Question about Rambam's view of murder

Guest Post by Eddie

There are some difficult passages in a Rambam I am studying, and I wish to ask if anyone has some knowledge of this material, and what the halacha is (or was).

The Rambam, in Hilchot Rotzeach, Ch4: 1, the Rambam argues that killing a person by mistake, if you intended to kill someone else, is exempt from punishment, as is throwing a stone (or bomb) into a crowd. Rambam Chapter 4              mechon-mamre.org/i/b504n.htm

 Here the Raavad points out this was a minority opinion of R' Shimon, and hence is not halacha. So this point is presumably not like the Rambam.

In Halacha 6 he writes: If ten people strike a person with ten different sticks and he dies, they are all not held liable for execution by the court. This law applies regardless of whether they struck him one after the other or they struck him at the same time .This is not disputed by Raavad, is it therefore halacha?

The problem is that this is not at all logical It means that, in a time when we have a Sanhedrin vested with capital punishment authority, murder becomes a very easy crime to commit - simply hire a gang of killers, and you are "patur".

One answer, or counter argument, might be the case of Pilegesh sh' b Giveah.  (Judges Ch. 19-20) where a gang of thugs attack a woman and kill her.  This leads to a war to wipe out the offenders, which ends up in 25,100 Benjamites being killed.  But Rambam might argue that this was a case of gang rape of a pilegesh, not of outright murder.

A further problematic halacha, 10, says that we can openly kill an apikorus, or even someone who brazenly commits an aveira. This can be done in public without need for Judge or Navi. 

What happens if someone decides to kill a woman who won't move on a bus, etc?

Furthermore, the Torah punishment of execution  only applies to certain sins. Where is the force of this halacha, with regards to sins that are not capital crimes, eg shatnez.   Can I kill someone for sowing kilayim in his farm?   The Chazon Ish has already stated that this particular halacha, or the continuation of it no longer applies , since today there are not wilful apikorsim. As far as I know, no Orthodox person has ever used this halacha to kill a reform, an atheist, a Bible critic etc, certainly not in the last 300 years.   The only exception might be Yigal Amir wrongfully shooting Rabin – but this was not because he was a heretic, but that  Rabin had been called a rodeif – which is another issue altogether.

The points I make are not suggesting any final psak halacha, and not attacking any Gedolim or Rishonim.  What I am trying to understand is the practical implications of these halachot, and whether they were ever (or will ever) be implemented?

Preventing sexual abusers of children from reoffending: systematic review of medical and psychological interventions

BMJ   Introduction: Sexual abuse of children is a global problem, and systematic reviews suggest that 18-20% of women and 7-8% of men in the general population report being abused before the age of 18.1 2 Rates have not differed substantially in recent decades but might vary across regions.2 [...]

The high prevalence and adverse consequences of sexual abuse of children warrant increased investment in development of preventive and therapeutic strategies.14 15 16 Such efforts should directly deal with children, their caregivers, and their environments to prevent potential abuse and effectively manage cases of abuse that have already occurred. Interventions for individuals at risk of sexual abusing children could prevent more children from being abused.

Society’s response to people who sexually abuse children has focused largely on punishment and deterrence through the criminal justice system. Offenders, however, are often directed to mental health professionals for treatment of disorders related to the offence (such as sexual compulsivity and paedophilia). Consequently, the availability of evidence based treatment for this population would be of considerable interest to medical practitioners. [...]

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of current medical and psychological interventions for individuals at risk of sexually abusing children, both in known abusers and those at risk of abusing.

Results After review of 1447 abstracts, we retrieved 167 full text studies, and finally included eight studies with low to moderate risk of bias. We found weak evidence for interventions aimed at reducing reoffending in identified sexual abusers of children. For adults, evidence from five trials was insufficient regarding both benefits and risks with psychological treatment and pharmacotherapy. For adolescents, limited evidence from one trial suggested that multisystemic therapy prevented reoffence (relative risk 0.18, 95% confidence interval 0.04 to 0.73); lack of adequate research prevented conclusions about effects of other treatments. Evidence was also inadequate regarding effectiveness of treatment for children with sexual behavioural problems in the one trial identified. Finally, we found no eligible research on preventive methods for adults and adolescents who had not sexually abused children but were at higher risk of doing so (such as those with paedophilic sexual preference).

Conclusion There are major weaknesses in the scientific evidence, particularly regarding adult men, the main category of sexual abusers of children. Better coordinated and funded high quality studies including several countries are urgently needed. Until conclusive evidence is available, realistic clinical strategies might involve reduction of specific risk factors for sex crimes, such as sexual preoccupation, in abusers at risk of reoffending.

A Kohain and the Daughter of a Jewish Mother by Rabbi Yair Hoffman

Five Towns Jewish Times   In the United States, the spiraling and out-of control assimilation rate in the past few decades has yielded a number of children with Jewish mothers and gentile fathers.  In the past few decades as well, the Baal Teshuvah movement has created an inspiring influx of Jews returning to their Torah roots.  The combination of both of these trends, however, has brought the following halachic question up hundreds, if not thousands, of times:  

May a girl whose father was not Jewish marry or date a Kohain?

