New Harvard Policy Bans Teacher-Student Relations

NY Times     Harvard University has adopted a ban on professors’ having sexual or romantic relationships with undergraduate students, joining a small but growing number of universities prohibiting such relationships. The move comes as the Obama administration investigates the handling of accusations of sexual assault at dozens of colleges, including Harvard.

The ban clarifies an earlier policy that labeled sexual and romantic relationships between professors and the students they teach as inappropriate, but did not explicitly prohibit professors from having relationships with students they did not teach.

Harvard said Thursday that the change had been made after a panel reviewing the institution’s policy on Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in education, determined that the university’s existing policy language on “relationships of unequal status did not explicitly reflect the faculty’s expectations of what constituted an appropriate relationship between undergraduate students and faculty members.” It said the policy had been revised “to include a clear prohibition to better accord with these expectations.” [...]

 “Our rule is that if you are supervising, evaluating or grading someone, you should not have a sexual relationship with that person,” said Alison Johnson, a history professor who led the committee. [...]

After the courts found in the 1990s that universities could be financially liable for sexual harassment, many institutions — among them, the University of California and Yale — adopted formal policies forbidding sexual or romantic relationships between faculty and students.

Jesse Friedman: Convicted abuser - is he a victim of 'a vast moral panic?'

NY Times  Early in “Capturing the Friedmans,” the 2003 documentary that tells the harrowing story of a father and son charged in 1987 with the brutal sexual abuse of children on Long Island, one of the detectives on the case recalls her hesitation in the face of intense pressure from parents to prosecute quickly.

“Just charging somebody with this kind of a crime is enough to ruin their lives,” she said. “So you want to make sure that you have enough evidence, and that you’re convinced that you’re making a good charge.”

On Tuesday, the son, Jesse Friedman, who was released in 2001 after serving 13 years in prison, will be back in court, arguing once again for the disclosure of that evidence, which he says will help to prove his innocence. Twenty-seven years after he was first charged, prosecutors still refuse to give it to him.

From the beginning, the case was deeply flawed. The only evidence that Jesse and his father, Arnold, had abused anyone consisted of statements to the police by children and one of Jesse’s friends. Many of the statements were made after repeated or hourslong visits from detectives who would not leave until they heard what they wanted. None of the children had previously complained to anyone of any abuse. [...]

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, similar cases were playing out across the country: extreme, often implausible allegations of mass sexual abuse of children by child care workers, leading to dozens of prosecutions and convictions. One federal appeals court has described the mood of the time as a “vast moral panic.”

The problem was that most of the charges weren’t true. Decades later, almost all the convictions of that era have been reversed. [...]

But Mr. Friedman says he pleaded guilty under the threat of an effective life sentence if he were convicted at trial.

In the years since his release, Mr. Friedman has been developing a case to clear his name, with the help of his lawyers and the documentary’s director, Andrew Jarecki. Among other things, the prosecution’s only adult witness has recanted, as have five of the children who said they had been abused. More than two dozen eyewitnesses at the computer classes where the abuse was allegedly committed now say no abuse occurred. Many students told investigators this at the time, but prosecutors did not share that with Mr. Friedman’s lawyer. [....]

In 2010, the federal Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said “the police, prosecutors, and the judge did everything they could to coerce a guilty plea and avoid a trial,” and that there was a “reasonable likelihood” Mr. Friedman had been wrongfully convicted.

That concern was echoed by the only person outside the Nassau County district attorney’s office to have seen the full 17,000-page file in the Friedman case — a state trial judge named F. Dana Winslow. In 2013, after reviewing the file along with new pieces of evidence, Mr. Winslow ordered prosecutors to turn over “every piece of paper” generated in the case against Mr. Friedman, with a handful of names redacted. That has still not happened.

The [D.A. ]office says it re-confirmed Mr. Friedman’s guilt in a three-year, 155-page report it released in 2013, purporting to re-investigate the case. But whether or not Mr. Friedman can establish his innocence is for a court to decide, not for the prosecutors who tried the case in the first place. [...]

There have long been grave questions about the prosecution and guilty plea. And innocent people plead guilty surprisingly often. At the very least, Mr. Friedman — whose life has already been ruined — should be given a real chance to prove his innocence in court. If the Nassau County district attorney’s office is so confident of his guilt, and of the legitimacy of its prosecution, what is it afraid of?

Why is polygamy or incest between consenting adults or bestiality -prohibited if Consitution prohibits banning gay marriage?

