History of protecting a confessed sexual predator: Letter campaign by Rabbis Saul Berman and Joseph Telushkins
Many people over the years have heard all sorts of negative rumors about Vicki Polin and The Awareness Center. It is important for the public to be aware of the history of how and why the harassment, bullying and hate began.
 |
| Dalai Lama and "rabbi" Marc Gafni |
We have to flash back to 2004, when The Awareness Center started providing information regarding "rabbi" Marc Gafni (AKA: Mordechai Gafni, Mark Winiarz, Mordechai Winiarz). Besides the case of rabbi Baruch Lanner, this was one of the other first major other cases in which it was learned how various religious leaders within the modern orthodox world would go to any lengths to protect "the good name" of a confessed sexual predator, verses protecting both child and adult survivors.
One of the individuals who dedicated themselves to protecting Marc Gafni was rabbi Saul Berman, who is the director of Edah.
Over the course of several months Berman made several outrageous demands of The Awareness Center in a letter dated August 24, 2004. It's important to notate that rabbi Berman never had any specialized training or education in the sexual abuse field, nor working with sex offenders. One such demand Berman made was that "Whenever possible, The Awareness Center would attempt to bring victim and accused together
under supervised circumstances for resolution by mediation."
August, 2004 was when rabbi Berman initiated the ban against the internet and started the attacks against bloggers. He also made the following threat against The Awareness Center if we did not comply with his demands.
Conversely, failure to take the immediate steps indicated above, and
reluctance to adopt the clear standards outlined above will result in
severe defection of supporters and the likelihood of being discredited
within the very community you seek to defend. I look forward to your
prompt response and to our being able to work together toward your vision
– the protection of our community from sexual predation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vicki Polin met rabbi Bob Carroll after speaking about sexual abuse at the 2004 JOFA (Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance) conference. After the question and answer portion of her presentation, they spoke briefly about what she shared. Soon after the conference Ms. Polin received the following letter from Rabbi Saul Berman.
March 25, 2004
Dear Ms. Polin
 |
| Rabbi Saul Berman / Rabbi Bob Carroll / Vicki Polin |
Rabbi Bob Carroll shared with me your inquiry about creating a link
to your important website from the Edah site. I believe that he responded
briefly to your inquiry, but I would like to expand the discussion further
in order to see whether our concerns could be sufficiently put to rest
to enable us to work together. The Edah website currently gets in excess
of 325,000 clicks per month and could serve as a valuable portal for
information about the abuse problem in the Jewish community. We would
like to be able to provide our community of readers with the opportunity
to be more aware of the problem and the resources available to help
victims.
The particular concerns that we have are as follows:
1. Process. Do you yourself make the determinations to include individual
cases within the listings of accused abusers? Are the members of your
Advisory Council consulted in each case and does there have to be a
vote or arrival at consensus in order to warrant inclusion?
2. Age of the charge. Do you operate with any equivalent of a statute
of limitations? For example, the charges against Rabbi Shlomo Aviner
were already 15 years old and you document no prior or subsequent charges
against him. What is the purpose then of listing him? It sounds like
the purpose is to disgrace him for his alleged behavior rather than
to protect the community from future threat.
3. Evidence for the charge. When an allegation includes no substantiation
whatsoever, and in consequence, public prosecutors dismiss the charges,
why should the allegation be honored by inclusion? Such is the situation,
for example of the charges against Rabbi Yonah Metzger. Should not the
site at minimum provide the accused with an opportunity to respond to
the charges?
4. Halachic criteria. Does the site operate by any Halachic criteria
for the permissibility of publicizing unlitigated and unwitnessed accusations?
If yes, who is the Halachik decisor on such matters? Certainly the Chofetz
Chaim requires not only first hand knowledge to justify reporting truthful
but defamatory reports, but it also requires that Tochacha be issued.
I assume that means that the accused must be provided with an opportunity
to either deny wrongdoing, or to do teshuva. Does the center provide
the opportunity, when feasible, for such direct engagement with alleged
abusers?
5. Range of wrongs. The Center identifies itself as being the "Jewish
Coalition Against Sexual Abuse/Assault." If that is the limit of its
mandate, and that is already extraordinarily broad, why does the site
venture into matters of "cultic" practices which involve no direct allegations
of sexual wrongdoing? For example the newspaper articles concerning
Rabbi Mordecai Gafni charge him with unspecified "cultic" practices,
but make no suggestions of sexual wrongdoing. Is this simply an evasive
attempt to "get" Gafni for long circulating, but never publicly confirmed,
allegations of impropriety dating from over twenty years ago?