One young lady who recently posed this question to this author explained:  “I have dated more modern-orthodox Kohanim who told me that they looked into it and their Rabbis said that it was okay.  But I have also looked into more Yeshivesh Kohanim, and their Rabbi forbade it.  Will the real halacha please stand up?”[...]

CONCLUSIONS

Notwithstanding all the factors discussed above, it was the conclusion of both Rav Elyashiv zt”l and Rav Moshe Feinstein not to rely on the leniencies involved here and not consider such cases as b’dieved. This is the normative view in the Torah world. It is this author’s understanding, however, that there have been some modern orthodox Rabbis who have expressed leniencies in the scenarios described above.

May a Rabbi officiate at such a wedding?  It is this author’s view that it should be avoided unless the issue of taharas mishpacha is at stake.  If the couple will not be observing taharas hamishpacha on account of the Rabbi not participating then he should be involved in such a wedding.  Otherwise he should avoid it.  

May such a Kohain duchen on Yom Tov or in Israel.  It seems that since he may remain married to her if he did marry, he did not lose his status as a Kohain (see Shvus Yaakov Vol. I #93 – indicating likewise).

Revolutionary use by Hassidim of Internet to improve relations with non-Jews - through Kiddush HaShem

The following are excerpts from a Mishpacha (August 7, 2013) article Rights and Wrongs in Montreal. It describes some radical changes in the way chassidic community activists deal with non-Jews as well as government. In particular the recognition of the need for transparency is amazing. Behind doors political deals are out and Kiddush HaShem is in. Of critical importance is the recognition of the unavoidable use of the tools of the Internet - especially to counter Internet anti-Semitism.
=======================
[...] It's not every day that chassidim dance for elderly non-Jewish res­idents of a retirement home, but the state of relations between Jews and non-Jews in Outremont has called for creative measures. Since about 2001, chassidim and community activists have faced off over the configuration of buses, expanding synagogues, and the legality of eiruvim. Tensions have flared, especially during Purim in 2012 when Celine Forget, a provocateur and city council member, showed up among the festivities to plant herself, camera in hand, to record any violation of city bylaws. When chassidim reacted with calls of "Forget, get out," the discord between chassidim and the local pop­ulation made headlines across Canada.

Into this maelstrom have stepped a new crop of Jewish commu­nity activists who have decided on a different approach. Rather than allow tensions to boil over, the chassidic residents of Outremont have engaged in an active campaign of Kiddush Hashem. In addition to the visits to retirement homes, community members have established an online site.joined a political party, and founded a community organization, all with the goals of easing misunderstandings and introducing non-Jewish residents to the chassidic way of life.

"Today, even politicians who were sym­pathetic to us in the past are not willing to stand up for us out of fear of being labeled as rubbing shoulders with the 'Jewish lob­byists:" Belzer chassid Cheskie Weiss explains. "Well, if we won't stand up for ourselves and engage the public and media to expose all the lies and misinformation being hurled against our community, no­body else will,"[...]

Pollak would be one of a number of chas­sidim who, together with Marshy, estab­lished Friends of Hutchison, a grassroots organization named after a street in the neighborhood. Its purpose is to engage chassidim and their non-Jewish neighbors in honest dialogue in order to dispel the lies and misconceptions being promulgated by Forget, Lacerte, and their followers.

Within the year, the number of individ­uals following Friends of Hutchison's site,filled with the smiling faces of chassidic children,jumped from 200 to 650.[..]

Battle in Cyberspace When Weiss and Bobover Boruch Shimon Posner first created an online site in May 2012 called OutremontHassid.com with the intention of directly engaging the public, they had few expectations. Today, they are astounded by its success. "The perception that chassidim are all hated, well - that's been blown away," Weiss says.

Following the 2012 Purim fiasco, Weiss was shocked at the degree of animosity directed at chassidim through the Internet. He decided to fight fire with fire. "We are living in the Internet era," he says. "People like Forget and Lacerte would nev­er have a voice if not for their blogs. Because of the Internet, thousands of people are exposed to their lies and misinformation and the media catches on to this be­cause they're seeking controversy." The Internet, he states, both empowers and victimizes us and we must learn to use it to our advantage.[...]

Still, he is amazed by the positive changes in attitude, especially in the Quebec media and by those voiced on his blog.He was recently moved by a letter posted by a "non-prac­ticing Muslim." She wrote,

"I applaud your genuine words ... I believe that the prob­lem is that many people want to vilify the Hasidim because they don't understand the culture and the customs ... More people support you than you think. ... I got very upset when some neighbor dropped a pamphlet at my door asking me to stop the synagogue expansion [the Bobover shul Shaar on Hutchison Street], but I was more upset that the Hassidic community wasn't doing anything to fight back."[...]

