Kolko gets 15 years after judge rejects guilty plea withdrawal

Asbury Park Press   After watching his former camp counselor try to avoid responsibility for molesting him during a nine-hour hearing on Thursday, a 16-year-old boy faced his abuser in court as a judge sentenced him to 15 years in prison.

Superior Court Judge Francis R. Hodgson imposed the prison term shortly before 11:30 p.m. on Yosef Kolko, 38, a former counselor at an Orthodox Jewish camp in Lakewood.

Before the sentence was handed down, the victim, who was 11 and 12 years old when he was molested by Kolko in 2008 and 2009, confronted his former camp counselor.

“Molesting may seem harmless to you, but the reality is, it kills people,” the victim said. “How can you ignore the tears and open wounds when you know how much you hurt me? You ganged up on me and hurt me again.”

The victim and his family were ostracized in Lakewood’s Orthodox community for bringing the child’s allegations to secular authorities and breaking the religious tradition of having rabbis handle such problems. The family [...] made a 12-hour trip by bus for the sentencing hearing and an earlier hearing that stretched from the afternoon until 11 p.m. on Kolko’s bid to retract his guilty plea.

Kolko’s attorney, Alan Zegas, argued Kolko should be allowed to withdraw his plea to the molestation charges because he was coerced into making the admissions by members of the Orthodox community who didn’t want the bad publicity from a trial. [...]

However, Kolko’s previous attorney, Michael Bachner, one of seven witnesses at the hearing on whether to allow the guilty plea to be withdrawn, testified there was no coercion.

 

Senior Assistant Ocean County Prosecutor Laura Pierro called Bachner to testify after six witnesses testified on behalf of Kolko, describing an effort by many people in the community to try and convince him to plead guilty.

“He was never being threatened,” Bachner said of Kolko. “I didn’t feel he was being coerced. He never indicated to me he was being pressured.”[...]

New accusers in rabbi ‘torture’ ring

NY Post   A prosecutor said Wednesday that “the phone has not stopped ringing” with calls from Orthodox Jewish men who claim they were kidnapped by a rabbinical torture ring that used a cattle prod to force recalcitrant husbands to divorce their unhappy wives.

Assistant US Attorney Joseph Gribko said that while the feds were aware of 20 abductions when the unholy gang was busted last week, it’s unclear how many more will be uncovered.

“It’s larger than we thought,” Gribko said in Trenton federal court.

“The threats are not just in the past. This is an ongoing business.”

Sadistic cult leader sentenced to 26 years

YNET    26 years in prison. That is the punishment meted out Thursday morning by the Jerusalem District Court on the head of a "sadistic cult" in the Jerusalem area. He was also ordered to pay NIS 100,000 to his victims. His aide, who was convicted alongside him in court, was sentenced to six years in prison.

In September, the head of the sect and his aide were convicted of sexual offenses, violence, imprisonment in conditions of slavery and abuse of women and dozens of minors – some of whom were biological children of the father of "the family." The father, known as D., and his assistant, were arrested with much publicity two years ago. Twenty charges were filed against the two, and they were convicted of most.

According to the verdict, the "family" consisted of six women and dozens of children. The father persuaded the women to join them peacefully, but once they joined, life became a living hell of horrific violence, and physical, sexual and emotional abuse towards them and their children. Even so, some wives continued to be faithful and denied the charges against him. "There was only love at home," they claimed after the conviction. "It is all lies."

 

Publication of the full indictment has been forbidden, in order to prevent the identification of dozens of young children and their mothers, but a shortened version was released. [...]

Kolko claims Rabbi Belsky and other rabbis pressured him to falsely plead guily and to go to jail - to avoid sensational trial

Asbury Park Press    Middle-of-the-night visits and YouTube videos of child molesters in prison were among methods employed by Lakewood’s Orthodox Jewish community to pressure a former Orthodox Jewish camp counselor to admit to sexually abusing a child, the former camp counselor’s attorneys said in court papers.The members of Lakewood’s Orthodox community made the concerted effort to persuade Yosef Kolko to plead guilty to child molestation against his will to spare the community the unwanted publicity of a trial, defense attorneys Stephanie Forbes and Alan L. Zegas said in a brief filed in state Superior Court. [...]

Senior Assistant Ocean County Prosecutor Laura Pierro said in a response to the brief filed by the defense attorneys that Kolko already had been contemplating a guilty plea, because of the way the trial was going. He went ahead with the plea after learning that the Prosecutor’s Office had been contacted by an attorney representing two more individuals who claimed to have been molested by him, Pierro said in her brief opposing Kolko’s motion. Kolko did not enter his guilty plea until after he consulted with a Brooklyn rabbi, Yisroel Belsky, to get his blessing, Pierro added. [...]

Five letters from members of the Orthodox community were submitted with the brief on Kolko’s behalf, saying that Kolko was pressured into taking a plea bargain. The letters included one from Shabsi Kolko supporting the defendant’s story that he told him he was pleading guilty against his will, and one from Belsky, who said he was among the people who advised Kolko to plead guilty.“The reasons were convincing enough to make those who believed in his innocence fearful of the sensationalism attached to the affair and other weighty considerations,’’ Belsky wrote in his handwritten letter.

Hodgson is scheduled to hold a hearing on Kolko’s motion at 1:30 p.m. today.

R Mendel Epstein's alleged get kidnap & torture gang - soon to be out on bail

Asbury Park Press     [See also Lohud for additional details]

Two rabbis and four other men charged with planning to kidnap and torture Orthodox Jewish husbands to force them to grant their wives religious divorces are set to be freed as early as today on bail that runs into millions of dollars for some defendants.

Home confinement and other tight restrictions were also placed on the six men, including Rabbi Mendel Epstein, by U.S. District Court Magistrate Judge Doulas E. Arpert this afternoon in Trenton.

Epstein will be wearing an electronic bracelet while he remains under house confinement in his home in Lakewood, Arpert said. [...]

A law-enforcement source with knowledge of the investigation said the arrests were the direct result of a 2011 case in which a Lakewood couple, David and Judy Wax, were accused of kidnapping an Israeli national in an attempt to force him to divorce his estranged wife in Israel. Proceedings in that case have been repeatedly postponed since the arrest.

