The parents were stunned. They have known this man as a
charismatic and very popular teacher for many years. Every single other day school
in the city would ‘kill’ to add him to their faculty. His talents have inspired
even mediocre students to excel in their studies and inspired them religioulsy.
Former students testify to that and have gone into Chinuch because of it. In
short, he is the role
model for Mechanchim.
This Rebbe also has a family of his own his oldest daughter
is about to embark on Shiddach dating. He has never been accused of anything
like this before. But even though they
are convinced of this man’s innocence, they know that their 9 year old is not
given to fantasies such as these. If he said something happened. It happened.
So they decided to press him to see if perhaps there was
something else going on here. They asked him to explain in detail what had
happened. He was embarrassed and very reluctant to do that. But after being
assured by his parents that it was the right thing to do - he went on to
describe in graphic detail what had happened.
He added that this was not the first time it happened. His Rebbe who he had gotten very close to had convinced
him that there was nothing wrong with what they were doing… and that this very
special bond they developed would be their little secret. That was one of the
great things about this Rebbe. He famously developed special relationships with
many of his students.
The parents were horrified. But as religious Jews they did
not immediately report the abuse to authorities. They first went to their beloved
and trusted Rav. He would be the honest broker… and surely after speaking to
their son and hearing the same thing they did he would urge them to immediately
report it to the police.
After listening to the boy’s graphic description of the
abuse he too was incredulous. He also knew and appreciated this Mechanech and
had spent many an occasion with him discussing various issues related to his
job. Based on all those experiences this Rav too considered him a role model
for Chincuh. But his reaction was a bit different than that of the parents. His
experiences with that Mechanech lead him to suspect that the child might just
be lying, despite his obvious discomfort and sincerity - even though he had
never lied about anything like this before.
Fearing that a good man’s reputation would be ruined and
that his family would suffer untold pain -
he decided to err on the side of what he believed to be caution and not
allow the parents to report the abuse to the authorities. He determined this
was not a case of Raglayim L’Davar – credible evidence.
Telling the authorities would then be Mesirah based on the
testimony of a child. He felt confident that he did the right thing – saving
this wonderful Mechanech from the devastation and untold pain that he and his
family would surely have suffered. He still teaches today.
The problem is that a victim of abuse was telling the truth.
His parents who knew their child better than anyone else believed him. They
were sure of it. But they could do absolutely nothing about it. Three days later
the boy committed suicide.
This story is fiction. However - except for the act of suicide it is
a common one told by many victims. And suicides are not unheard of by victims of
abuse.
The Rabbi in this story is not an evil person. He chose to
side with his gut feeling that this long time, well known, and successful
Mechanech could not possibly do what he was accused of. But he had no training in how to investigate
the truth of an allegation. He just said “Couldn’t be!” ...and decided that it should not be reported.
This brings me to an article in yesterday’s Forward.
Apparently Rabbi Dovid Zweibel (pictured above) has spilled the beans about the Agudah’s real
reason for requiring every allegation of abuse to be first vetted by a Rabbi. From
the Forward:
Central to the issue for Agudath is mesirah, the prohibition
in Jewish law against informing on a fellow Jew to the authorities. This
religious principle flourished in Eastern Europe in centuries past, when Jews
lived in ghettoes ruled by hostile, often anti-Semitic governments. But Zwiebel
said the notion that mesirah doesn’t apply in modern-day democracies, where
there is a fair criminal justice system, is “a minority view” among top rabbis
in the ultra-Orthodox world. “The majority view is, there is a prohibition
against mesirah,” Zwiebel said.
So the real issue for Agudah is not that justice will be
served if rabbis are consulted first. It is that a Jew not be reported to the
police even if he is guilty. Because that constitutes Mesirah. It seems that the only way they would allow
reporting it to the authorities is if there was a clear and present danger. But
if that danger has somehow disappeared (for example when an abuser has been
barred from being around children and monitored by the community) abusers go
scot free. I find that unconscionable.
Rav Elyashiv had been the hero of both victims and their advocates
with his directive that if there is credible evidence of ongoing abuse that it
should be reported to authorities – and
that it was not considered Mesirah. There is apparently another aspect of Rav
Elyashiv’s psak that is not so widely quoted. But it was this time by Rabbi Dovid
Zweibel who (along with Rabbi Avi Shafran) was interviewed for this article:
(He) read in Hebrew from an edict issued last year by Rabbi
Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, a widely revered talmudic authority based in Israel. In
the excerpt, the 102-year-old Elyashiv warned that a “bitter” student could
wrongly accuse a teacher of abuse, putting that teacher in “a situation where
he would rather be dead than alive.”
Asked how a rabbi could ascertain whether a child is lying,
Shafran said, “There are certain subtle [signs] in a child that show whether
the child is fantasizing.” He said these indicators included a child’s tone of
voice or specific things he or she says.
Offering the hypothetical example of a parent who came to a
rabbi after his child told him she had been abused by a teacher, Zwiebel said
the rabbi’s decision on whether the parent can go to law enforcement “depends
on whether your child has the habit of fantasizing. It depends on whether your
child and the teacher have had run-ins in the past. It may require some level
of nuance and investigation [by a rabbi] that go beyond the mere allegation.”
In other words the benefit of the doubt always to go to the
accused. Who determines that doubt? Not a professional but a rabbi. What are some of the parameters for determining whether evidence is credible? Subtle signs; tone
of voice; nuance; a habit of fantasizing...
Even if these are legitimate ‘tells’ of whether an accusation
is credible, is a Rav the best person to determine it? Or is it a mental health professional specially
trained to do it with years of experience dealing exclusively in sex crimes.
Can a Rav honestly say he will make a completely unbiased evaluation if he
knows the accused socially and is predisposed to believe him?
If the accused is a community member in good standing the
benefit of the doubt that the Rav subconsciousnessly accrues to him multiplies. What about the
parents who know their child best and believe him? Sorry. Not good enough to
report to the authorities. It will ruin the man’s life. What if he’s innocent?
I’m sorry but I don’t understand this rationale. It is
grossly unfair to the victim. And it allows for pre-existing biases to favor the
accused – even if it is unintentional and made with the best of intentions.
By following this path, victims feel like they have been
abused again. Only this time by the religious leaders that they once respected
and by the community to which they belong.
Is there any question as to why so many people who have gone
OTD were victims of sex abuse? Is it any wonder they feel rejected by their
community? Is it any wonder that many of them become clinically depressed and
on a downward spiral that can lead to anti social behavior, alcoholism, drugs,
and even suicide? How many victims like this need to be created before their voices
are heard and the right thing is done by them?