Taking the Next Step Chassidim's approach to dealing with government, Weiss maintains, must also change. He differentiates between the old ways of conducting politics, quietly working is­ sues out behind the scene with politicians, and the new way. "The old way is no longer possible. Because of the Internet, nothing can remain hidden. Today, we understand that nothing can be worked out with politicians if we ourselves cannot explain, sell, and defend our position to the public and and the media. Everything else can be made to appear shady. [...]

12 Steps :The spiritual/scientific basis of addiction recovery

National Geographic   [...] Since the inception of Alcoholics Anonymous (A.A.)—the progenitor of 12-step programs—science has sometimes been at odds with the notion that laypeople can cure themselves.

Yet the success of the 12-step approach may ultimately be explained through medical science and psychology. Both offer substantive reasons for why it works. [...]

The 12-step approach, said Paul Gallant, an interventionist with 27 years of sobriety, is "so popular with treatment centers because it's proven to work. When a person completes treatment, they have a place to go.

"Self-knowledge is not a sufficient treatment for alcoholism," continued Gallant. "I've worked with people who have had years and years of psychotherapy and intensive analysis, but it's brought them no closer to ongoing abstinence."

However, experiencing what Gallant called a "psychic change," which in the 12-step world is linked to the marvel of a "spiritual awakening," often results in a distinct personality and behavioral transformation that leads to long-term sobriety.

"The not-drinking is really just a part of it," Gallant said. "It's not drinking and changing as a person. That psychic change needs to come from a program of spiritual development, and so far the greatest success has been Alcoholics Anonymous."[...]

Daas Torah - Prohibition against clear and flesh colored stockings

שו"ת אגרות משה 
 
אבן העזר חלק ד סימן ק

ו. אם יש טעם להקפיד שילכו הבנות באנפילאות כשאין מקפידין שלא יהו דקות כך שהבשר לא יראה מתוכן.

ובהא שיש אנשים שמקפידים שלא ילכו נשותיהן ובנותיהן בלא אנפילאות על רגליהן אבל אין מקפידין שיהיו האנפילאות באופן שא"א להראות שכתר"ה הקשה דאיזה חלוק יש דאם חשיבין לערוה גם למטה מהארכובה שקורין קני"א אין מועילין כלום דערוה בעששית אסור ואם כהמ"ב שאינו בדין ערוה אין צורך אנפילאות, האמת הוא שהוא לצניעות יותר מחמת שלהלכה עד הקני"א אינו ערוה. אבל איכא גם טעם להצניעות בזה משום שבעצם אין החוטים אף מהאנפילאות הדקין שייך שיראה בשר הרגלים והראיה שכשהן צבועין לבן ושחור לא נראה בשר הרגלים ורק מחמת שצבועין בצבע כמראה הבשר לכן נמצא שבעצם הם מכוסין ולא נראין כלל רק שנדמה לאינשי כנראין, שלכן אף במקום שהוא בדין ערוה ממש נמי הא איכא חלוק מאחר דעכ"פ הערוה מכוסה אך שיש לאסור משום דאיכא הרהור עכ"פ מזה שנראין כבשר וא"כ באם הוא מקום שאינו מביא לידי הרהור כהא דלמטה מארכובה אף אם היה עכ"פ בדין ערוה לא היה שום איסור, ונוגע לדינא ממש בקטנות שליכא הרהור אך שמ"מ הוא בדין ערוה שיהיה מותר באנפילאות כאלו, וזהו אולי טעמם.

והנני ידידו 

משה פיינשטיין
=================================================
שו"ת שבט הלוי חלק א סימן א

כבוד ידידי הרב הגאון הצ' אהוב למעלה ונחמד למטה כש"ת מו"ה בנימין זאב. יעקבזון שליט"א רב פאג"י סנהדרי' יצ"ו. אחדשה"ט באהבה וכבוד.

יקרת מכתבו קבלתי ושמחתי להקשיב משלומו הטוב. ואודות שאלתו שאלת חכם בענין הנשים גם נשואות ההולכות בלי גרבים, אם יש בזה גלוי ערוה מצד הדין ואם צריך למחות.

אעבור פרשתא דא בקיצור וה' יהי' אתנו.

בברכות כ"ד ע"א אר"י טפח באשה ערוה למאי אילימא לאסתכולי והאמר ר"ש וכו' אלא באשתו ולענין ק"ש א"ר חסדא שוק באשה ערוה. ופירש"י שוק באשת איש ערוה להסתכל וכן באשתו לק"ש. ובשו"ע סימן ע"ה ס"א טפח מגולה באשה במקום שדרכה לכסותו וכו' וברמ"א וי"א דוקא באשתו אבל באשה אחרת אפילו פחות מטפח הוי ערוה. וכתב בספר משנה ברורה שם אבל פניה וידיה כפי המנהג שדרך להיות מגולה באותו מקום וכן פרסות רגל עד השוק והוא עד מקום שנקרא קני"א בל"א במקום שדרכן לילך יחף מותר לקרות כנגדן וכו' אבל זרועותיה ושוקה אפי' רגילין לילך כדרך הפרוצות אסור ע"כ, וציין שם דדבריו לקוחים מהח"א ופמ"ג.

