Tuesday, January 4, 2022

Witnesses in abuse cases Sho’el U’Meishiv (1:185): is not to determine guilt but only the possibility of guilt

 From my book Child and Domestic Abuse Volume II. this is accepted as halacha l'maaseh

Sho’el U’Meishiv (1:185): Rumors spread about a certain teacher who had lived in that city for 8 years. Children that he had taught while they were young and now were 13 years or more older testified that he had sodomized them when they were younger. The previous summer a certain G d fearing man found out about this and was outraged and informed the rav of the community. However the rav did not want to accept this testimony… However the Maharik and the Terumas HaDeshen wrote and the Rema rules in Shulchan Aruch that in a situation where kosher witness are not necessary - then even a woman or child is believed. If so, in this matter it is definitely impossible for there to be adult males and it is impossible for there to be testimony in the matter. That is because without a doubt this man – even if he is wicked and dissolute – keeps his deeds secret and he only amuses himself with small children and claims he is only playing with them. Therefore it is obvious that they should be believed. However we are not trying to disqualify him from being a witness or making an oath but we only want to be able to say whether he perhaps did this. Our Sages said in Nida (61) that while it is prohibited to believe lashon harah, the concern aroused by it is required. And in Mo’ed Koton (18) they said that regarding bad talk – at least some of it is true. Therefore woe is to us that in our days such a thing happened that a man like this should be a teacher of children who are pure creatures and there is concern that he violated them. Therefore in my opinion it is appropriate to remove the crown of teacher from his head. They need to be concerned for their souls until he completely repents with appropriate afflictions and only then can he considered a full member of the community and it will be an atonement for his sins. Furthermore as long as he hasn’t confessed his sins then repentance is not possible as the Tevu’os Shor wrote in siman 2…. But in this case where there is testimony – even though it is not from kosher witnesses it is worth more than rumors and it is obvious he should be prevented from getting students to teach.

4 comments:

  1. Again, this is a society where a boy who wears the wrong colour shirt to the beis medrash or displays the wrong kind of phone on his hip is ostracized and has his life ruined but a man who's accused of molesting dozens - dozens! - has everyone come running to his defence. Where are the priorities?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I was looking up the verse in the Torah, - Tzedek, Tzedek Tirdof..
    Now the commentators intepret it as meaning "appoint the right judges".
    But they don't state the rules by which you do that, or emphasise the plain meaning - whomever the Judge is, must judge with righeousness.
    But Rambam in Hilchot Sanhedrin gives some clues.
    Certain people are excluded from being the head of the Sanhedrin -
    someone who is too old , becasue he will judge with strictness, as he has forgotten how to be young. Someone with no childred, because he has no rachmanut. Now both of these characteristics are viewed as negative in the Rambam - but they have been turned into virtues in part of the strict Halacha world.

    ReplyDelete
  3. So?
    Motherhood is praiseworthy and the sun shines during the day!

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.