6. Unlistings. What criteria are utilized for removing people from
the listing? For example, there was a time when Rabbi Tzvi Flaum was
listed on the site. What process was put into motion that eventually
resulted in his removal from the list, and what determines when that
process is set in motion?
As I indicated at the outset, we truly value the work you are doing
and would like to be able to do our part in helping rid the Jewish community
of leaders who exploit the vulnerabilities of others in the interest
of their own sexual gratification. We feel, however, that our concerns
about the above issues of process and substantive criteria must be responded
to, in theory and practice, before we can use our website to promote
the visibility of the Center. Please get back to me as soon as possible
so that we can explore these issues together.
Sincerely, rabbi Saul J. Berman
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Awareness Center responded to rabbi Berman's letter:
June 16, 2004
Dear Rabbi Berman,
Thank you for taking the time to write regarding the concerns about
The Awareness Center. I also want to apologize for taking so long to
get back to you. Please understand that we at The Awareness Center receive
enormous numbers of emails and phone calls on a daily basis, which causes
us to function as a crisis hot-line.
I know you originally wrote your letter to me (Vicki), but the Executive
Board of Directors decided to respond together, as an organization.
We have no way of knowing whether our reply will put all of your concerns
to rest--only you would know that. However, we hope that you read the
information below with an open mind, not only to the rights of the accused,
but also to that of the many victims repeatedly silenced in the past.
1. Process. Do you yourself make the determinations to include individual
cases within the listings of accused abusers? Are the members of your
Advisory Council consulted in each case and does there have to be a
vote or arrival at consensus in order to warrant inclusion?
At this time Vicki Polin is the webmaster of our site. The Awareness
Center has a few volunteers who post articles and other information
to our daily email newsletters. Vicki Polin, as the Executive Director
and President of The Awareness Center, is aware of and approves all
the cases that are posted. Our policy is to post all cases of alleged
and convicted offenders, whose allegations/convictions have been published
elsewhere in legal and/or court documentation, police reports, newspapers,
etc. We might also allow other information to be posted as long as at
least one other Board of Directors member approves.
Our Executive Board of Directors includes:
Vicki Polin - President
Na'ama Yehuda - Vice President
Michael Salamon, Ph.D. - Treasurer
Rabbi Yosef Blau - Secretary
The Awareness Center also has an Advisory Board whose members offer
us a wide range of advice on various issues that pertain to sexual victimization/violence/offenders
in Jewish communities around the globe. Please be aware that The Awareness
Center is purely a volunteer run organization. Our Executive Director,
Board of Directors, Advisory Board and other volunteers devote hundreds
if not thousands of hours of their personal time, without any compensation.
Once The Awareness Center has funding, and we are able to pay our Executive
Director and hire other necessary staff there will be, if needed, changes
in the way we operate.
2. Age of the charge. Do you operate with any equivalent of a statute
of limitations? For example, the charges against Rabbi Shlomo Aviner
were already 15 years old and you document no prior or subsequent charges
against him. What is the purpose then of listing him? It sounds like
the purpose is to disgrace him for his alleged behavior rather than
to protect the community from future threat.
The Awareness Center is not a litigation organization. We are a resource/referral
organization that operates as a clearinghouse for information already
posted elsewhere. Almost all the information on our web page is information
that has been published elsewhere. Exceptions being articles written
by members of our Board of Directors, Advisory Board, or other individuals
whom we respect. Our web page acts as a specialized library on the topic
of sexual violence/victimization.
Did you know that in some countries there is no statue of limitation
on cases of sexual violence? Once such country is Canada. When someone
is sexually violated it is as if someone has murdered his or her soul.
This is one of the many reasons why we do not put time restraints on
articles.
It has been well documented in the general public and also in Jewish
communities that many offenders will victimize in one community and
then move on to another. The status quo has been that different communities
do not share vital information, with the end result being that children
and/or adults continue to be sexually violated. As we know there has
been a code of silence, in society at large but very much so in the
Jewish Community--not to tell. Because of such codes of silence, offenders
who abused 30 or even 40 years ago often continue to offend today.
The Awareness Center gets emails on a daily basis from NEW survivors
of offenders listed on the site, often about offenses that happened
many years ago, and were kept silent because the victim was certain
that he or she were the only ones. If we cap the length of time an offense
can be listed, we are in effect claiming that after a time, a survivor
is no longer entitiled to recognition. We also in effect silence potential
future victims who might otherwise not know that they are not the only
ones an offender has harmed, and would therefore be likely to speak
up.