והנה מוכח מזה דדעת הגאון מ"ב דדרך הפרוצות דהוא בכלל דת יהודית שמוציאין עבורה אשה מבעלה מעיקר הדין עפ"י המבואר כתובות ע"ב מתחיל רק מארכובה דהיינו קני"א ולמעלה ונמשך בזה אחרי החיי"א ופרמ"ג, ובמכתה"ג דבריו צ"ע, דדברי החיי"א אינם משמע כן וגם בדברי הפמ"ג צ"ע.

וז"ל החיי"א כלל ד' ס"ב כל גופה של אשה מה שדרכה להיות מכוסה נקרא ערוה וכו' וכן פרסות רגליה במקום שדרך לילך יחף מותר אבל זרועותיה ושוקה אפי' רגילין בכך כדרך "פרוצות" אסור ע"כ, הרי דלא התיר אלא פרסות רגליה, אבל לא חלק הרגל שלמעלה מן הפרסה דהיינו קנאכע"ל בל"א עד ארכובה (קני"א) דזה באמת בכלל שוק כאשר אבאר אי"ה להלן.

אלא דעיקר העתקת מ"ב בזה מהפמ"ג, וגם זה צ"ע, דז"ל הפמ"ג במ"ז סק"א והוי יודע דלשון שוק הוא מארכובה (עיין רש"י ויקרא ז' ל"ב, ובתוי"ט פ"י דחולין מ"ד וכ"פ הרמב"ם פ"ט ה"י ממעה"ק ושוק לפעמים נקרא ירך, כ"ז בפרמ"ג), ונמצא כל הרגל עד הקני"א במקום שהולכין יחף ומגולה אפשר אין חשש וכו' עכ"ל. הנה הפמ"ג כתב זה דרך אפשר והמ"ב החליט הדברים.

אמנם גם גוף דברי רבינו הפמ"ג לא זכיתי להבין מש"כ דשוק באדם מתחיל רק מארכובה דהיינו הקני"א ולמעלה והיינו משום דהבין הפמ"ג דשוק דאדם דומיא דשוק דבהמה דמבואר לענין חזה ושוק במשנה וגמרא חולין שם ובתוי"ט שם וברמב"ם הנ"ל דהוא מפרק ארכובה התחתונה ולמעלה עד הגוף ב' פרקים דהיינו פרק אמצעי מן הרגל ופרק העליון וס"ל להפמ"ג דארכובה התחתונה של בהמה כנגדה ארכובת האדם דהיינו הקני"א ורק משם ולמעלה מתחיל השוק, וזה צע"ג דהא כבר הוכיחו תוס' מנחות ל"ז ע"א ד"ה קיבורית דשוק דאדם לא הוי כשוק דבהמה, דשוק דאדם מתחיל מיד אחר הרגל התחתון לפני הארכוביא דהיינו הקני"א, וכן הוכיח הגרעק"א בתשובותיו מהדו"ת סימן כ"ח בראיות נכונות דשוק דאדם למטה מן הקני"א, וא"כ תמה אני על עצמי דמה"ת לנו לחלק בין שוק דאדם דמתניתין דאהלות פ"א שהביאו תוס' הנ"ל ועוד כ"ד דמוכח כן כמבואר בתשובת הגרעק"א לשוק של ענינינו דלימא דשוק של גלוי ערוה רק למעלה מן הארכובה, וכיון דכל חילי' דפמ"ג רק מדמיון שוק של בהמה וכבר כתבנו דאין משם ראיה, א"כ שוב הדרינן לסתם לשון שוק שבשאר מקומות שכולל נמי חלק הרגל אשר למטה מן הקני"א, ושפיר דייק החיי"א לכתוב וכן פרסות רגליה וכו', דרק זה מותר באיתגליא, וכל השאר צריך להיות מכוסה, או בבגד, או עכ"פ בגרבים.

ונראה לענ"ד ראיה לזה מלשון הב"י ממש"כ על דברי הטור בסימן ע"ה שכתב וכן אם שוקה מגולה וכו' וז"ל הב"י כלומר שאע"פ שאינו מקום צנוע באיש הוי ערוה באשה, ואי ס"ד דהיינו ממקום הברך עד הגוף, היתכן קס"ד כזאת שמקום זה לא יהיה ערוה באשה מקום שהוא המרגיל הכי גדול לערוה ורגליה יורדת מות כתיב. ותו דגם באיש מקום זה מקום צנוע הוא, כדמשמע במגילה כ"ד ע"א ע"ש רש"י ד"ה פוחח ועש"ה כ"ד ע"ב רש"י ד"ה קטן, ועש"ה בהגהות הב"ח אות ב' דמפורש כן וע"ש בטו"א ורש"ש בזה. אלא כנ"ל דהבית יוסף קרא גם לפרק שלמטה מן הארכובה שוק וזה דקמ"ל דגם זה בכלל ערוה לענין ק"ש וגלוי ערוה לענין אשת איש.