Just Say No: When It Makes Sense Not to Take Your Medicine

Time Magazine    It sounds like something a quack would support, but it’s true. There’s growing evidence that lifestyle changes such as eating a healthier diet and exercising more may be enough to prevent and even treat conditions ranging from diabetes to cancer.

The latest comes from a review of studies, published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, that analyzed the effects of a combination of behaviors that reduced the rate of Type 2 diabetes among those at high risk of developing the disease. Making over their diets and boosting their amount of daily exercise, as well as quitting smoking and managing their stress were enough to help the participants, all of whom had high blood-sugar levels that precede diabetes, lower their glucose and avoid getting diagnosed with the disease.

And it’s not the first study to hint at the power of the pharmaceutical-free approach. A study published this month in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention reported that brisk walking cut postmenopausal women’s breast-cancer risk by 14% compared with those who didn’t walk. Women who exercised more vigorously enjoyed a 25% drop in risk of developing the disease. Another report in the journal Lancet Oncology found that a plant-based diet, stress management and other lifestyle changes contributed to longer-lived cells among men with prostate cancer. Those results echoed previous work that documented that the same lifestyle-based changes contributed to fewer recurrent tumors among men who had been treated for prostate cancer.

Taken together, the data has more doctors putting away their prescription pads when they see certain patients. The pill-free route isn’t for everyone, however, so it’s important for physicians and patients to understand when it’s appropriate and when it isn’t. [...]

Israeli court rules teen can’t be forced to go to yeshiva

Haaretz    The Haifa District Court overturned a Magistrate's Court ruling that forced a 16-year-old boy to study in a yeshiva as his father demanded, against his will. The court accepted the youth's appeal and ordered that he be allowed to register at a technical school of his choice. 

The youth's parents are separated. Both are religious, and the mother supported her son's wish. The District Court criticized the Magistrate's Court for not calling the youth to the witness stand or requesting to hear his opinion, and for ignoring the report of a social worker that supported the boy’s stance. The mother told the court that the standard of studies in the yeshiva was very low, that it does not prepare students properly for the matriculation exams, and that many students have left the yeshiva. The judges, Shoshana Stemer, Adi Zarnakin and Rivka Lemelshtrich summoned the youth to their chambers and heard his opinion. The youth was represented by attorney Efrat Venkart of the Justice Ministry department of legal aid. [...]

Lashon Hara:Did Chofetz Chaim transform a moral issue into a legal one?

[updated see below] How do we know that lashon harah (making derogatory statements about others) is prohibited? The most obvious candidate for the prohibition of lashon is Vayikra (19:16), Do not spread gossip amongst your people....  However the Rambam in Sefer HaMtizvos (301) says that this is a prohibition for rechilus (gossip) and motzi shem rah (slander) and does not mention lashon harah at all. .In contrast the Rambam in his later work Mishna Torah (Hilchos De'os 7:1) states that this verse is the source for the prohibition of rechilus (gossip) and that lashon hara and motzi shem rah are also included in this Torah commandment. The Chofetz Chaim says that the verse is only about rechilus and that lashon harah is learned by kal v'chomer from rechilus. [He says that consequently there is a problem for the Ravad who disagrees with the Rambam and says that rechilus is more severe than lashon harah – and thus the Ravad must learn lashon harah from a different verse.]

The Bavli also does not provide a verse for the prohibition of lashon harah. Rather the concern is for the prohibition of slander. Kesuvos (26a) mentions a debate regarding motzi shem rav – is it learned from Vayikra (19:16) or is learned from Devarim (23:10) Guard yourself from all evil. It does not ask about lashon harah. The verse in Vayikra is also cited as the source of rules regarding judges. He is not to be harsh to one litigant and gentle to the other. The deliberations of the court are not to be revealed.

One obvious explanation as to the lack of sources is that the Talmud does not clearly differentiate between gossip (rechilus) and derogatory comments (lashon harah) but rather uses the terms interchangably. We see this also from Yerushalmi (Peah 1:1) which does in fact ask for the source of prohibition of lashon harah. It says there is a dispute whether lashon harah is learned from the prohibition of gossip (Vayikra 19:16) or from Guard yourself from all evil (Devarim 23:10) – just as the Bavli asked regarding slander (motzi shem rah). Rav La says that prohibition against spreading gossip indicates a prohibition against "lashon harah –rechilus." [both terms together as if lashon harah is an adjective modifying rechilus] Rav Nechmiah said one should not be like a peddler who carries the words of one and brings them to another and vice versa. 

אזהרה ללשון הרע מניין ונשמרת מכל דבר רע אמר רבי לא תני רבי ישמעאל לא תלך רכיל בעמך זו רכילות לשון הרע תני ר' נחמיה שלא תהא כרוכל הזה מטעין דבריו של זה לזה ודבריו של זה לזה

The question is then whether it is true that before the Rishonim there was not a precise differential meaning for rechilus and lashon harah and that the terms were used interchangably? This would make sense if speaking negatively about others was a moral issue rather than a legal one. In other words if speaking lashon harah was a problem of character or midos and not halacha. If this is true than the revolution of the Chofetz Chaim was not that he was the first to create a Shulchan Aruch of the issur of lashon harah but rather that he succeeded in transforming lashon harah from midos to halacha. While it is true that bad midos are also prohibited by halacha – but there is no need for precisely describing the parameters as the Chofetz Chaim has done regarding the prohibitions of lashon harah/rechilus. 

This issue of whether lashon harah is primarily midos or issur is discussed by Rav Asher Weiss (Minchas Asher Vayikra 19:16 #41) and Dr. Benny Brown Pdf fixed link  [ and Daas Torah link] (From Principles to Rules and from Musar to Halakhah:The Hafetz Hayim’s Rulings on Libel and Gossip) and Rabbi Asher Buchman pdf (Legislating Morality: The Prohibition of Lashon Hara in Hakira) who discusses why Rambam placed these laws in Hilchos De'os which describes character perfection)

update (10/16/13) The Chofetz Chaim himself made the distinction between moral (mussar) and halacha in his explanation of how he could use Rabbeinu Yonah as a source - when it was  mussar (moral) not a halacha sefer

Chofetz Chaim (Lashon Harah – Introduction: Comment): The reader should not find it astounding that even though my entire sefer is based on halachic principles and conclusions, but I nevertheless cite in a number of places proofs from Rabbeinu Yonah's sefer – Shaarei Teshuva which is a mussar book [not halacha]. That is because if one examines Rabbeinu Yonah's words in a number of places it is clear that he was very careful with his words and they do not deviate from the halacha. In particular this is true concerning his writings about lashon harah. In fact everything he wrote there is a source in the Talmud as I will explain G‑d willing in this sefer. However he is very sparing in his words and he doesn't cite his sources contary to the practice of Rishonim. Nevertheless, in most cases I did not depend exclusively on the rulings of Rabbeinu Yonah – except in circumstances where a leniency could be inferred (and this is true for other Mussar books).

