the beans on Trump “to thwart the president’s misguided impulses.”
The NYS Court of Appeals has not yet ruled on my motion 840 of 8/20/2018. This is my letter today to them:
1.I request permission to submit these papers concerning my motion 2018--840 8/20/2018. I'm attaching an affidavit of service proving I mailed by UPS a true copy to Susan and to Kings County Supreme Court, Matrimonial Division. I attach Exhibit A: Myla Serlin's Affirmation under penalties of perjury 8/19/2013 and.Exhibit B: Jerusalem Post 5/23/1996 divorcee Susan.
2.Judge Prus had no good reason to accept/calendar case 54688/2012 in view of my cases 23213/1991 and 46412/1992. Judge Prus had no good reason to accept and to hear 54688/2012. The status of Susan is not his business, and not NYS's business.
3.According to Jewish law the wife is required to join the husband on moving to Israel. In 1989 Susan signed Aliya papers that she wants to live in Jerusalem. In 1992 she went to Rabbi Ralbag's bet din court in NYS to seek a get from me which I gave her through the offices of the Jerusalem Court on 2/17/1993 before witnesses in Rabbi Ralbag's bet din court. This is my English translation of Decision of the Jerusalem Bet Din January 21, 1993:
“Rabbi Yitzchak Aaron Ben Shoshan Head Secretary The Regional Rabbinic Court Jerusalem With the help of G-d to the Attention of Rabbi Aryeah Ralbag Agudas Harabanim U.S.A. Plaintiff Susan Aranoff Against Gerald Aranoff This is the decision of the Court on date 23 Tevet 5753 (January 21, 1993) that the husband is willing to accept divorce by his agreeing to the division of the dwelling immediately that he gets 45% and the wife gets 55%. In exchange for her agreement to arrange divorce, likewise, therefore, he shall not pay child support, that the husband claims that written on their names are 2 million dollars in the bank, therefore, he shall not pay child support. And that the dwelling will be sold immediately, actually your honor [referring to Rabbi Ralbag] has already sent us the name of the wife to arrange and the name of the second agent in his letter [referring to Rabbi Ralbag's letter] that was sent by fax on date 8 Adar First 5752 (). Please summons the wife at your earliest convenience to notify us regarding her agreement to arrange divorce.”
4.Exhibit B: Jerusalem Post 5/23/1996 divorcee Susan states: “She said that neither her status as a divorcee…”
5.Judge Prus signing the NYS Judgment of Divorce me and Susan 9/10/2013 was preposterous, ridiculous, ludicrous; and illogical.
I contracted hpv' i was told there is no hpv cure except treatment to control it, i totally lost of hope all i could think loosing my life because it was so embarrass for been hpv patient. some weeks ago i read possible natural cure which was guarantee And I ordered the treatment after one week i got 100% cure. I'm so excited to shear this testimony to every article for others living with hpv there is possible natural treatment to eliminate the virus email Dr Onokun, his herbal clinic address; Dronokunherbalcure@gmail.com or website at www.dronokunherbalcure.wordpress.com or Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/naturaltreatmentcenter1/
ReplyDeletewhat garbage
ReplyDeleteIt's like those who say the Israeli army or settlers carry out pogroms!