וכיו"ב מדברי הב"ח שם במה שכתב דהיה סברא מבחוץ דאין לחוש כלל לגילוי השוק וכו' ואפילו בא"א ליכא איסור להסתכל בהם (לולא דקמ"ל הטור) דמן הסתם הן מלוכלכות בטיט וצואה ולא יגיע לידי הרהור וכו' יעש"ה ופמ"ג הנ"ל ואי ס"ד דהב"ח אשוק שלמעלה מן הארכובה עד הגוף קאי, א"כ אין לך תמהון לבב גדול מזה שיעלה על לב שום טועה דיהיה מותר להסתכל בא"א בירך הסמוך למקום הגוף ממש. וגם וכי שם מן הסתם מלוכלך בטיט וכו' (והיינו מחמת מלאכה וכיו"ב כמש"כ הפמ"ג), אלא ודאי כמש"כ עפ"י תוס' מנחות הנ"ל דשוק דאדם מתחיל למעלה מרגל התחתון, ועפ"י דין צריך להיות מכוסה או בבגד או בגרבים וכיו"ב, ולא מצאתי כדי סמיכה להתיר, מאחר שבחיי"א מבואר לאיסור ובפמ"ג אינו מבואר להיתר כנ"ל. והקב"ה יצילנו משגיאות ויטהר לבנו לעבדו באמת. ידידו דוש"ת מצפה לחסדי ה'.

ועיין בלשון רשב"ם ב"ב נ"ז ע"ב ד"ה לפי, משמע קצת כדברינו, וכבר העיר בזה בתשובת צור יעקב ח"ב סי' א' בהגה בן המחבר זצ"ל, וע"ש בפנים התשובה. וכבר כתבנו דבתשובת הגרעק"א מהד"ת הכריע כדהתוס' מנחות ל"ז דיש חילוק בין שוק דאדם לבהמה והיינו לחומרא כמש"כ. .

Anthony Weiner Meets with the Orthodox Jewish Media

Five Towns Jewish Times  Early Thursday morning, embattled mayoral candidate Anthony Weiner, met with representatives of the orthodox Jewish media in the home of Gedaliah Weinberger.

Although Mr. Weinberger was careful to point out that the meeting was not an endorsement, he did go on in detail about a number of times when Mr. Weiner went to bat for the Jewish community.  Reading from an amicus brief prepared by the Becket Fund, Mr. Weinberger demonstrated that there are numerous areas where religious Jews are experiencing discrimination – even in New York City.

Rabbi Pesach Lerner, sitting in the audience, pointed out that of all the representatives and senators in government, it was Anthony Weiner who was first to go to bat for Jonathan Pollard.

Mr. Weiner then spoke and raised a number of new ideas that he has to improve the lot of New Yorkers.  He then opened up the floor to questions from the orthodox Jewish media. [...]

Larry Gordon, publisher of the Five Towns Jewish Times, asked Mr. Weiner, “What would you do when you are mayor and your New York City school chancellor is caught doing the same things that you had done?”

Mr. Weiner answered that he would investigate whether it would in any way effect the chilcren or how he performed at his job and decide based solely on that criterion.

In the entire meeting, Mr. Weiner was well-prepared on the issues, was poised and answered questions directed at him with finesse and assurance. [...]

The sense that everyone in attendance got after the meeting was that Anthony Weiner is clearly not out of the race, and just might win.

Sexual abuse and cover-ups in an insular religious community- the Mennonites of Bolivia

R. Eidensohn,

I am an occasional lurker on your blog (thank you for the public service!) and I thought the following article might be of interest to you or your readers.  It describes a situation of an insular, closed community, afraid that the entire outside world is wicked, and run by religious leaders with lifetime tenure who do not have investigative or police capacity, yet refuse except in the most extreme cases to involve outside police in any allegations of wrongdoing.  And children who are taught little or nothing about their bodies and sex, and a culture that is inherently suspicious of any claims made by children and women.  And a leadership that is willing to let offenders who do get caught back into the community as long as they say they are sorry.  The community in question is an old-order Mennonite one in Bolivia, but the parallels to some Orthodox societies were striking to me, and the negative consequences equally sad.

==========================
Warning! A distressing story to read but the parallels are important

Vice  [...] Then, one night in June 2009, two men were caught trying to enter a neighbor’s home. The two ratted out a few friends and, falling like a house of cards, a group of nine Manitoba men, ages 19 to 43, eventually confessed that they had been raping Colony families since 2005. To incapacitate their victims and any possible witnesses, the men used a spray created by a veterinarian from a neighboring Mennonite community that he had adapted from a chemical used to anesthetize cows. According to their initial confessions (which they later recanted), the rapists admitted to—sometimes in groups, sometimes alone—hiding outside bedroom windows at night, spraying the substance through the screens to drug entire families, and then crawling inside. 