Progress in dealing with Domestic Abuse

Times of Israel      It was only when her sons came at her with knives that she realized keeping quiet was not going to work. 

For nine years, her rabbis had told her not to speak up about her husband’s verbal, physical and sexual attacks. They assured her that the abuse would pass, that if she obeyed his every wish — folding his napkin just so or letting him do as he liked in bed — the attacks would end and he would stop telling their grown sons she was a bad mother. 

But when her sons began to threaten her, she knew it was time to leave.

Taking her youngest children, she turned to Yad Sarah, a highly regarded Israeli charity founded by former Jerusalem Mayor Uri Lupolianski. The organization mainly focuses on medical services, but it also runs a domestic abuse division geared toward Orthodox Jews. A professional there directed her to Bat Melech, a shelter for battered religious women. [..]

The wall of silence surrounding sensitive domestic issues in the haredi Orthodox community has long been seen as an impediment to successfully addressing them. Yad Sarah and Bat Melech have sought to change the situation — and their efforts appear to be bearing fruit.

A decade ago, haredi community leaders rarely spoke openly about violence against women. Now leading rabbis are working with experts to fight abuse in the community. [...]

Rachel Imeinu and the Rescue of the Jewish people

5TJT by Rabbi Yair Hoffman    [...] Yaakov knew that Hashem Yisboruch would not be able to resist the cries of a mother.  A young mother, who died in childbirth at the age of 26, and was a remarkable tzadaikes.

Yaakov Avinu did not bury Rachel in the ancestral plot his grandfather Avrohom Avinu had purchased.  He did not bury her at Maaras HaMachpeilah in Chevron.  She would not be buried with the other Avos and Imahos.  Her destiny lay elsewhere.

Yaakov Avinu buried her on the side of the road – on the path toward Yerushalayim, on the path in  Beis Lechem.

Why? Why?!  Why?!?

She was the love of Yaakov Avinu’s life.  Why didn’t he bury her next to him?  Why did he not bury her with the Imahos and the Avos?

The answer is one we all know, of course.  Because when we get up to the B in the above mnemonic, the Babylonians, the same thing was going to happen.  The Jewish people being exiled to Babylonia, passing that road in Beis Lechem would be relegated to oblivion. [...]

Chacham Tzvi #1 Provides no heter to force a Get in a case of ma'os alei or where the husband loses leverage

I recently posted  an  article by Rabbi Hoffman  in 5TJT  about the use of cattle prods to force a husband to give a get.  He noted while it is clearly prohibited by the major poskim such as Rav Eliashiv and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach - there are minority views such as the Chacham Tzvi which would allow it. [see 2005 Bedatz protesting against American cattle prod gittin]

"There are also Poskim who draw a distinction between the cases in the Gemorah and Shulchan Aruch and cases where the wife is no longer under the same roof as the husband. These Poskim write that the entire issue of limitation of forcing was only when they were under the same roof, but otherwise forcing when there is a concern that the wife would be an Agunah, left alone, is always permitted. The responsa of the Chacham Tzvi Siman 1 seems to indicate that he holds of this distinction. He writes that one may force a get either because of igun or because of the issues that Chazal enumerated. This is also the position of the Z’kain Aharon (Rabbi haLevy) in his responsa (#149). According to these Poskim the cattle prod get would be kosher."

Note Rabbi Hoffman tentativeness  - that the Chachom Tzvi would seem to accept the distinction of whether the wife is under the same roof. Thus the Chachom Tzvi at most implies that there might be a heter when the couple are living apart.

However I disagree with Rabbi Hoffman's apparent assertion that the Chachom Tzvi would allow the use of force in all cases where the couple are living apart.

I looked in the authoritative sefer Kefiya B'Get by Rav Tvi Gartner, expecting the find the Chachom Tzvi cited all over the place as a heter to use force. But I only found a single reference to it which is found below. [It is also not cited in review articles about aguna e.g., in the 111 pages of  Rabbi Breitowitz - Plight of the Aguna]

Chachom Tzvi says clearly that a get can be forced either because of the specific cases permitted by the gemora  or because of the issue of agunah. Rav Gartner explains  the Chachom Tzi as saying that force can be used in the case of aguna because it is similar to a forced sale in which the customer pays for the item and thus the "seller" loses nothing. This logic is described in Rabbi Hoffman's article in reference to the Rashbam and others. The simple question is does this in fact provide a heter to use a cattle prod to force a husband to give a get? (assuming of course that the government permitted its citizens to torture each other for religious reasons)

The answer is clearly no! Where the wife has requested the divorce because of ma'os alei - this is simply not a case of aguna. The overwhelming view of the poskim is that she is not an aguna because he didn't wish to divorce her and thus she still has a marriage. It is not the marriage she wants - but she is not an aguna. Even if there is a civil divorce - there is nothing preventing her from returning to him.

But what about the case where there is no possibility of reconciliation - doesn't the Chachom Tzvi allow force even in the case of ma'os alei? The answer again is clearly no! In most cases there are unresolved issues for which the giving of the get is the major motivation for the husband being able to obtain equitable custody or to resolve financial issues. Clearly the husband has much to lose by giving the Get. Thus even if you want to posken like the minority view of the Chachom Tzi - that in a case of aguna force can be use - his heter  doesn't apply in most modern cases.

In fact it apparently would only apply where the husband is only refusing to give a get out of spite - and he has nothing to lose by giving her the get.