The Awareness Center's mission is not to cause humiliation to anyone,
not even to abusers--we are niether judge nor jury, nor do we claim
to stand in place of higher authorities of justice. We do, however,
believe that a victim's right to validation comes BEFORE an offender's
right for privacy. It is always painful to come across yet another Jewish
person who was offended. It saddens us even more when we find so many
offenders who had charges against them dropped or dismissed as incomplete
evidence following witness tampering, intimidation, and using the force
of authority figures to silence the victims.
At the same time, if you or anyone else wants to provide us with documentations
that prove that Rabbi Aviner (or any other of the alleged or convicted
offenders on the site) took steps to not only take responsibility for
wrongdoings, asked forgiveness of victims, had entered and completed
treatment with a psychotherapist who has recognized experience with
treating sexual offenders and who is willing to give a written letter
that they are no longer posing a risk to others--we would not only be
thrilled for the steps to healing taken by members of our community,
but will seriously consider taking the case off the site, or moving
it to a link for offenders who made "teshuva" (not only between them
and G-d but also between Adam-Lechavero) and can be models to others
who erred.
3. Evidence for the charge. When an allegation includes no substantiation
whatsoever, and in consequence, public prosecutors dismiss the charges,
why should the allegation be honored by inclusion? Such is the situation,
for example of the charges against Rabbi Yonah Metzger. Should not the
site at minimum provide the accused with an opportunity to respond to
the charges?
Some of the comments above should address the above concern. To repeat
the important points--sadly, there were many cases where the police
dropped the investigation or the case was dismissed following witness
tampering, threatening, shaming, and other methods of silencing the
victims. If you are familiar with some of the more public cases, you
must know that unfortunatelly such manipulations in handling of complaints
were not rare. Victims and their families were routinely told by rabbinical
courts, rabbis of their community, or people close to the accused rabbi,
that if they did not drop their charges/stop talking about it and so
forth, they will be excommunicated, their children will not find a shiduch,
no yeshiva would accept their children, etc... Families of victims had
to recant or stop cooperating with the police because otherwise they
were accused of "mesira", "lashon-hara", and ruining the name of a rabbi.
Many were told flat out that they should keep quiet because the rabbi's
reputation was more important than anything that he might have done
to them!
Because of the long history of meddling and muddying the water of victims'
complaints, The Awareness Center is forced to make difficult decisions.
Please note that we do not post personal communications of people who
claim that this or that person had harmed them, only information that
was already published/written elsewhere, and only from reputable sources/publications.
As for the offender's right to respond--of course that they have the
same right to respond as any one else! We would welcome responses from
offenders who can open our eyes to formal documentation that we overlooked
and which they believe should be on the site. Though we cannot promise
to post them, we will give such documentation serious and expedited
consideration for posting. Even more--for those offenders want to use
The Awareness Center's forum as a place for public apology and regonition
of the severity of their actions, via personal emails/mail and/or documents
that hold such apologies from a previous time, we would take these under
expedited consideration as well.
4. Halachic criteria. Does the site operate by any Halachic criteria
for the permissibility of publicizing unlitigated and unwitnessed accusations?
If yes, who is the Halachik decisor on such matters? Certainly the Chofetz
Chaim requires not only first hand knowledge to justify reporting truthful
but defamatory reports, but it also requires that Tochacha be issued.
I assume that means that the accused must be provided with an opportunity
to either deny wrongdoing, or to do teshuva. Does the center provide
the opportunity, when feasible, for such direct engagement with alleged
abusers?
Please be advised that Rabbi Yosef Blau is on our Board of Directors
and we consult with him almost daily. We also have five other rabbis
on our Advisory Board.
Please feel free to consult with Rabbi Blau if
you have any more Halachic concerns.
Sincerely,
Vicki Polin, MA, LCPC - President
Na'ama Yehuda, MSC, SLP, APP - Vice President
Michael Salamon, PhD - Treasurer
Rabbi Yosef Blau - Secretary Executive Board of Directors - The Awareness
Center
.....................................................................................................................
Rabbi Saul Berman writes a public letter August 26, 2004:
August 26, 2004
Dear Colleagues and Friends,
 |
| Rabbi Saul Berman |
Thank you for taking the time to respond to the inquiries which I had
made concerning the functioning and policies of The Awareness Center
(TAC).
Unfortunately, I did not find satisfaction of my concerns in your responses.
On the contrary, your letter makes me even more concerned than before
about Awareness Center practices which are themselves irresponsible,
lacking in accountability and therefore, potentially abusive towards
innocent persons.
