Rav Ratzbi: Are the Yemenite deniers of Zohar - heretics?

Bystander Effect: Failure of crime witnesses to intervene

What would you do if you saw a child being raped in a mikveh? What if you heard one of your child's friends was being abused by his parents? What if you saw money being stolen from a pushka? Would you intervene and try and stop the crime?

Time Magazine   As the trial of two high school football players accused of the rape approaches, it’s hard not to wonder about those who simply watched. Why didn’t anyone try to stop the assault, even by anonymously dialing 911?  Why did the bystanders apparently egg on the bullying that escalated into rape, seeing the behavior as something to broadcast rather than conceal? And, perhaps more important, how can the inertia of inaction be broken?

Unfortunately, bystander inaction is so common that it has been an active area of social-psychology research since 1964, when Kitty Genovese, a 28-year-old New York woman, was stabbed to death on the street in front of witnesses who failed to get help. The original version of the story — that 38 people saw the crime and did nothing — was later found to be inaccurate, with more people calling the police than was initially reported. But cases like Steubenville incident illustrate that bystander inaction persists, especially among teens and young adults. Research now suggests, however, that mobilizing witnesses is not only possible but could be an effective way to prevent these types of crimes from occurring or escalating.

Hundreds of colleges now offer programs to encourage intervention. “It’s just emerging,” says Sarah McMahon, associate director of the Center on Violence Against Women and Children at Rutgers University, of these efforts. “There are a number of programs now around the country, and the idea is very appealing. So far, the evaluations show that the programs do have a really positive effect both on willingness to step in and on actual behaviors.”

The interventions are based on research that suggests that the strongest enabling factor in sexual violence is the idea that such behavior is covertly condoned. “We know that people — especially adolescents — listen to peers,” says McMahon. “If their peers are expressing disapproval of the behavior, that’s really powerful, and that’s a key ingredient in how to ultimately prevent these crimes from happening, more than any other techniques that have been tried.”

In fact, studies show that teens’ beliefs about other people’s perspectives on the acceptability of bullying and sexual assault have a greater influence on their behavior than their own personal views. “Especially with men and boys, their willingness to intervene is based on whether or not they think their male peers would approve. That is the strongest factor, more so than their own attitudes,” McMahon says.

Death penalty for sexual crimes - based on chazaka (presumption)

Contrary to common belief - halacha prescribes punishment - even capital punishment based on circumstantial evidence and presumption (chazaka). Even strong rumors are enough to give punishment

Kiddushin (80a): This was taught only in respect of Sanctities of the border, but not in respect of genealogy. But R. Johanan maintained: Even in respect of genealogy. Now, R. Johanan is in accord with his view [elsewhere]. For R. Hiyya b. Abba said in R. Johanan's name: We flagellate on the strength of presumption, we stone and burn on the strength of presumption, but we do not burn terumah on the strength of presumption. We flagellate on the strength of presumption, as Rab Judah. For Rab Judah said: If a woman was presumed a niddah by her neighbours, her husband is flagellated on her account as a niddah. We stone and burn on the strength of presumption, as Rabbah son of R. Huna. For Rabbah son of R. Huna said: If a man, woman, boy and girl lived in a house [together], they are stoned and burnt on each other's account.6 R. Simeon b. Pazzi said in R. Joshua b. Levi's name on Bar Kappara's authority: It once happened that a woman came to Jerusalem carrying an infant on her back; she brought him up and he had intercourse with her, whereupon they were brought before Beth din and stoned. Not because he was definitely her son, but because he clung to her.

שולחן ערוך (אבן העזר יט:א): מי שהוחזק בשאר בשר, דנין על פי חזקה זו אף על פי שאין שם ראיה ברורה שזה קרוב, ומלקין וחונקין וסוקלין על חזקה זו.

 Aruch HaShulchan (C.M. 2:1): Even though the Jewish court does not judge cases involving capital punishment or flogging or fines outside of Israel – but if the beis din sees that the times require it - because there is a breakdown in law and order – then it is permitted. Everything depends on the judgment of how serious the problem is. Not only can the court judge these cases when there is community lawlessness but even when a single individual sins it is permitted to punish him if they think it is necessary - as long as they do it for pure motivation. This ability to judge these cases in emergency situations is even when there are not valid witnesses but only a reasonable basis that it is true and constant rumors are heard when there are no enemies who would create them

(Rambam (Hilchos Sanhedrin 24:5): A beis din – in all places and for all times  - has the power to flog a person about whom there are rumors of bad behavior and the people and complaining that he has transgressed prohibited sexual relations. This is only when the rumors are unceasing as we have explained and also that he doesn’t have any known enemies who would slander him. ….  

Yam shel Shlomo (Yevamos 10:20):… Similarly the beis din has the right to flog a person who has a bad reputation and there are constant rumors that he is involved in improper sexual relations. However this is only when he doesn’t have enemies that would spread lies about him

Kiddushin (81a): Rav said that we flog a person because of an evil rumor about him

Meiri(Kiddushin 81a): All those who act with inappropriate frivolity until people are constantly complaining about him that he is a sinner is to be flogged based on his activity which leads people to give him a bad reputation – even though no one has given formal testimony that he has sinned… Whoever acts in a way that causes rumors that he is a sinner has violated a negative commandment from Tradition.

 

Metzitza: Injunction against parental consent denied

Wall Street Journal  A judge has ruled that New York City health officials can move forward with a new regulation requiring written parental consent for a form of circumcision that involves oral suction.

In October, a group of ultra-Orthodox rabbis sued the city in an attempt to block officials from enforcing the new regulation. They claimed the city exaggerated the danger and infringed on their religious freedom.