But it wasn’t until their trial, which took place almost two years later, in 2011, that the full scope of their crimes came to light. The transcripts read like a horror movie script: Victims ranged in age from three to 65 (the youngest had a broken hymen, purportedly from finger penetration). The girls and women were married, single, residents, visitors, the mentally infirm. Though it’s never discussed and was not part of the legal case, residents privately told me that men and boys were raped, too. [...]

Then, one night in June 2009, two men were caught trying to enter a neighbor’s home. The two ratted out a few friends and, falling like a house of cards, a group of nine Manitoba men, ages 19 to 43, eventually confessed that they had been raping Colony families since 2005. To incapacitate their victims and any possible witnesses, the men used a spray created by a veterinarian from a neighboring Mennonite community that he had adapted from a chemical used to anesthetize cows. According to their initial confessions (which they later recanted), the rapists admitted to—sometimes in groups, sometimes alone—hiding outside bedroom windows at night, spraying the substance through the screens to drug entire families, and then crawling inside. 

But it wasn’t until their trial, which took place almost two years later, in 2011, that the full scope of their crimes came to light. The transcripts read like a horror movie script: Victims ranged in age from three to 65 (the youngest had a broken hymen, purportedly from finger penetration). The girls and women were married, single, residents, visitors, the mentally infirm. Though it’s never discussed and was not part of the legal case, residents privately told me that men and boys were raped, too. [...]

All the victims I interviewed said the rapes crossed their minds almost daily. In addition to confiding in friends, they have coped by falling back on faith. Helena, for example—though her clutched arms and pained swaying seemed to belie it—told me she’d found peace and insisted, “I have forgiven the men who raped me.”

She wasn’t alone. I heard the same thing from victims, parents, sisters, brothers. Some even said that if the convicted rapists would only admit their crimes—as they did initially—and ask penance from God, the colony would request that the judge dismiss their sentences.

I was perplexed. How could there be unanimous acceptance of such flagrant and premeditated crimes?

It wasn’t until I spoke with Minister Juan Fehr, dressed as all ministers in the community do, entirely in black with high black boots, that I understood. “God chooses His people with tests of fire,” he told me. “In order to go to heaven you must forgive those who have wronged you.” The minister said that he trusts that most of the victims came to forgiveness on their own. But if one woman didn’t want to forgive, he said, she would have been visited by Bishop Neurdorf, Manitoba’s highest authority, and “he would have simply explained to her that if she didn’t forgive, then God wouldn’t forgive her.” [...]

The Old Colony leaders I spoke with denied that their communities have an ongoing sexual abuse problem and insisted that incidents are dealt with internally when they arise. “[Incest] almost never happens here,” Minister Jacob Fehr told me one evening as we chatted on his porch at dusk. He said that in his 19 years as a minister, Manitoba had only one case of incestuous rape (father to daughter). Another minister denied that even this episode had happened.[...]

Eli Beer, the founder and president of United Hatzalah

Why you should listen to him:

When he was 6-years-old, Eli Beer was walking home from school when he witnessed a bus bombing in Jerusalem. This traumatic experience inspired Beer to seek out a career that saves lives. At age 15, he took an EMT course and began volunteering on an ambulance. But he found that, when someone truly needed fast medical attention, the ambulance just wasn't able to get there in time because of traffic and the distance needed to travel. 

At age 17, Beer gathered a like-minded group of EMTs with a passion for saving lives to listen to police scanners and rush to the scene when medical help was needed in their neighborhood. The initiative became United Hatzalah, which is Hebrew for “rescue.” Twenty-five years later, the organization has more than 2,000 volunteers and helped 207,000 people as they waited for an ambulance last year. Beer serves as United Hatzalah’s president.

Beer has responded to some of the worst civil, wartime and terror-related incidents. In 2010, he was named Social Entrepreneur of the Year in Israel by the Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship and, two years later, became a World Economic Forum Young Global Leader. Married with five children, when Beer is not saving lives or guiding United Hatzalah, he manages the family real estate company, Beer Realty.

Weberman: The story of rape in Chassidic Williamsburg

Time   The 2012 trial of Nechemya Weberman captivated New Yorkers: the prominent and respected counselor of the Satmar Hasidim sect stood accused of sexually abusing a young girl entrusted in his care. Incredibly, the youthful victim—who was 12 at the start of her four-year ordeal—and her family were ridiculed and defamed by many in this intensely insular ultra-Orthodox Jewish community, nestled in a Brooklyn neighborhood famous for its hipster clubs and cafes.

In her new Kindle ebook The Devil of Williamsburg, which goes on sale today, writer-editor Allison Yarrow offers a compelling account of a crime that horrified a city and forced a devout group of believers to confront some unpleasant truths. It is a piece of long-form investigative journalism—based on reporting, interviews, and courtroom testimony—that has as its narrative spine the story of two women: the young (and now married) victim and Weberman’s wife, who even now professes her husband’s innocence.