However, I continue to recognize the essential contribution which TAC
can make to helping the Jewish community deal with issues of sexual
abuse, Therefore, rather than throwing up my hands in despair and disappointment
and urging others to disassociate themselves from TAC, I would like
to join with you in looking at possible policy changes which could make
your work even more effective in enlisting the support of the community.
In my comments I will retain the order and numbering of my original
letter, and of your responses, so that we can refer to those as necessary.
1. Process of Listing - On two separate occasions you indicate that
TAC will only post information which was already published in other
reputable sources. You know that to be not true and, therefore, you
add a morally undermining caveat – that you would “allow other information
to be posted as long as at least one other Board of Directors member
approves.” This slight exception, while tempting given the secrecy which
has engulfed such situations, opens the door to witch-hunting and vengeance
for personal grievances. It is essential that the fundamental threshold
of prior publication in reputable sources be upheld.
Nor should blogs and other such self-publishing vehicles be acceptable
as a reputable source. Vicki Polin has on occasion sent her own comments
into blogs, over the signature ‘Me,’ and then used them as a basis for
reporting accusations within TAC site. This is certainly unconscionable.
1. Age of the charge - I am persuaded by your comments that no Statute
of Limitations should apply in regard to prosecutions for criminal sexual
assault. Likewise, the report of conviction or of a finding of culpability
by an Ethics committee of a Professional association, should remain
posted on the website. However, the same cannot possibly be justified
in regard to accusations for which, over time, there remains insufficient
evidence for any legal action and absence of evidence of a pattern of
continuing sexual impropriety. While it is essential to continue to
monitor such situations, it is unjust for a barren accusation to be
held permanently before the eyes of the community.
I would suggest the following policy: A previously published accusation
should be allowed to remain on TAC website for up to one year after
the listing. If by that time there have been no additional accusations
reported either in publications or directly to TAC, then the article
should be removed into a non-public monitoring area. The website should
prominently announce that aside from the persons openly listed as accused
or convicted abusers, there are other persons who are being monitored,
and that people should transmit to TAC any information about sexual
abuse since it might help lead to prosecution of repeat abusers. Also,
the accused should be informed by TAC that the published material is
being removed from the website, but that emergence of any future accusations
could cause the material to be restored to public view.
1. Evidence for the Charge - I understand and sympathize with the temptation
to ascribe veracity to every charge of sexual assault, particularly
when there appears to be exploitation of a vulnerable victim. However,
the totalitarian mindset of guilty until proven innocent, is, and must
be, rejected by persons with democratic spirit, and certainly by people
infused with the spirit of Jewish Law and values.
Reporting published records of accusations is essential to encourage
further reports being made. However, once an accusation has been adequately
investigated by a public or responsible private body and the charges
have been dismissed, it is essential, in the Jewish spirit of justice,
for the exculpatory finding to be reported on TAC website for a period
of some months, and for the entire record to then be removed from the
site.
1. Halachic Criteria - I would certainly agree that the protection
of children and vulnerable adults can often require, even by Halachic
standards, the posting of published accusations against otherwise upstanding
citizens. Where criminal prosecution is possible, many, including myself,
argue that there is a Halachic duty to report the assault to the appropriate
governmental authority in order to allow criminal prosecution to be
pursued. Likewise, where possible, accusations should be reported to
employers and Professional Associations for condemnatory action against
accused abusers.
Where no criminal prosecution is possible, and no Professional Association
has jurisdiction, the primary goals need to shift. Firstly, TAC must
provide referrals to gain help and healing of the psychological and
spiritual wounds of the victim. Secondly, one accused of a lengthy pattern
of abusive relationships should be encouraged to seek Psychiatric and
Spiritual counsel. Thirdly, when the accusations suggest that the abusive
behavior was sporadic or rare and contextual, then TAC should attempt
to bring the accused abuser and his or her victim together for reconciliation,
itself a critical element in healing the wounds. Continued public listing
of accusations on TAC website, must be used not as a goal in itself,
but as a tool to produce the aforementioned results (i.e., as Tochacha.)
Whenever possible, TAC must utilize accepted mediation services and
techniques to bring victim and accused together for an attempt at resolution
of their conflict (i.e., as Teshuva and Piyus.
1. Range of Wrongs - I remain opposed to TAC being focused on anything
other than direct instances of sexual abuse within the Jewish community.
While sexual abuse is connected to some cults, it is also connected
to certain social and economic conditions, to varied psychological backgrounds
and certainly to the general status of women within the given culture.
Such connections could theoretically justify the inclusion of any information
concerning human beings within the website. It is an unacceptable diversion
of the resources and energies of TAC, its website, its staff, and its
supporters, to report on matters outside its direct mandate.