Police report: BBC legend Savile - a prolific pedophile

NYTimes   British police and the country’s leading children’s charity were preparing on Friday to publish comprehensive details of the sexual abuse scandal involving former television host Jimmy Savile that has convulsed the nation’s public broadcaster, drawn in a mounting tally of suspects and raised questions about the protection of children from predators. [...]

The Guardian newspaper said on Friday that the report to be published by Scotland Yard and the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children would accuse Mr. Savile of abusing children as young as 10. The institutions where abuse took place included a hospice for the dying, several hospitals and prisons and BBC premises, British news reports said. [...]

A report commissioned by the BBC concluded last month that lax leadership hampered by “rigid management chains” left the corporation “completely incapable” of dealing with the crisis.

R Amnon Yitzchok projected to win 4 seats

Times of Israel   The right-wing bloc will hold a 22-seat advantage in the Knesset over the center-left after the upcoming elections, Israel Radio projected in a poll published on Thursday. The most surprising aspect of the survey was its projection that the Koah Lehashpia (Ability to Influence) party, headed by evangelical telerabbi Amnon Yitzhak, would win four seats.

Yitzhak, who founded and leads an organization that advocates spiritual revival among secular Israelis, remarked in an interview this month on Channel 10 that the Holocaust was a punishment for Jewish sins, and in November that Superstorm Sandy, which struck the United States, was a message to Israel to cease its dependence on its biggest ally.

Boro Park reacts to "chassidic" actors on 13th Ave

Fascinating to see the consternation when they realized they couldn't differentiate goyim dressed as chassidim and the real thing.

Weberman juror:Facts caused conviction not religion

NY Daily News    "It wasn't religion, it wasn't their background, it wasn't revenge," said the 42-year-old man, who asked not to be identified. "It was a young girl and an old man alone in a room."

Weberman’s lawyer George Farkas had claimed after the conviction that Hasidic Jews do not have “the same shot with a jury as anyone else."

But the juror said he had no preconceptions about Weberman's community, adding the panel didn't view him as "a monster."

"We realized we couldn't make a flippant decision and ruin a man's life," the juror recalled. "It was, 'Oh boy, we have a serious job.'"

The juror said the panel accepted the victim's "emotional" testimony, which stretched over four days, but didn't want to rely solely on her words.

“Something else” came in the form of social worker Sara Fried, who testified she diagnosed the girl with post traumatic stress disorder over the years of molestation.

"That's what clinched it," the juror said during an hour-long interview at a Brooklyn diner last week. "We took the vote and everyone was unanimous."

He also noted there were multiple locks in Weberman's home, that he admitted to driving the girl upstate alone and that he housed other runaway teens.  [...]

R Amnon Yitzchok defends himself / attacks opponents

זוועה! דברים מבהילים מהרב אמנון יצחק מנתיבות
RaP wrote:

12 minutes in Hebrew, where it seems perhaps planted interviewers-questioners ask him soft-ball questions in his favor about the elections, why he split from Shas and about Rav Ovadya Yosef and then AY launches into his diatribes and self-justifies himself:

State: Draft of charedim too expensive for IDF

YNET  In brief filed with High Court over petitions demanding the immediate draft of yeshiva boys State argues that expanding current draft 'is not feasible'; will strain IDF's resources and may impede primary missions

In the brief, obtained by Ynet, the State said that the complex preparations required from the IDF ahead of the draft strains the military's current resources and that a larger draft "is not feasible and will hurt the military."

The State argues that a universal draft will force the IDF to invest considerable funds in infrastructure which most likely will be rendered useless within a short while.

The brief explained that Tal Law stated a draft goal of 2,400 haredim by 2015; but the military now has to induct 19,500 ultra-Orthodox recruits in the same time period. [...]

Absorbing such numbers into the military required the IDF to build more dedicated bases, so to accommodate the haredi soldiers' demand for the separation of men and women, as well as create new men-only battalions, for the same reason.

Another challenge, according to the State, is the IDF's own ability to screen haredi candidates – a process which also mandates the formation of all-male teams in every level of the induction bases: interviewers, doctors, placement coordinators and so on.

Liability for making Defamatory comments on Internet

Time Magazine   Jane Perez, a retired captain in the military from Fairfax County, VA, was not happy with her home contractor, so she wrote reviews on Yelp and Angie’s List explaining why. She said he had done a poor job on her renovations and billed her for work he did not perform — and that he may have stolen her jewelry. She warned readers: “Bottom line: do not put yourself through this nightmare of a contractor.”

The contractor, Christopher Dietz, filed a $750,000 defamation suit and got a judge to order Perez to rewrite the reviews. The Virginia Supreme Court recently reversed that decision, saying that reviews should not be censored — and that if they were defamatory, Dietz should focus on getting money damages.

The ruling is being hailed as an important victory for freedom of speech on the Internet, which it is. But it is also a reminder of the risks that come with being an online critic. Sites like Yelp! and Amazon give ordinary people the power to write reviews that have a major impact on other people’s reputations and livelihoods. But it also means that they can be held legally responsible if what they write is defamatory. [...]

Under federal law — 47 U.S.C. § 230, to be specific — websites like Yelp and Angie’s List are shielded from being sued for defamation, but the writers — people like Perez — are legally responsible for what they write and lawsuits can be filed against them. That may not be what a lot of people are thinking when they go on Angie’s List or Amazon to air grievances. In fact, Perez told the Washington Post that when she posted her reviews it never occurred to her that she might end up in court or on the hook for thousands of dollars in legal fees — not to mention the monetary damages. Dietz is suing for $750,000, and awards can go far higher than that. In 2006, a jury awarded a Florida woman $11.3 million in damages against a woman who made defamatory comments on an Internet message board.

R Amnon Yitzchok: Love Rav Yosef but vote for me