Talking Points    Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) asked Attorney General nominee Loretta Lynch to explain Wednesday at her confirmation hearing why polygamy wouldn't also become a constitutional right if if the Supreme Court decided that same-sex marriage was protected by the Constitution.

"If the Supreme Court rules that same-sex marriage bans are unconstitutional — that it violates the Constitution to try to limit marriage between a man and a woman, that's clearly the law of the land unless there's a constitutional amendment to change it — what legal rationale would be in play that would prohibit polygamy?" Graham asked. "What's the legal difference between a state ban on same-sex marriage being unconstitutional but a ban on polygamy being constitutional?"

"Could you try to articulate how one could be banned under the Constitution and the other not?" [...]
===============================
 Bestiality - if animal not harmed?

CNS News      (December 20111) Senate Approves Bill that Legalizes Sodomy and Bestiality in U.S. Military

The Senate on Thursday evening voted 93-7 to approve a defense authorization bill that includes a provision which not only repeals the military law on sodomy, it also repeals the military ban on sex with animals--or bestiality.

 ==================================

Incest between consenting adults?

USA Today

A state assemblywoman says she'll propose legislation banning adult incest, in the wake of a New York magazine interview with an anonymous Great Lakes-area 18-year-old who says she plans to informally marry her long-estranged biological father and move to New Jersey because there aren't penalties in the state so long as both participants in the sexual relationship are at least 18 years old.

======================================
Additional question - Relationship of halacha of polygamy to ban of polygamy in secular society

If the cherem of Rabbeinu Gershom was based on the ban on polygamy in the Christian world in which Ashkenazi Jews then resided, would that ban no longer be relevant if/when polygamy becomes legal in the United States and the West?

Schlesinger Twins: Another Chabad rabbi supports Beth

Lubavitcher refuses to divorce his wife saying the Rebbe is alive and "paskened"

Psak Din

הבעל, שמאמין כי הרבי חי, התעמר באשתו ובילדיו במשך שנים. בית הדין הרבני שחרר את האישה וקבע: "יחיה הוא בחייו כרצונו אך יעזוב את אשתו לנפשה."

גבר ואישה נישאו ב-1991. לשניהם היו אלה נישואין שניים: האישה הייתה אלמנה עם שני ילדים, ואילו הבעל גרוש עם שני ילדים. לבני הזוג נולדו ארבעה ילדים משותפים, שלושה מהם בגירים ואחת קטינה. הם נישאו בישראל ולאחר מכן עברו לדרום אפריקה. ב-2009 עזבה האישה את הבית ואת דרום אפריקה, ועברה לגור בניו יורק ליד הוריה. מאז ועד היום הבעל ממשיך לגור בדרום אפריקה והאישה בניו יורק.

לשאלות בענייני משפחה:

תחילה פתחה האישה בהליכים נגד הבעל בבית הדין ביוהנסבורג בדרום אפריקה. הבעל סירב לשתף כל פעולה עם בית הדין בדרום אפריקה, שבתגובה הוציא נגדו "כתב סירוב וחרם חמור".

לרגל חתונת בנם המשותף שמתגורר בישראל, הגיעו השניים לארץ. האישה ניצלה את ההזדמנות ופתחה תיק בבית הדין הרבני האזורי בתל-אביב, בו תבעה מבעלה לתת לה גט.

האישה טענה כי לאורך השנים שררה בבית אווירה קבועה של פחד וטרור. לטענתה, הבעל נהג בהתפרצויות זעם, צעקות וכינויי גנאי משפילים, גם כלפי הילדים, שאותם אף נהג להכות. לפני שש שנים עברה לניו יורק כי הרגישה שהיא פשוט לא יכולה יותר להמשיך כך.

לדבריה, הבעל מעולם לא עבד ולא פרנס, ואף לא נתן לה לצאת לעבודה, ובמשך כל השנים המשפחה התקיימה מתרומות שאביה אסף עבורם. אם לא די בזה, המשיכה, הבעל בהתנהגותו הביא לכך שהיא הייתה חייבת לשלוח שניים מילדיהם ללמוד בארה"ב בגלל הסכנה הרוחשת בבית.

הבעל – חסיד חב"ד שחי באמונה כי הרבי מלובביץ עדיין חי – טען כי קיבל מהרבי "איגרת" ובה ההוראה לא להתגרש, וזהו זה. הוא הכחיש את האלימות הפיזית והמילולית, הן כלפי האישה והן כלפי הילדים, וטען כי הילדים נשלחו לארה"ב כדי לקבל חינוך טוב יותר. 