Recent issues of TAC Digest have strayed massively away from the central
focus of the organization, including reports on Israeli politics, religious
conflict related to the status of women, and much news totally unrelated
to the Jewish community. Such news briefings should be discontinued,
and the website should immediately have removed from it any published
materials related to cultic practices, which have no direct bearing
on allegations of sexual abuse.
1. Unlistings - It is essential that TAC not be perceived as a garbage
site, a permanent dumping grounds for every allegation of sexual impropriety
against Jews and Jewish leaders. It is precisely this perception which
has made TAC a favorite subject and link within many anti-Semitic websites.
Vicki has had to work valiantly to reduce the prominence of such misuse
of TAC within Google citations. The dynamic character of the web-listings
would itself encourage the confidence of our community in the integrity
of the site.
I have above identified two situations in which a listing should be
removed:
a. If after one year of the listing of a published accusation, no further
reports of abuse have been identified, then the report will be removed
to a monitoring area within TAC, not available for public viewing
b. If an accusation has been adequately investigated by a public or
responsible private body and the charges have been dismissed, the exculpatory
finding will be reported on TAC website for a period of three months.
If no new accusations of abuse are made within that time, the entire
record will then be removed from TAC website.
I would add two additional circumstances in which listings should be
removed:
c. If, pursuant to the attempts outlined above (par. 4), an actual
reconciliation is achieved between the victim and the accused, then
the mediated agreement between them should specifically call for the
removal of published information from TAC website, and that should immediately
be done.
d. Any person concerning whom a published record of accusation of sexual
abuse appears on TAC website, must have the right to appeal that decision
to a Special Committee of the Board of Directors of TAC. Such an appeal
should be able to be done either in person or in writing. Minimally
such communication with the accused could produce an opportunity to
press the accused to go for help, to do Teshuva, and to attempt reconciliation
with the victim. The Committee might offer to include exculpatory materials
within the listing. The Committee must remain open to the possibility
that they will be persuaded by the appeal that there is in fact no substance
to the accusation and that the material should be removed from the website
pending further clarification, or permanently.
This closes my narrative response to your letter. The following is
an outline of the policies which I believe would deeply strengthen The
Awareness Center, and would certainly make it possible for Edah to throw
its support behind the project.
Proposed standards of operation of The Awareness Center
1. Process of listing:
a. No listing will be done on the website without prior publication
of incriminating information in a reputable source in which an accused
is specifically mentioned by name.
b. Blogs, and other self-published materials will not be utilized as
a reputable source of prior publication.
c. The executive Director of TAC and its Board members will be expected
to refrain from “blogging” based on unpublished information.
2. Age of the Charge:
a. There will be no statute of limitations for the listing of criminal
convictions or of findings of impropriety by Professional associations.
b. If, however, after one year of the listing of a published accusation,
no further reports of abuse have been identified, then the report will
be removed to a monitoring area within TAC, not available for public
viewing.
c. Emphasis will be placed within TAC website, and by its supporters,
on the encouragement of reporting accusations of abuse concerning persons
not publicly identified on the website.
d. The accused will be informed of the removal of the published material,
but will be informed that any new accusations could result in the restoration
of the material to public view.
3. Evidence for the Charge:
a. Published reports of accusations of sexual abuse will be reported
on TAC website despite the absence of corroborating evidence or testimony.
b. If an accusation has been adequately investigated by a public or
responsible private body and the charges have been dismissed, the exculpatory
finding will be reported on TAC website for a period of three months.
c. If no new accusations of abuse are made within that time, the entire
record will then be removed from TAC website.
4. Halachic Criteria
a. TAC will encourage victims to report allegations of sexual abuse
to appropriate governmental authorities for criminal prosecution, and
to employers and Professional Associations for administrative action.
b. TAC will provide referrals for victims to professional help in achieving
healing of their psychological and spiritual wounds.
c. TAC will attempt in advise persons accused of lengthy patterns of
sexual abuse, to seek appropriate psychiatric and spiritual help.
d. Whenever possible, TAC will attempt to bring victim and accused together
under supervised circumstances for resolution by mediation.
5. Range of Wrongs
a. TAC will remain focused exclusively on the subject of sexual abuse
within the Jewish community.
b. TAC Digests will not include materials other than the above.
c. The staff will immediately remove from, and not further include within,
TAC website, any published articles which do not deal directly with
allegations of sexual abuse within the Jewish community.
