Tuesday, August 22, 2023

Rav Yisroel Reisman's psak: It is redifus to publish information about this particular sex offender - he is not a danger to the community

Update: I just called up the person in Flatbush  whose name appears on the emails supporting the child molester that were sent to me. While he acknowledged they were friends when the molester lived in Flatbush - he denied writing emails to me on the subject. That also means that the email that informed  me that another individual had requested this person in Flatbush to email is also a phony. In short it is possible that the convicted pedophile has created a group of imaginary supporters in whose name he is sending information supporting himself and attacking those he finds disagreeable. Please read the first part of this post in the context of this information.

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.

10 comments :

  1. And public high school girls.
    And elite private high schools too.

    ReplyDelete
  2. RDE, who was the other posek who disagreed with his close associate Rabbi Reisman? And why the coyness in not mentioning who it is?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I DIDNT ASK HISt PERMISSION to pubicize his views

    ReplyDelete
  4. “Rav Yisroel Reisman's psak: It is redifus to publish information about this particular sex offender - he is not a danger to the community”
    I 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.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Why not?

    Why don't you just ask him now?

    ReplyDelete
  6. I DONT WANT TOENABLE A public dispute between these two rabbis that will only serve to muddy these issues

    ReplyDelete
  7. Why 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?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Interesting that you have no compulsions about you making a public dispute with Rabbi Reisman, while using your anonymous rabbi as your tool or whip.

    I'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?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Daas Torah says “I DONT WANT TO ENABLE A public dispute between these two rabbis that will only serve to muddy these issues”
    I 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.

    ReplyDelete
  10. what garbage
    It's like those who say the Israeli army or settlers carry out pogroms!

    ReplyDelete

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