Rav Hershel Schacter's lectures dealing with violence against husbands have been removed from YU website

At the bottom I have provided links to some of the posts dealing with the subject. It is important to note when rereading these posts how the world suddenly changed with the arrest of R Epstein and Wolmark. The recording have been removed from the YU website.

--------------------------------------
Guest Post (from someone who insists on remaining anonymous):

Daas Torah has previously featured several commentaries about Rabbi Schachter's advocacy of violence against men who haven't given a get, including on lectures posted on YU's website.  Rabbis Dovid and Daniel Eidensohn have noted that Rabbi Schachter's advocacy of violence is without halachic basis, and constitutes dangerous incitement to violence.  ORA claims Rabbi Schachter as its posek (Jewish Law decision-maker), and has previously disseminated Rabbi Schachter's incitement to violence.  Rabbi Schachter and ORA know very well that their incitement to violence could very well result in actual violence, and that very well may be their specific intention.  Indeed, a specific target of Rabbi Schachter and ORA's incitement was actually attacked by masked thugs, as previously covered on Daas Torah.  This puts to lie ORA's claim that it is against violence.   

YU has pulled Rabbi Schachter's lecture calling for violence from its website following the FBI sting operation. If there were nothing wrong with Rabbi Schachter's lecture, why would YU have taken it down?  

It is about time that Rabbi Schachter and ORA apologize for their abominable incitement to violence, which is against halacha and against the law.
==================================================
Video - YU Lecture series Shachter - Plight of the Agunah
Audio  - Rav Schachter's letter and links to various recordings of lectures
Web Archive: Rav Schachter "Options for helping Agunot"
Audio - Rav Schachter Aharon Friedman beaten police report
Rav Eliashiv denounces rabbis who force gittin  Rav Schachter Witholding Get is serious aveira
 Does Rav Schachter Permit Beatings
Rav Schacter's Occasional Mispeaking
Aharon Friedman beaten
Jewish Exponent reports Friedman assault

Dying Alabama congregation saved with $50K relocation grants

NY Times   [see also CNN 2008]

DOTHAN, Ala. — Five years ago, a Jewish businessman, worried that his synagogue was dying, put up $1 million to finance a program to recruit fellow Jews to move to a corner of the Deep South best known for peanuts. 

Alabama might not be the promised land, but the plan worked. 

The redbrick synagogue now has religion classes full of children, and a temple bowling team is starting. Six new Jewish families with 18 people who used to live in Florida, New York and elsewhere now call Dothan their home. Their arrival helped double the size of worship services, and more families are applying for the assistance. 

The businessman, Larry Blumberg, smiles when he talks about what has grown in the few years since he had the idea to pay moving expenses for families relocating to the area.[...]

Mr. Blumberg, who owns a chain of hotels, came up with a plan: offer Jewish families $50,000 in relocation assistance in exchange for pulling up their roots, moving to Dothan, getting involved at Temple Emanu-El and staying for at least five years.  [...]

A Rabbi's Tale of Abuduction, Torture - Newsday

 update 10/12/13 NY Post     Click  Rubin case documents 1998

2005 Bedatz protesting against American cattle prod gittin

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

Rabbis Belsky and Wolmark, amongst those who signed the seruv against Aharon, were accused by Rabbi Abraham Rubin of being responsible for an attack in which Rabbi Rubin was kidnapped and beaten to force him to give a get.
==============================================

A TALE OF ABDUCTION , TORTURE Newsday March 8, 1998  by Dan Morrison

On the evening of Oct. 23, 1996, as Rabbi Abraham Rubin walked home from synagogue toward his Borough Park home, two cars collided up the block at the intersection of 56th Street and 14th Avenue.

Rubin, 31, ran toward the scene of the accident, an apparent diversion. A man standing on the sidewalk in front of him suddenly turned and started punching him and grabbed his glasses. He was dragged into a waiting van, he says, where several assailants began beating him.

He did not have to ask why.

For five years, Rubin, an Orthodox Jew, had been involved in a bitter dispute with his estranged wife.

Rubin says he has refused to this day to grant his wife a religious divorce, known as a get, until she lets him see his two children, who live with her in Montreal.

In an interview that elaborated on charges in a lawsuit he has filed against his alleged captors, Rubin described his abduction and torture.

"I was expecting it, sooner or later," he said.

Inside the van, he said, paid assailants wrapped a black laundry bag around his head. As he was handcuffed and choked, a voice said in sarcastic Yiddish, "Ess vet zein gut It will be good . . .
Mir vilen nor die zalst a yid We only want you to be a Jew ."

As the van sped through Brooklyn, Rubin said, he was asked if he knew  Kol D'Alim G'var, a Talmudic commentary on the theory that might makes right.

The van stopped, and all the attackers left, except one, he said. "The rabbi is coming," he said he heard one of his assailants say. The door opened and new passengers entered.

"Do you understand English?" Rubin said he was asked. "Repeat my words."

Rubin said that when he refused to repeat the 12-line oath that grants a Jewish wife a divorce, punches and electric shocks rained down on him, first just a few and then a torrent - so many that he began reciting the "Viduy," the traditional Jewish deathbed prayer of repentance.

According to the lawsuit Rubin filed against his alleged captors, they zapped him with an electronic stun gun - in all, more than 30 times - including shocks to his genitals.

After passing out for about an hour, Rubin said, he was shaken awake. "Rabbi, wake up," a voice said. "The get is done."

He was transferred from the van to a car. "Don't be a moser," an informer, he said he was told. "If you know what's good for you, don't be a moser."

He said he was thrown from the car, still handcuffed and shrouded, and dumped outside a Brooklyn cemetery. A cab driver found the bloody rabbi and took him to the 66th Precinct. No arrests have been made in the attack.

Rubin, represented by Manhattan attorney Thomas Stickel, charges in a civil racketeering lawsuit filed in State Supreme Court in Brooklyn that Mendel Epstein, a well-known divorce mediator, took part in his "abduction and torture." Rubin said he learned the details of the plot during an investigation he and his friends conducted over several months.

Epstein's attorney has denied the charges. The suit also charges several other rabbis with planning or participating in the attack, including Martin Wolmark, a rabbi from the upstate Orthodox enclave of  Monsey, and Israel Belsky, a rabbi from the Ditmas Park section of Brooklyn.