In the excerpt below, Yarrow likens the abuse suffered by the girl (called Rayna in the book, but whose real identity has been sealed by the court) to that of a victim of incest. [...]

There are multiple shades and layers in an abusive relationship between a predator and a child victim, says Lipner, who not only treats them, but was once one himself. He says some victims, especially boys, find physical pleasure in sexual encounters with their abuser, which is more distressing and confusing than abuse suffered alone. Despite complex feelings, “children have no mature capacity to consent to sex with adults, even if they like the adult, the attention, or the sexual touch,” Lipner stresses.[...]

None of this nuance would do the prosecution any good in court, where narratives are delivered to juries in stark black and white. But it is a painful contradiction for victims. Rayna will forever wrestle with the shards of her relationship with Weberman.

In the meantime, Weberman’s legal team hopes to use the textbook confusion of the victim‐abuser relationship to Weberman’s advantage in their appeal.

 

Campus rape:Importance of a nationwide coalition against coverups

This article mentions an issue that is critical to the proper handling of sexual abuse - but which I have not seen mentioned elsewhere. It is important that not only a few cases in a few location are publicized and the perpetrators punished. True universal change for dealing with this problem depends on the realization that this an inherent problem of all organizations. When this sickness is finally recognized as such - then it will be accepted and dealt with properly. However as long as sexual abuse is viewed as an rare or one time occurence or the consequences of a single sick individual - it is easier to rationalize coverups.

Time   Most experts say that the rate of campus sexual assault has largely remained constant: one-quarter to one-fifth of college women will experience rape or attempted rape before graduating. The recent outpouring of complaints from students across the country, they say, isn’t because campus sexual assaults are on the rise, but due to the steadily rising level of organization and activism among survivors.

Campus sexual assault is notoriously under-reported. According to a Department of Justice study based on surveys of over 4,000 female students, at a school of 10,000 female students, around 350 or more will become victims of rape. Meanwhile, in 2011, the University of Southern California – a school with around 40,000 students – reported 15 total sexual assaults surrounding all nine of its campuses. The University of Colorado, Boulder, which is also under federal investigation and has more than 30,000 students, lists six incidents.

But higher education watchers worry that universities have a reason to drag their heels on becoming more vigilant when it comes to assault on campus: a significant spike in the number of rapes reported on campus could scare away applicants and damage the school’s reputation.

“The national movement is so important because if only a few people are telling the truth, if only a few campuses are telling the truth, it will hurt them,” Heldman says. “But if everyone starts telling the truth, then we have a radical rethinking of higher education.”

As more complaints and investigations arise, universities will be forced to modify their adjudication and reporting procedures. One thing is clear: schools have a new, powerful force to answer to beyond the federal government.

Weiss-Dodelson divorce battle in the news again: Context & documentation

The following Jewish Week article written by a relative of the wife is obviously not an objective or balanced account of this divorce case involving the Feinstein and Kotler families.   Perhaps the critical issue is the wife's claim that her husband refuses to go to beis din to negotiate a settlement. He denies it and I present here the 20 pages of documentation to support his claim. I have linked to the article as well as one of many articles on the matter published on my blog. None of this material appears or is acknowledged in the Jewish Week article even though it is readily accessible with a Google search - why not?

I submitted this comment to the Jewish Week article - don't know whether it will be published.

Unfortunately this is a very simplistic and biased presentation of a complex issue by a relative of the wife who obviously shares her pain. However there is much material that could and should have been presented if this was meant as anything other than another attack in the continuing battle. For those that are interested the husband's side - it  is available in a number of posts on my blog Daas Torah. Search for "Weiss" in the archives. Alternatively see this post http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2013/08/weiss-dodleson-divorce-battle-in-news.html which has links to the relevant information.

This is a sad and unfortunate situation - but it is not going to resolved by p.r. fluff pieces in the media. It requires both of them to work together with a neutral beis din

Important links and documentation

1 response   ,2 ora   ,3 response  4 Weiss family response and documentation

5 bitul seruv,  6 defending bitul seruv  7 ORA's view from Jewish Press

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

The Jewish Week  My cousin, Gital Dodelson — my beautiful, poised, second cousin who is entering her third year of law school in the evening program at Rutgers University, and who belongs to the strictly observant Orthodox community of Lakewood, N.J. — seemed destined for many happy years ahead in February 2009, when she married Avrohom Meir Weiss, the great-grandson of the late Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, the revered Talmudic authority of his generation.[...]

Alas, the marriage was short-lived. After nine months, Gital gave birth to a baby boy, but just one month later, at Gital’s initiative, in December 2009, the couple parted ways. Three years later, she is still waiting for her “get” — her document of Jewish divorce. 