Uziel Frankel - Rivky Stein's mentor - use of beis din to obtain house

I received the following document from Yoel Weiss regarding Uziel Frankel - Rivky Stein's mentor - problematic use of a beis din to obtain a house.

This allegations was referred to in the recent Weiss document to dismiss Rivky's charges.

http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2015/02/weiss-files-motion-to-dismiss-rivkys.html

"Mr. Frankel is very familiar with filing frivolous RICO complaints. He has done it unsuccessfully before in previous attempts to intimidate, threaten and harass innocent people. He even stole an innocent person's home and he was convicted when he was sued for that in State RICO complaint. (See Exhibit 4 attached.)"

========================================================

   Uziel Frankel - Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award 3-31-04-1 

Beaten wife receives Get by hiring false witnesses to tell the truth.Is this Get valid?

Rav Yizchok Zilberstein (Aleinu L'Shabeach Vayikra page 317) describes a strange case. A woman is being beaten by her husband. She goes and complains to beis din. They simply tell the husband to behave himself - but the beatings go on. There were no witnesses for her claims - which is common in such cases. Her brothers, seeing nothing was being done - hired two people to be false witnesses on her behalf and to testify that they saw the husband beating her. The beis din carefully examined the false witnesses and decided that they are telling the truth. Based on this testimony the beis din orders the husband to give his wife a divorce - which is the law in Shulchan Aruch.

After she received the Get she went to Rav Silberstein to ask whether she can remarry with a Get given because of false witnesses - who were telling the truth about her beating. She said, "It is clear that what the witnesses said was true that the husband beat me. But on the other hand they lied when they said that they witnessed it. Is the Get posul?"

Rav Silberstein felt that the Get was valid because we accept the principle that every Jew wants to do what is right in the eyes of G-d. The reason why we sometimes force the husband to give a Get is because his yetzer harah sometimes prevents him from doing the right thing. In this case the husband is well aware of the truth that he was beating his wife. In his heart he knows that he has an obligation to divorce his wife. Therefore we can consider that he gave the Get willingly - even though he was forced to give it.

However Rav Eliashiv did not agree with this reasoning and stated that it is prohibited to remarry with a  Get obtained through false witnesses. However in this case since the woman already has the Get there is no reason to tell the husband that Rav Eliashiv said the Get is not valid....It is possible to say to him that since the Get already is in the hands of his wife perhaps he will now write a get of his own free will...

Survivor tells Pope Francis to hand priests over to police as new Vatican child abuse commission starts work

Telegraph

Pope Francis should immediately hand over to the police all the Vatican documents on Catholic priests accused of sexually abusing children and “cast out the vipers” who are still being protected by the Church, a British survivor of clerical abuse said.

The Catholic Church needs to end decades of obfuscation and cover-ups by fully cooperating with civil authorities around the world instead of protecting abusive priests, moving them from parish to parish or subjecting them only to canon law, said Peter Saunders.

Peter Saunders, who was sexually abused as a child in London by two Catholic priests and the headmaster of his Catholic primary school, was appointed by the Pope to a new Vatican commission on child protection, which will hold its first full meeting on Friday in Rome.

“The Pope should release all the documents the Vatican has on abusive priests,” he said in an interview shortly after arriving in Rome for the meeting of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors.[...]

New York Times' "The Orthodox Sex Guru" - furthered an inaccurate stereotype that Orthodox Jews are clueless about reality

Times of Israel     Last week, the paper of record contained a 3,000 word profile piece on Bat Sheva Marcus “Orthodox Sex Guru” who feeds into the hands of the New York Times by furthering the ignorant stereotype of unworldly Orthodox Jews clueless in the bedroom.
See original post

You don’t have to be a guru to recognize that rather than remaining in the dark ages as Marcus describes, in the last few years, Orthodoxy has been advancing in healthy sexual awareness, building on our rich treasure trove of holy traditions surrounding the spousal relationship. 

The Orthodox community in Israel is paving the way for healthy discourse and learning surrounding intimacy and sexuality. Where Dr. Marcus finds it challenging to gather a crowd for sexuality training course, we are seeing the opposite here in Israel.

In my work as an educator and therapist, I have found that the words ‘Orthodoxy’ and ‘Sex’ are not incongruous, but describe a fast growing and important area. There are a number of burgeoning organizations that offer training in the topic of intimacy to a variety of medical professionals, as well as kallah and chatan teachers.