In a telephone interview, Belsky denied taking part in the attack. "I have no connection to any of this," he said. "The guy is a crackpot. The whole thing is a frivolous action."

Robert Rimberg, an attorney for Wolmark, also denied the charges listed in the lawsuit. "As far as I know, and based on my investigation, there is no basis for it," he said. [...]

While no one has ever been prosecuted for a get-related attack in New York City, that may soon  change. Det. Robert Roddenberg of the 66th Precinct said Rubin's case might be the first of its kind to make it into a courtroom.

"Rubin is entitled to his day in court and the best investigation we can do," Roddenberg said. "Rubin is one of the few who have stood up. He was abducted. They beat the - - - out of him.

"They investigators spent an awful lot of time doing this case and it was really nitpicked to do it right," Roddenberg said. "It was done as well as any homicide case could be done. Just like not every homicide case gets solved, will this case get solved? That's up to the DA's office."

Lubavitcher Rebbe attacks Women's Liberation Movement

R Epstein and Wolmark original criminal complaint in get coercion case

This is the original criminal complaint filed against Rabbi Epstein and Wolmark and 2 others. It has since been modified by the addition of 6 others who were added to this complaint and who are also now in custody click link here

Mendel Epstein, Martin Wolmark, Ariel Potash, Jay Goldstein  (a/k/a "Yaakov"), Moshe Goldstein, Binyamin Stimler, David Hellman, Simcha Bulmash, Avrohom Goldsstein, and Sholom Shuchat

R Mendel Epstein and Wolmark FBI Filed Complaint

CBS News Video: R Epstein and Wolmark alleged kidnapping and torture for get case

"The Book of Woe" - A critical look at the DSM-5

Scientific American    This is a landmark book about a landmark book. Psychotherapist and author Greenberg first took on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) in a blistering article in Wired in 2010. The Book of Woe is the nearly 400-page update, whose release coincided with the May 2013 release of the DSM-5, the fifth edition of the bible of mental health, which first appeared in 1952.

Relying heavily on interviews with distinguished insiders in the psychiatric establishment, Greenberg paints a picture so compelling and bleak that it could easily send the vulnerable reader into therapy. The basic message is this: everyone in the mental health profession knows full well that the DSM is a work of fiction—that the hundreds of “disorders” described therein are just labels for fuzzy, overlapping clusters of symptoms and that we have never found a definitive biological marker for even one of those disorders. Mental health professionals pretend that the disorders are real, but they're not, period.[...]

Psychiatrists are in the business of pathologizing and throwing drugs at everyday problems, and given the money at stake, perhaps nothing can stop this trend.

Anti-bullying programs don't work well - and the focus on bullying might cause problems

Time Magazine   A new study recently published in the Journal of Criminology suggests that the anti-bullying programs that have become popular in many schools may not be as useful as previously thought. The authors examined 7000 kids at 195 different schools to try to determine child and school influences on bullying. Surprisingly, the authors found that children who attended schools with anti-bullying programs were more likely to experience bullying than children who attended schools without such programs.  In fairness, the data is correlational, so it’s not possible to say that anti-bullying programs necessarily led to more bullying.  One could argue that, perhaps, schools with bigger bullying problems were more likely to implement anti-bullying programs.  Nonetheless, this data suggests such programs may not be terribly effective. [...]

But the bigger and better reality check is that bullying behavior has actually been declining. Researchers David Finkelhor and colleagues surveyed children in 2003 and again in 2008 and found that they were being exposed to less violence across the board, including bullying. Across most indices, most deviant youth behavior has also been improving—smoking, drinking, violence, pregnancy, suicide.  It’s impossible to say why for sure, but I believe it’s part of a larger trend and not the result of anti-bullying programs.

 

Bullying was undeniably a problem that needed to be brought out of obscurity, but the issue has arguably now gotten too much attention. Such hype can lead to other problems such as the use of bullying accusations themselves as weapons in peer conflicts and overly harsh “zero tolerance” policies that over punish minor infractions  and may exacerbate the isolation that can lead to bullying in the first place. Now that bullying has been reduced, we need to be careful that it doesn’t distract us from other pressing problems besetting our nation’s schools.

Why R Mendel Epstein's cattle prod forced gittin are invalid

5 Towns Jewish Times by Rabbi Yair Hoffman  Most of our readers have read about the FBI sting against the Rabbis who perform what we can now call “The Cattle Prod Get.” In this column we will not be dealing with the aspects of Chilul Hashem and the breaking of American law. Rather, we will focus on whether these Gets are kosher or not in the first place.

[see Bedatz protests cattle prod divorces]
THE MISHNA

The Mishna in Ksuvos (77a) lists a number of illnesses and professions in which a qualified Beis Din may force the husband to give a Get. The Gemorah both in Ksuvos and Yevamos provides further cases, and the final halacha regarding forced cases has been quantified in Shulchan Aruch Even HaEzer chapter 154.

THE DEBATE

There is a fundamental debate among the Rishonim, however, as to whether the cases discussed in the Talmud are the only such cases where a get may be forced upon the husband or whether they are examples of cases that may include other cases too. We will see that the final disposition of a forced get in most contemporary cases is dependent upon this debate among the Rishonim. The first view is that of the Rambam (Ishus 14:8), who rules that there are other cases where a get may be forced.

The next view is that of the Rosh and the Rashba. The Rosh, Rabbi Asher Ben Yechiel, rules in his responsa (43:3) that one may only force a get in the cases specifically mentioned in the Talmud. The Shulchan Aruch cites the Rosh in 154:5. The Rashba agrees with the Rosh in this respect as well.

MA-OOS ALAI

Most cases of divorces that appear in our times do not deal with the issues of these illnesses and professions. They rather deal with cases where the wife allegedly finds the husband disgusting. This is termed in halacha as “Ma-oos alai” – he is disgusting in my eyes. For these cases, the Rambam rules that a get may be forced, while others disagree.

HOW DOES A FORCED GET WORK?

The essential question behind this debate may lie in how a forced get really works. What is the principle behind the mechanism? The Mishna in Yevamos (112b) clearly states that a man can only divorce his wife of his own will and accord. It cannot be done against his will. Yet we find that the Mishna in Eirachin (21a) states that the way it works in divorces is that we can force him until he says, “I want [to do it].” How are we to understand how this works?