6. Unlistings
a. (2.b. above) If after one year of the listing of a published accusation,
no further reports of abuse have been identified, then the report will
be removed to a monitoring area within TAC, not available for public
viewing
b. (3.b.&c. above) If an accusation has been adequately investigated
by a public or responsible private body and the charges have been dismissed,
the exculpatory finding will be reported on TAC website for a period
of three months. If no new accusations of abuse are made within that
time, the entire record will then be removed from TAC website.
c. If, pursuant to the attempts outlined above (par. 4. d.), an actual
reconciliation is achieved between the victim and the accused, then
the mediated agreement between them should specifically call for the
removal of published information from TAC website, and that should immediately
be done.
d. Every accused person should be entitled to appeal to a Special Committee,
either in writing or in person. If the Committee is persuaded that the
accusation is unfounded, they shall instruct the removal of materials
from the website.
Just to concretize the implications of these standards, a complete
review of the listings at the website would have to be undertaken to
assure compliance with the standards. Entries concerning the following
individuals would have to be immediately eliminated for non-conformity
with the standards : Rabbis Shlomo Aviner, Mordechai Gafni, Yonah Metzger
and Don Well. I am certain that other cases would also now fall outside
the limits of propriety set by these standards. These changes will be
perceived as strength, not weakness.
I recognize the truth of your oft asserted declaration that The Awareness
Center lacks the financial and human resources to achieve its own ideal
vision, and therefore might find it difficult to undertake the intense
evaluation required by this proposal. A smaller, tighter operation,
more clearly focused on a narrow mission and operating with well defined
and defensible policies, would be in a stronger position to appeal for
the funds needed to assure its effectiveness. Many would be more willing
to help raise the necessary funds.
Conversely, failure to take the immediate steps indicated above, and
reluctance to adopt the clear standards outlined above will result in
severe defection of supporters and the likelihood of being discredited
within the very community you seek to defend. I look forward to your
prompt response and to our being able to work together toward your vision
– the protection of our community from sexual predation.
Sincerely yours,
Rabbi Saul J. Berman
.....................................................................................................................
Letter from: rabbi Saul J. Berman & rabbi Joseph Telushkin to rabbi Yosef
Blau:
 |
| Rabbi Joseph Telushkin / Rabbi Saul Berman / Rabbi Yosef Blau |
Originally posted on the Bayit Chadash web page
September 13, 2004
Dear Rabbi Blau,
Since we met some months ago to discuss some issues related to sexual
abuse and the role of The Awareness Center, Rabbi Joseph Telushkin and
I have been maintaining a continuing interest in the activities of The
Awareness Center.
My recent letter to Vicki Polin and the members of the Executive Committee
of The Awareness Center included a list of suggested policy recommendations
which would have made the operation of The Awareness Center website
a fair and effective instrument in the battle against sexual abuse in
the Jewish community. Unfortunately, Vicki, in the name of the Executive
Committee, dismissed all of the suggestions with a single condescending
brush stroke.
Permit us to be perfectly blunt. The Awareness Center website as it
currently stands is often misleading, its truthfulness cannot be assumed,
and, in the name of justice, it has itself become an instrument of vicious
abuse. We are moved to make this harsh evaluation in the light of the
following points and more:
1. The claim that the site will only report previously published accusations
is an outright lie. Vicki has herself sent anonymous slanderous postings
to web blogs and then cited them on The Awareness Center site as the
basis for serious accusations.
2. The Awareness Center posts and distributes material which is totally
false, describing as fact occurrences which simply never took place.
The clear intent is the character assassination of those whom Vicki
has decided are deserving of public defamation.
3. The site does not remove accusatory material even after full and
multiple investigations have concluded that they are false.
4. The Awareness Center has initiated campaigns to destroy the reputation
and work prospects of accused persons, even after their names have been
formally cleared and/or full resolution between the parties has been
achieved.
5. The site will provide no opportunity for response by accused persons,
other than an admission of guilt.
6. The attempt to destroy people's reputations long after their death
is not the pursuit of justice, it is journalistic pornography.
These and many other serious offenses (of which we have extensive substantiation)
have made The Awareness Center an untrustworthy and deplorable repository
of falsehoods, innuendoes, and scandal mongering. It is a disgrace to
the Jewish community and we will not abide its continued destructive
activities.
We fear that your own reputation for probity and for responsible communal
response to the vital issue of sexual abuse may be seriously injured
by your continued association with The Awareness Center. We urge you,
as we will be strongly urging all others connected with it, to disassociate
your name from The Awareness Center until such time as responsible policies
and honest procedures are implemented for its future operation.