That wait could take decades. There are cases like that, and my cousins report that Avrohom Meir has indicated if his conditions aren’t satisfied, he’ll wait until Gital’s hair turns gray to give her the get. It seems he isn’t satisfied with the settlement handed down last summer by the New Jersey courts, granting him custody of his son every Tuesday and Thursday afternoon as well as every other weekend. Among his other demands, according to my cousins: He wants to share custody 50-50, and he wants $350,000 to cover his legal expenses.

Also this: He’s not interested in going to a bet din, or rabbinic court, to resolve these matters, and has ignored a siruv (a contempt-of-court ruling issued by a rabbinic court) after failing to heed repeated summonses by Beis Din of Mechon L’Hoyroa, a reputable rabbinic court in Monsey, N.Y.  He continues to ignore the siruv even after several of the most prominent rabbis in the country urged him in writing to go to a rabbinic court. [...]

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

In contrast to her claims  my brother wrote on this blog

A  signed letter from major Rosh Yeshivas has been issued attacking Rabbi Avrohom Mayer Weiss for not giving his wife, a Dodelson, a GET. The letter declares three things: One, that the Siruv given the husband by Beth Din Machon LiHorah requires everyone to treat him as if he was in Cherem. Two, everyone should pressure him with public humiliations and by taking away his livelihood to force him to give his wife a GET.

All three things are completely wrong. Let us begin with the Siruv issued by Beth Din Machon LiHorah. Yes, they issued a Siruv and claimed that he did not respond to their demand that he go to a Beth Din to settle his issues with his wife. But there is another Beth Din, that of Rav Gestetner  in Monsey, that has issued a Bitul Siruv, claiming that the husband acted in a proper way and did accept the obligation to go to a Beth Din. The family claims that it has over twenty pages of proof in writing that they did accept the demand by Machon LiHorah to enter the Beth Din process to resolve the issues with his wife.  So the issue must be resolved by a third Beth Din, impartial and fearless and not the cousin of the wife as in this letter. [...]

Testimony of minor is not to determine guilt but only to protect victims - Rav Dovid Cohen

Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society Fall 2012

Letters

Dear Editor,

In Rabbi Reiss's article (JHCS, Pesach 5772) on child molestation he writes about the difficulty to know for certain  that molestation has occurred: "One hurdle is that acts of child molestation typically occur in private, with only the children able to testify about what has transpired." He then applies the Ramo (Choshen Mishpat 35:14) that in circumstances where the   only individuals present are minors, they  can testify with respect to actions  committed in that venue. However, it seems   to me that the Ramo is not applicable in our situation, because   we are dealing with minors who are the injured party, as is quite clear from the quoted section above. The Ramo did not   permit "testimony" from minors if they are the Baal Davar  (plaintiff or defendant), as that is not "testimony" and they are   not "witnesses" but rather Baalei Davar. [The Shach and Aruch   Hashulchan say that even relatives are not included in the Ramo's rule, Kal V' homer the Baal Davar.] The only   applicability of the Ramo would be if a minor witnessed an act of molestation  committed against another person, which is of  course not the typical situation and is not what is being   discussed here.

Sincerely,

Rabbi Binyamin Cohen

* * *

Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society Spring 2013

Letters

To the Editor:

In the Fall edition of this journal [LXIV], Rav Binyamin  Cohen, sh'lita, comments on an earlier article about child  molestation. There, the author had relied on the ruling of  Ramo [CM 35:14], that it is permissible for beit din to accept the  testimony of a minor if there is no other choice. Rav Cohen  argues, however, that this ruling should not apply to a child's  accusations about what was done to him, because he is a  litigant in the matter, and the testimony of a litigant is not  acceptable in a Jewish court. (On the other hand, if the child is  testifying about something he saw being done to another  person, Rav Cohen would allow Ramo's ruling to apply.)

However, I wish to point out what I think is a fundamental  error in his objection: in these situations, our batei din are not  sitting in judgment concerning punishment or payment. They  are seeking to protect the members of the community, trying  to determine whether the accused offender is to be dismissed  from the position which gives him opportunity to molest.  Their function is not to gather "evidence", but rather to make  a finding according to umdenah (a logical or reasonable  inference: even circumstantial evidence). Anyone's "testi­mony" can be used to establish an uindenah.

The problem of molestation in a community therefore does  not go under the label of nezikin (damages) but rather under  the rubric of hilchot rotzeach ushemirat hanefesh (laws of murder  and protecting life), and the batei din are simply there to  protect the victims. If it is necessary to incarcerate the  offenders in order to protect the victims - so be it.

Rav Dovid Cohen
  Brooklyn, NY

* * *

Moti Elon convicted today of sexual assault on minor

YNet   The Jerusalem Magistrates' Court convicted prominent Religious Zionism leader Rabbi Moti Elon of sexually assaulting a minor on Wednesday. He was found guilty of performing indecent acts against a minor.

The Israeli Institute for behavioral Risk Assessment has been asked to give an opinion on the threat posed by Elon ahead of sentencing.