To answer this question, there seem to be four different approaches. [...]

It is pretty clear, however, from the writings of Rav Elyashiv and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach that they do not seem to subscribe to this view.

Indeed, a friend of this author was once present when Rabbi Mendel Epstein’s name came up in front of Rav Elyashiv zt”l, and Rav Elyashiv zt”l said, “Oh him? His Gittin are invalid.” This was said in reference to his forced Gittin. Whether Rav Elyashiv’s ruling applies to each person’s individual case is another story and a competent Posaim should be consulted regarding each case.

Shabbos Alert: Rainbow rubber band looms by Rabbi Yair Hoffman

5 Towns Jewish Times   Fifth grade Bais Yaakov girls and Gedolei HaPoskim in Hilchos Shabbos finally have something very much in common. Both are very much excited about the new rainbow looms – albeit for quite different reasons.  For the Poskim, finally after all these years, the esoteric malachos of Maisach, Ossei Shtei Batei Nirim, Oreg and Potzaya, have practical everyday application that people are actually doing.

But let’s step back a bit to describe the latest craze that has hit not only the Bais Yaakov’s but even the boys Yeshivos.  There are miniature weaving looms in which colorful rubber bands are fitted onto and the practitioners of this new pastime are now weaving colorful rubber band jewelry. [...]

The new craze presents both challenges and opportunity. The challenges can be divided into three categories.  We will go through each one.

THE FIRST CHALLENGE

One challenge is that entire cadres of young girls and boys are now unwittingly violating four of the most obscure Av malachos of Shabbos.

Maisach is setting up the loom.  In our case it is setting up the rubber bands on the plastic mini-loom.   Other Poskim hold that it is only when the loom is set up on the horizontal side that Maisach applies.  Regardless, Maisach will be violated when the new jewelry is being woven.

Oseh batei Nirin in the theory is the setting up of the loom itself.  The loom used in this modern manifestation works differently.  It does not have the back and forth pedals, but according to some of the explanations found in the Rishonim, the loom used would be a violation of Oseh Batein Nirim too.  Some Poskim hold that the violation of Osei Batei Nirim involves merely passing the strings through the weaving machine.

There is also the Malacha of Oreg which is the actual weaving.  This can be violated even without the loom.  The Rainbow Loom offers that possibility too.  Indeed, from the fact that there are so many combinations, each different pattern can be a different violation of the above three Av Malachos.

The fourth category of prohibited Malacha involving weaving is called Potzaya.  This can involve removing the woven item from the loom, or removing one of the bands from the total bracelet.

Some would like to argue that because the main material being used is made of rubber bands, that it is temporary and not a violation of the weaving Malachos.  However, most rishonim understand that temporary means less than 24 hours.  Experience shows that this is definitely not the case here. [...]

R Mendel Epstein arrested - suspicion of forcing get

update Washington Post   A judge in New Jersey has ordered two rabbis and eight associates held in federal custody after being accused of plotting to kidnap and torture a man to force him to grant a religious divorce. Rabbis Mendel Epstein and Martin Wolmark, four alleged enforcers and four other associates all appeared in federal court in Trenton on Thursday.
 ==================
CBS News  [FBI criminal charges]     [see also Washington Post]    [See Newsday article about alleged earlier case of torture]     Bedatz protests cattle prod divorces
  FBI agents raided several locations overnight in an investigation into a series of violent crimes against Orthodox Jewish men involved in religious divorces from their wives, according to CBS New York.

Mendel Epstein, Martin Wolmark, Ariel Potash and Fnu Lnu were reportedly arrested after the FBI raided Yeshiva Shaarei Torah in Suffern, N.Y., the home of a rabbi in Brooklyn and at least one more location in New Jersey.

The station reports a criminal complaint says the women who wanted to divorce their husbands would hire "tough guys," with approval from rabbis, to beat up their husbands and force them to consent them to divorce. Ten other people were also taken into custody, according to the station.[...]

An undercover investigation by the FBI, Wolmark linked the undercover agents to Epstein in New Jersey. Epstein allegedly said in a conversation, "Basically what were are going to be doing is kidnapping a guy for a couple of hours and beating him up and torturing him and then getting him to give the 'get.'"

He said the they would hire "tough guys" who would use "electric cattle prods, karate, handcuffs and place plastic bags over the heads of husbands."

Authorities reportedly said Epstein commits a kidnapping every year to year and a half.

The kidnapping would cost $10,000 for the approval of a rabbi and $60,000 to $70,000 for the "tough guys" they would hire. 

Lnu and Potash would reportedly assist Epstein in the kidnappings.[...]

BHOL    See below link for similar arrests in Monsey and New Jersey

הקהילה החרדית בארה"ב בתדהמה: סוכני הבולשת הפדרלית פשטו אתמול (ד), על בתיהם ובתי הכנסת של שני רבנים, האחד במונסי והשני בברוקלין.

הבולשת פשטה תחילה על ביתו של הדיין הרה"ג מנדל אפשטיין.

סוכני הבולשת הגיעו לביתו של הרב בשכונת פלטבוש ובו זמנית גם לבית מדרשו, ערכו חיפושים ועצרו אותו.

הרב הובל כשהוא אזוק באזיקים לניידת והוא נלקח לחקירה.

שעה לאחר מכן פשטו סוכני הבולשת הפדרלית על ביתו ובית מדרשו של הרב אשר וולמארק מראשי ישיבת שערי תורה במונסי.

דובר הבולשת בניו-יורק אישר כי נגד השניים מתנהלת מזה זמן חקירה, וכי בתום החקירה הוחלט לבצע את המעצרים.

בנוסף הוסיף ואמר, כי הרבנים מואשמים בסחיטה והלבנת כספים. לפי דיווחים בעיתונות המקומית החשדות קשורים להתארגנות שעסקה במאבק נגד סרבני גיטין

 lohud   MONSEY — The FBI descended late Wednesday on Yeshiva Shaarei Torah in connection with an investigation into a gang that pressured men into giving their wives religious divorces, a law enforcement source told The Journal News..