Sincerely,
Rabbi Saul J. Berman
Rabbi Joseph Telushkin
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
Five months after writing the letter above, Rabbi Berman realized that The Awareness Center's board of directors and halachic advisory board (including Rabbi Yosef Blau) disagreed with him he wrote the following letter to The Awareness Center's board and advisory board members. He then resorted to cyber-bullying campaign against the founder and director of The Awareness Center. When that didn't work he also started to go after each and every member of The Awareness Center's board and advisory board.
January 4, 2005
Dear members of the Awareness Center board,
The issue of sexual abuse in the Jewish community is an important one
that needs to be confronted. However, due to serious concerns amongst
growing numbers of members of the Jewish community about the tactics
and abuses of the Awareness Center, as well as Vicki Polin's refusal
to respond satisfactorily to my previous communications, we feel forced
to take action in order to prevent the continued undermining of this
important issue.
It is not clear how aware you as board members have been of the abusive,
unethical, unhalachic and libelous ways in which Vicki has conducted
her efforts in your names, but we assume that it is in everyone's best
interest for the Awareness Center to operate at the highest level of
integrity so that its actions are respected and trusted in the community.
Since that is currently not the case, we hope that you will do everything
in your power to immediately make the changes which Vicki Polin herself
has been unwilling to do, or to shut down the site. The way the site
now operates makes the members of the board subject to serious personal
liability.
Please read the attached letter addressed to Rabbi Blau from myself,
Rabbi Joseph Telushkin, Rabbi Shefa Gold, Dr. Stephen Marmer, and Naomi
Mark which outlines some of the issues involved. I will be contacting
several of you by phone in the next day to discuss this further. Unless
certain changes are made soon in the way that Vicki Polin operates,
we stand ready to take further action.
.....................................................................................................................
Please note that Saul Berman, Joseph Telushkin, Shefa Gold, Stephen Marmer or Naomi Marks ever met Vicki Polin in person. It is very difficult to believe that Marmer and Mark could make any sort of psychological assessment on a person with only hearsay information.
Below is the letter referred to above:
 |
Rabbi Saul J. Berman, Rabbi Joseph Telushkin, Rabbi Shefa Gold, Stephen S. Marmer, MD, PhD, Naomi Mark, LCSW
|
Dear Rabbi Blau,
Since we met some months ago to discuss some issues related to sexual
abuse and the role of The Awareness Center, Rabbi Joseph Telushkin and
I have been maintaining a continuing interest in the activities of The
Awareness Center. We are very alarmed at the apparent absence of control
over the site by the prominent people who attach their names to it.
My letter this past spring to Vicki Polin and the members of the Executive
Committee of The Awareness Center included a list of suggested policy
guidelines which would have made the operation of The Awareness Center
website a fair and effective instrument in the battle against sexual
abuse in the Jewish community. Unfortunately, Vicki, in the name of
the Executive Committee, dismissed all of the suggestions with a single
condescending brush stroke. She noted in that letter, "Please be advised
that Rabbi Yosef Blau is on our board of directors and we consult with
him almost daily. Please feel free to consult with Rabbi Blau if you
have any more halachic concerns." It is clear that you, Rabbi Blau,
are Vicki Polin's source of Jewish ethical and halachic credibility.
Upon further investigation a number of highly disturbing matters have
come to light which demonstrate that Vicki Polin is unfit to direct
an effort like the Awareness Center, a role which demands impeccable
integrity, honesty and psychological stability. For example, we have
definitive information in the form of transcripts and signed affidavits
that Vicki appeared on May 1, 1989 on the Oprah Winfrey show under a
pseudonym. She claimed - partly on the show and partly in private conversations
- that she had recovered through therapy many horrific memories of ritualistic
abuse and that these memories included the following;
1) that she and others were repeatedly sexually abused on open Torah
scrolls in a synagogue.
2) that she was forced by her parents and other Jewish families to murder
babies and eat their flesh
3) that she has had five abortions as a result of repeated incest with
her father
4) that her repeated sexual abuse was part of a widespread phenomenon
(involving many rabbis and community professionals) of neo-satanic ritual
abuse and murder within the Jewish community. According to Vicki, the
satanic cult in which her family was involved is directly traceable
to the false messiah Jacob Frank.
All sectors of the Jewish community were appropriately outraged by
her appearance on the Oprah show, and the claims she made on the show
have since been used by anti-Semitic groups as modern evidence of the
ancient canard of the Jewish blood libel. In response, Oprah's producers
pointed out correctly that it had been made clear on the show that Vicki
was mentally disturbed. Vicki herself has shared with friends that she
suffers from multiple personality disorder.
Vicki has also presented herself, on the record and in private conversation,
as the psychotherapist of particular alleged victims of sexual abuse
reported on by The Awareness Center. That Vicki should be in a therapeutic
role with these women is unconscionable and any information that comes
from her can simply not be considered credible.