In addition to numerous private practitioners, organizations like the Eden Center, Merkaz Yahel, the Puah Institute, and Nishmat’s Yoatzot Halacha Program, to name a few, are all doing pioneering work in expanding the healthy discussion surrounding intimacy and sexuality within the religious community in Israel.

In America steps are definitely being taken in this direction with pioneers taking the field in the form of religious and community leaders, among them; Drs. Scott and Rivky Chudnoff as well as Chani and Shmuel Maybruch. [...]

Royal Commission: Rabbi Gutnick shakes as he tells of phone call that he thought was a prank, a decision he ‘profoundly regrets’

The Guardian

Rabbi Moshe Gutnick, a senior judge of the Sydney Beth Din rabbinical court, now worked with victims of child sexual abuse and encouraged them to go to police without fear, he told the royal commission into institutional responses into child sex abuse on Wednesday.

Gutnick said he received the phone call in 1987, when he was a teacher at the orthodox Yeshivah Centre Bondi, and it was the first time he had heard of sexual abuse there.[...]

“I then subsequently forgot about the phone call because I thought it was nothing more than children playing a prank,” he told the commission.

Gutnick became emotional as he described how in 2011 a man asked to meet him. 

“This proved to be a life-changing experience,” Gutnick said before commissioner Justice Jennifer Coate.

“At my house the man asked me if I remembered receiving a phone call from a young boy in the 1980s, during which the young boy reported Gug for child sexual abuse. He told me that it was him, and that Gug had sexually abused him.

“I was shocked. It was the first time I had come face-to-face with a victim.”

Gutnick began to shake as he told the commission at Melbourne’s county court that after speaking to the victim he resolved to do everything in his power to make sure the voices of sex abuse victims were heard. [...]

Manny and Zephaniah Waks tell royal commission about sex abuse ordeal at Yeshivah Centre

abc

The only survivor of abuse within Melbourne's Jewish community to speak publicly, he has become a name synonymous with the fight against sexual abuse in the Jewish community worldwide.

However it has come with a cost.

Mr Waks has felt so ostracised by the ultra-orthodox Chabad Jewish community that he moved his family to France to start a new life.

Only days ago he returned to Australia to give evidence at the royal commission, as it hears for the first time allegations of abuse in Jewish institutions.

"You know on the plane ride on the way here I had to pinch myself to say, 'Wow, I'm actually coming to Australia because the royal commission is happening'," he said.

"I've literally been working towards this goal, even subconsciously, for decades."

Mr Waks, 39, was sexually abused by security guard David Cyprus at the Yeshivah Centre in Melbourne in the 1990s.

He reported the abuse to senior staff at the centre but he says nothing was done.

It was only years later, when he disclosed the abuse to his father Zephaniah, that they went to police.

"There is still a significant group of rabbis, mainly within the ultra-orthodox community, within the Yeshivah Chabad community, who would not support victims to go to the police," Mr Waks said.

"It causes untold damage.

"The reality is we don't even know how much damage it does because we don't know how many victims are out there thinking, 'I'd better not go because it causes all sorts of things'." [...]

In national abuse probe, leading Australian rabbi decries Orthodox community’s ‘cover-up culture’

JPOST

A senior Australian rabbi told a government commission of inquiry on Wednesday that the Jewish-Australian Orthodox community was guilty of covering up sex crimes against its members, going so far as to use intimidation to prevent people from coming forward.

In testimony before the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, Rabbi Moshe Gutnick, a senior Chabad leader in Sydney and the head of the Organization of Rabbis of Australasia, said that “a culture of cover-up, often couched in religious terms, pervaded our thinking and our actions.”

Gutnick asserted that those who reported abuse were labeled mosers (“informers”), and subjected to social ostracism, according to The Guardian.

Such actions are a “gross misuse of rabbinic power,” he said, adding that those who push for victims to go to their rabbis rather than the authorities are trying to “hush it up, to cover it up, to prevent the victim from finding redress. There is no doubt at all: Mesira [‘informing’] has no application whatsoever to instances of child sexual abuse. To use mesira in this way is an abomination.”[...]

Victim’s rights advocate Manny Waks, who was himself sexually abused as a student in a Chabad school, took to Facebook to praise Gutnick for his statement, which included an admission that he had been informed about allegations of abuse 20 years ago and had not followed up properly. [...]