Yeshivah embroiled in fresh abuse scandal

Australian Jewish News    YESHIVAH College in Melbourne has been dragged further into the mire of child sex abuse scandal, with an alleged victim, who claims he was repeatedly raped by a longstanding employee of the school, breaking his silence this week.

The alleged abuses happened some time ago, though The AJN has opted not to publish the dates as to conceal the identities of the victim and the alleged perpetrator, who remains in close contact with children at the school today.

The man, who was eight, or nine when the alleged incidents took place, claims he was lured to the college’s shul with the promise of chocolates and raped on the bimah “in front of the sefer torah”. He also claims he was also forced to perform oral sex and believes there to be at least one more victim of the alleged pedophile. [...]

Greek PM refuses to wear kippa when laying wreath at Yad Vashem ceremony - so what?

YNET   An upsetting diplomatic mishap overshadowed the visit of Greek Prime Minister Antonis Samaras in Israel: Greece's PM refused to wear a yarmulke (kippa) at a memorial service for Holocaust victims that took place at the Yizkor tent (Hall of Remembrance) at Yad Vashem on Tuesday.

The ceremony's organizers urged Samaras to honor the occasion. When he was offered to put on a hat instead of a yarmulke, he still declined, and finally laid a wreath bareheaded.[..]

It is rare for distinguished foreign guests to take such a stance: Nevertheless, in 2005, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan acted in a similar manner. Former French President Jacques Chirac also refused to wear a yarmulke, however settled for a hat.[...]

Whistleblower consequences: Psychologist who helped unveil Penn State abuse scandal - loses contract with school

AOL    The lasting pain the reported victims of Jerry Sandusky, convicted sex offender and former Penn State assistant football coach face will take a long time to end, if it ever does. Sexual assault on children is a crime and sin that never vanishes. Sometimes that's even true for the people who try to stop it.

Michael Gillum, the Clinton County, PA, psychologist who was one of the people crucial in uncovering the story -- and critical of the local high school's response to the crisis -- had been told earlier this year that his official contract with the county wouldn't be renewed, as USA Today reported. But, the paper also reported that Central Mountain High School was coming under new investigation by the Pennsylvania Attorney General's office.

Gillum had worked with Aaron Fisher, a student at the high school where Sandusky was a volunteer football coach, during the four years of the prosecution process. Fisher was known as "Victim 1" because his was the first of the allegations of eventually ten victims that led to prosecution, according to CNN. Fisher said that Sandusky forced him into sex acts more than 20 times between 2006 and 2008. However, the accusations resulted in so much bullying that he had to leave Central Mountain High School, according to the Patriot-News.[...]

Abuse: Court rules parents have right to spank child for discipline

SFGATE    Santa Clara County woman who spanked her 12-year-old daughter in the rear with a wooden spoon should not have been labeled a child abuser, said a state appeals court Tuesday, ruling that social workers and judges must consider a parent's right to impose "reasonable discipline" on a child.

The Sixth District Court of Appeal in San Jose stopped short of deciding whether Veronica Gonzalez had acted reasonably and legally when she swatted her daughter several times in 2010, hard enough to leave bruises, after the child stopped doing most of her schoolwork and lied to her parents.

But the court said the Santa Clara County Department of Social Services had violated Gonzalez's rights by disregarding parents' authority to discipline their children and refusing to allow testimony by the daughter, who disputed many of the social worker's accusations against her mother. The court said the department must either hold a new hearing or dismiss the case.

Neither the department nor the Superior Court judge who upheld its finding that Gonzalez had abused her daughter gave "any weight to the right of a parent to impose reasonable discipline on his or her child," Presiding Justice Conrad Rushing said in the 3-0 ruling, published as a precedent for trial courts statewide.

Although beating a child may amount to abuse, Rushing said, it depends on the circumstances, including whether the parent intended to inflict bruises. No evidence was introduced showing that Gonzalez intended her daughter to be bruised, Rushing said.[...]

Dismissing the Rabbi by Rabbi Yair Hoffman

Five Towns Jewish Times    “How could you have voted against renewing the Rabbi’s contract? He visited my mother when she was in the hospital and took such good care of her! She adored him.  He buried your father!  He Bar Mitzvahed all three of the kids.  Husband, have you no shame?”

“Yes dear, but the other shul is growing more and more popular.  If our shul will continue to survive we need to bring in someone younger, and more dynamic.”

Invariably, the above conversation has taken place in one form or another all over the country, throughout the centuries, and across continents.  Jews, however, have always turned to Halacha for guidance in all matters.  Is there then halachic guidance about renewing the contracts of our providers of halachic guidance? [...]

THE ARUCH HASHULCHAN

But things are not always what they seem.

The Aruch HaShulchan writes (YD 245:29) that even though the Rabbi was only hired by the town for a certain number of years, nonetheless, they may never fire him.

There are some Poskim (Ohel Moshe CM 26) who understand that this is the intent of the Ramah, since Part II B of the Ramah seems to contradict Part II A.   How so?  Part B seems to clearly be addressing a city where the custom is to allow hiring for specific periods of time.  If so, what is this further qualification?

These Poskim state that the new Rabbi may not take over the income-producing aspects of the job that the previous person had.  He may, however, take new ones (see Ohel Moshe). [...]

THREE COUNTER ARGUMENTS

But does he have no leg to stand on whatsoever?  Aside from some untoward or unseemly activity on the part of the pulpit Rabbi, is there no other manner in which he can be dismissed?

There may be an alternative method to resolving the seemingly contradicting clauses in the Ramah.  It could be that the Ramah is saying in Part IIB that even though the congregation has accepted upon themselves this lower status of a Rav, one with only a set time – do not think that this can give others license to come into town and compete with the Rav in any manner.  He is still considered to be a full-fledged Rabbi – notwithstanding the fact that there is a set limit to his term.  Thus far, however, this author has not found any of the Achronim that read the Ramah in this manner.

One can also make an argument that the Aruch HaShulchan and the position of the other Achronim were discussing the situation in Europe where the prevailing Minhag may have been never to discontinue with a Rav even if one had contracted for a set period of years.  Here in America, one can perhaps argue that the prevailing custom is to follow contract law and, sometimes to not renew the contract.  So it could very well be that things are different in America.