The person who has partnered with Vicki in a number of unjustified
and distortion-filled character assassinations has been Luke Ford, whom
you have cooperated with as well, Rabbi Blau. Luke Ford is a discredited
malicious gossip columnist for the pornography industry. He has made
clear in his own writings that he does not check information, that he
often reports information that is false, and that his definition of
truth is that it expresses "the point of view" of the person telling
him the information.
We find it shocking that you not only associate with Vicki Polin and
Luke Ford, but that you are the major source of professional rabbinic
credibility for Vicki Polin and the Awareness Center. Vicki Polin has
written clearly that she only publishes materials from "reputable sources."
It is difficult to imagine that under any definition Luke Ford's blog
and reports would fit into that category.
Most importantly, the Awareness Center as it currently operates is
often misleading, dishonest, and, in the name of justice, viciously
abusive. We are moved to make this harsh evaluation in the light of
the following points:
1. The claim that the website will only report previously published
accusations is an outright lie.
1a. Vicki, responding to my (Rabbi Berman) initial communication of
concerns, wrote as follows: "Please note that we do not post personal
communications of people who claim that this or that person harmed them."
(6/16/04 letter from Vicki Polin to Rabbi Berman, representing herself
and the executive board of TAC). In fact, the Awareness Center has posted
personal testimonies, including those discredited by earlier investigation.
2. Vicki herself or through a close associate sends anonymous slanderous
postings to web blogs and then cites them on The Awareness Center site
and in mailings as the basis for serious accusations.
3. The Awareness Center posts and distributes material which is totally
false, describing as fact occurrences which never took place. The clear
intent is the character assassination of those whom Vicki has decided
are deserving of public defamation.
4. The site does not remove accusatory material even after full and
multiple investigations have concluded that they are false.
5. The Awareness Center regularly initiates active campaigns to destroy
the reputation and work prospects of accused persons, without any evidence
other than accusation, even when the refutation of the accused party
is compelling, and even after their names have been formally cleared
and/or full resolution between the parties has been achieved, and even
when it is clear the accused person poses no danger.
6. The site will provide no opportunity for response by accused persons,
other than an admission of guilt.
7. The attempt to destroy people's reputations long after their death
is not the pursuit of justice, it is journalistic pornography.
These and other serious offenses (of which we have extensive substantiation)
have made The Awareness Center an untrustworthy and deplorable repository
of falsehoods, innuendoes, and scandal mongering. The Awareness Center
is in gross violation of all halachic standards that might apply to
these situations. It also violates standards of libel, with its board
members personally liable for any legal action highly likely to be taken
against it.
As a result of the McCarthyite activities of the Awareness Center and
its false and unsubstantiated accusations, the real and critical issue
of sexual abuse is being truly undermined. All of this leads us to conclude
that we have an obligation to protect innocent people from name rape
and other terrible violations. The Awareness Center is a disgrace to
the Jewish community and we should not abide its continued destructive
activities.
We believe that our concerns about the Awareness Center's transgressions
will need to be publicized to the general public, and we will take steps
to allow that to happen, unless there is an immediate removal of inappropriate
material from the Awareness Center site, and serious safeguards and
oversight instituted to prevent continued abuses. While the original
motivations behind the Awareness Center are indeed important, these
same goals can be accomplished-as we outlined in a several-page letter
to Vicki Polin-without the Awareness Center devolving into an instrument
of abuse in which the ends justify any means.
Two key members of the board/advisory board who, as we do, support
the fight against sexual abuse, have already resigned from the board,
independently of any effort on our part. We also know that there are
those promoted on the website as "Rabbis Who Publicly Support the Awareness
Center" who have no idea that their names are being listed. After one
of these rabbis, Shefa Gold, was made aware that her name was being
inappropriately used, she contacted Vicki strongly insisting that her
name be immediately removed. This was months ago and her name is still
listed as of this day, in flagrant violation of her request.
It is clear that the Awareness Center website speaks for its board
as well as claiming to speak for the Jewish community as a whole without
any mandate, oversight or control by those bodies. We fear that your
own reputation for probity and your leadership role in the communal
response to the vital issue of sexual abuse may be seriously injured
by your continued association with The Awareness Center. We urge you
to disassociate your name from the Awareness Center and to work toward
its closure until such time as responsible policies and honest procedures
are implemented for its future operation.
Sincerely,
Rabbi Saul J. Berman
Rabbi Joseph Telushkin
Rabbi Shefa Gold
Stephen S. Marmer, MD, PhD
Naomi Mark, ACSW
