G.R.A.C.E. March 2013 Update For BJU Investigation

The letter they posted from an interviewee is somewhat odd to me. The letter can easily make the reader conclude that the person was abused at BJU in it’s opening paragraph. This to me seems to be an unfair and premature publication before GRACE has concluded it’s investigation.

If these interviews are confidential, why would they publish any of them prior to the completion of their investigation? I get that the letter is separate from whatever the author wrote on the online survey, but this letter leaves the reader with the impression that the author is appealing to those who have been abused as a current fact:

Can you trust GRACE? Yes, I believe you can. I believe they will do everything possible
to earn your trust. Will you be hurt worse, by opening up to them about your painful
story?

Any legitimate investigation is always in the “IF” stage until the investigation is finished. I expect publications like that from other “disaffected” groups, but not from a professional investigative agency before they have concluded their results.

One blogger posted a few questions and comments about my post about the OP on Sharper Iron so I’ll answer them here.

Is Dr. Ach’s opinion representative of all fundamentalists?

No, but they should be! (just kidding). I do not represent all of fundamentalism anymore than the 2 Jacks represent all of fundamentalism, nor do I represent the views of Sharper Iron. I am merely a blogger with an opinion on this forum that others are free to agree or disagree with.

[I] t would seem that BJU should at least publicly admit that there are actual cases where they know they did wrong.

How do you know that GRACE has substantiated that? That is the purpose of an unbiased and impartial third-party investigation is to find facts and form a conclusion based on those facts without the pressure of those within BJU that want to be vindicated, and those outside of BJU that want BJU to be crucified on just allegations alone.

In impartial investigation avoids the temptation to ride on the momentum of popular high-profile cases like Jack Schaap and Ernie Willis. There are many involved in these so-called victim advocacy self-created groups that have no training in proper investigations, and many whom are atheists, agnostics and anti-fundamentalist that would like nothing more than to see every fundamentalist church in America shut down. The popularity of high-profile cases has provided the opportunity for these “disaffected” to “strike while the iron is hot” which causes pressure to rush to judgment before allegations can be verified.

When I worked in a law firm, I have seen numerous cases where a battered wife or child or missing child had the parents accuse the police officers of not doing their jobs. When police investigate, they often include EVERYONE as a suspect because history has proven that there are times when not everyone is as innocent as they claim, including the person that called 911. Police and FBI are aware that often the perpetrator inserts themselves into the investigation to keep tabs on what information the police have uncovered in order to figure out ways to divert attention from themselves and/or help direct the investigation in a different direction.

Because of those type of scenarios and the questions police must often ask, they get accused of “not doing their job”. I have heard mothers asked, “Why are you questioning us instead of looking for the perp?”. That question is often asked because outsiders don’t understand the process that investigators must go through to make the allegations “stick”.

Now granted, this is not necessarily a criminal investigation (even though there could be matters that if uncovered could lead to criminal prosecution) but the integrity of the process is still the same. Victims have a right to be heard and have a voice, but BJU also has a right to not be falsely accused of wrong doing. An independent third-party impartial investigation should be conducted in a manner that preserves both of those rights regardless of how badly the vigilante lynch mobs want to see mug shots posted in the Wall Street journal by sunrise.

It seems that it would quell some of the harsh criticism that victims are facing

All the more reason to wait for the investigation to be concluded. There have been some instances where some victims stories have been deemed false. It never helps the real victim when those who have not truly been victimized invent stories to add fuel to the fire. I have seen cases from a certain group where one person had several different profiles and claimed different stories of abuse for each character.

And since many of the victims are unnamed, it would be hard to conclude that these unknown victims are facing “harsh criticism”. Of course, it was not clarified as to whether that comment meant specific victims or criticism of the entire victim class as a whole. Although the class as a whole should not be written off as “psychos”, neither should the class demand that GRACE or anyone else simply stamp the allegations as “verified” until they have concluded their investigation. This is why GRACE has given a link to an individual survey and then conducted private interviews, because if they simply went off the accusations of all the blogs and Facebook pages, there wouldn’t be any churches left.

IF BJU truly desires to do right, they will admit that there are indeed victims of sexual abuse who were treated poorly. It is the least they can do.

I have seen 2 cases where these allegations were substantiated: one person who had 9 cases of abuse to his jacket where the abuse was apparently not made known to BJU staff until the 9th case where it was reported to a BJU staff who then reported it to her superiors and the person was arrested.

And then Ernie Willis whom I am not sure whether the abuse occurred at BJU.

Other than those cases, I have not seen any specific allegations claimed by anyone that has demonstrated the BJU treated a particular victim of abuse poorly. And when I say “abuse” I mean it in the sense of physical or sexual abuse and not merely “BJU criticized the RCC and my grandfather is a priest and that is emotionally abusive”, or “BJU forced me to wear a tie to chapel and I think those kind of controlling rules are abusive”.

If and when it is determined that abuse occurred at BJU, and it is determined that BJU had the requisite scienter to address the abuse and did not, and/or it can be verified with more than just mere assumption and speculation that BJU actively attempted to impede the progress of an investigation or prosecution, THEN you can post demands for accountability and summon the firing squads.

Thank you for the clarification. Perhaps a modicum of research would have benefited had I wanted to wait longer to post my response to those questions but I have not yet done such research because of other projects. But I do know someone who has researched it pretty thoroughly and I was confident that if my details were inaccurate I would be corrected. Thank you.

I mentioned the Ernie Willis issue because it seems to be an often sited proof of abuse that occurred AT BJU. I have just read another article about something making the devil proud of Christianity, and that story as well has a caption of abuse that happened AT BJU, and none of the events described did. (The story I believe makes accusations against someone that I believe you wrote an article about holding him in pretty good esteem.)

So yes, it would probably do me some good to catch up on everything to separate what actually happened AT BJU from stories that did not occur AT BJU.

[Easton]

From the GRACE update:

“As of March 1st, the survey has been accessed over 538 times with over 125 completed surveys received.”

“125” - this small number does not represent people complaining about wearing ties.

That “small number” doesn’t really represent anything right now since it was a confidential survey. You never know, 100 of them could be about ties.

The point that I was making about the “ties” was that the term “abuse” has been so convoluted those who follow these other groups who have been convinced that abuse is comprised of such matters think flooding the hotline with such complaints will further convince GRACE that they need to be extra thorough in their investigations. (I’ve even seen a comment on an article titled, “The Evangelical Hate Machine” when an SFL follower called it abusive being forced to make ones bed every morning).

Now because we don’t know what those surveys said, I can’t say that they are NOT about real abuse either. But considering the trend of these groups to post all of their stories on prominent anti-fundamentalist websites and Facebook pages, I would find it just a little ironic that if there were 125 cases extant, that BJU and staff or students haven’t heard about at least a few of them. That’s a lot of cases to cover up no matter how “small” the number 125 is.

Perhaps there are 125 cases of abuse. But if there are not, I would hope that those submitting the surveys would understand that tendering cases not relevant to the investigation only delays the discovery of matters that need to be addressed immediately.

And fortunately it appears there are some perhaps still thinking about the survey since it has been accessed “over 538” times (as opposed to 539).

I responded in a PM