Finally, we find that Rav Shternbuch (Teshuvos v’Hanhagos Vol. II #722) does make a qualitative distinction between a Rabbi who takes the mantle of Psak Halacha on his shoulders and teaches Torah to the masses (as has been the role of a Rav in Israel from generation to generation) and a Rabbi whose main purpose is to speak at funerals, weddings, Bar Mitzvahs and in shul on the Shabbos and holidays.  Rav Shternbuch writes that it should be comparable to the citation of the Yerushalmi “Av Beis Din she’sarach ain moridin oso – An Av Bais Din who stumbled – we do not forcibly remove him.”  He writes that the Rabbi must be somewhat comparable to an Av Bais Din in terms of his ability to rule.

Nonetheless, he concludes that even in the case of someone who does not fit into that definition per se, should be treated with respect and not be dismissed until he finds some other suitable and respectable position.

Whatever the case may be, they should come to a mutually acceptable accord, for all three reasons mentioned above – that leadership should continue in Israel, that it is something belonging to another that cannot be taken away and that we only lift up things in matters of Kedusha and we do not lower. a

Abuse:Training bystanders "not to stand idly by the blood of another person"

We have repeated reported incidents of abuse, identified perpetrators and enablers and we have spent many hours discussing  the halacha and hashkofic issues. We have also wondered why people aren't doing something about the problem.

The most obvious answer for inactivity is that bystanders really don't know how to respond i.e., what is the appropriate things to do when  witnessing or hearing about abuse.  In fact this reluctance for bystanders to intervene is known in psychology as the Bystander Effect. This concept was used to explain a report of a woman who was brutally attacked for 30 minutes and then murdered while 38 neighbors were watching from the windows - and they were said to have done nothing.

Psychologists concluded that to the degree a person feels that it is his personal responsibility to do something he will act. If it can be rationalized that someone else should or will take care of it - people become very passive. It is also important that the bystander know what to do.

Bystanders realistically worry about themselves regarding the embarrassment, the halacha of mesira and lashon harah, the concern for lawsuits, possible retaliation, loss of job etc etc. It really is easier just to look away and pretend you didn't see or hear something.

[update clarification to concern's comment] In our community there is already support for an accused molester. 1) proclaim he was innocent 2) claim that anyone who said otherwise was a moser in short - it was a reactionary position of do nothing against an accused perpetrator and allow nothing to be done. the alleged perpetrator is always protected. The guilt or innocence is not the question for them - it is that there is a high wall to prevent action to be taken against an accused molester and they reinforced that wall

What I am proposing is to focus on protecting the victim. At the present the issue of arvus and tochacha don't get involved because the molester is never guilty. The focus on protecting the accused molester has a much stronger base in society than those who want to help the victim. The potential protectors of the victim are the bystanders to the crime.

I think it is time to institute a program in our communities to teach two things. 1) There is an individual responsibility to act to protect others. 2) How to effectively intervene when someone witnesses not only sexual abuse but bullying of any time. The following describes one such program used in universities which trains bystanders how to intervene to stop and report abuse.

Those who are interested in organizing such a program please contact me

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

Yale University   All sophomores will be required to complete a 75-minute bystander intervention training as part of an ongoing effort to improve the campus sexual climate, according to a Wednesday email to the class of 2015 from Yale College Dean Mary Miller and Assistant Dean of Student Affairs Melanie Boyd ’90.

Over 90 workshop sessions on strategies for preventing sexual misconduct as a third party will be held from Jan. 31 to Feb. 3. The program will be run in small groups of 14 or 15 students, and each group will be led by student communication and consent educators in an effort to establish a conversational setting, Boyd said. The curriculum of the training consists of a video showing a hypothetically harmful scenario, an overview of the ideas behind bystander intervention and group discussions about applicable situations.

“This is a fairly new area in sexual violence prevention,” Boyd told the News. “Preliminary research at other universities is showing that bystander intervention training can produce dramatic drops of sexual violence on campus, as well as improving the climate overall.”

In contrast to traditional prevention programs that target potential victims or perpetrators, bystander intervention will teach students methods to respond to instances of sexual misconduct as third-party community members, Boyd said. Sexual assault tends to unfold through fairly standardized two-person interactions, according to studies, but the introduction of a third party quickly disrupts the original power dynamic and can prevent potential sexual misconduct, Boyd said. The program aims to encourage students’ tendencies to intervene in harmful situations and to shift the broader mindset of the campus community, rather than emphasizing the promotion of new content, she added.

The entire sophomore class will be trained because bystander intervention is most effective at a community level, Boyd said. Training of sophomores will round out existing workshops given to freshmen, which educate them about the dynamics of sexual pressure, and leadership training workshops geared toward juniors and seniors. The added sophomore workshops are part of an effort to structure the University’s sexual awareness programs more effectively, with bystander trainings a “middle ground” between the existing approaches for students in other classes. [...]

10 % of American teens admit perpetrating sexual violence

LA Times   Nearly 1 in 10 young Americans between ages 14 and 21 acknowledges having perpetrated an act of sexual violence at least once, and 4% of a nationally representative sample of American kids reported attempting or completing rape, a new study finds.

While those most likely to report initiating unwanted sexual contact in their early to mid-teens were boys, girls were among the perpetrators as the age of respondents increased. Latino and African American youths, and those from low-income families, were less likely to have coerced another person to engage in sex than were whites and those from higher-income families, the study found.

And among perpetrators of sexual violence, consumption of X-rated materials -- specifically those depicting physical harm in the context of sex -- was notably more common than it was among youths who did not report efforts to coerce or force someone else to engage in sex.

The research, published Monday in the journal JAMA Pediatrics, appears to be first to gauge how widespread sexual violence is among Americans of high-school and college age. It was based on surveys conducted between October 2010 and March 2012 with 1,058 people ages 14 to 21 who participated in a broader longitudinal study called "Growing Up With Media." [...]

The authors said that the rarity with which perpetrators either are caught or assume responsibility for their actions underscores the importance of "bystander" training and intervention in U.S. high schools and colleges. Such training emphasizes the responsibility of peers not only to discourage and prevent negative behavior within their group or community, but also to recognize, stop or report such behavior when they witness it. Widely used in anti-bullying campaigns, bystander intervention is now gaining ground on college campuses as a means of reducing sexual violence. [...]