|
In Reply to: An official letter from the Family to exFamily.org? posted by WC on April 13, 2002 at 07:26:43:
The Family as an organization has been able to circumvent laws by operating across borders. This is nothing new. I quote Bill Clinton who said, "I never broke the laws of this country" when asked if he smoked Marijuana.
Contained in this ingenious diversionary statement, are all the strongest hints of the legal strategy exfamily.org can adopt.
The Family spokeman stated, "We believe that your allegations that the Family promoted or engaged in: child pornography, adult-child sex, prostitution, adultery, libel, kidnapping, larceny, evasion and political meddling is libelous and we know of no court of law that has found The Family guilty of these crimes (of course some of the listed are not crimes)."
Let us examine the exfamily.org allegations, and then shed some light on the "found The Family guilty" point.
Re: Child pornography
Pictures of Davidito receiving oral sex at age 3, and videos of nude dancing children should settle the matter quickly.
Re: Adult-child sex
Already thoroughly examined in a court of law and found to be true. Although it was a civil case about custody, and so technically the Family was not brought to court for these charges, the judge did in fact find the Family "guilty" of these activities. It is in fact very much in exfamily.org's favour, that such charges have not yet been brought up in a criminal case, but I will save the details for a private email to exfamily.org.
Re: Prostitution
Thoroughly documented in the FF volume. Remember "God Is A Pimp", "Hookers for Jesus" and "Make it Pay"? It will never be a problem gathering affivadivits by exmembers stating that they were in fact encouraged by the Family to prostitute themselves.
Re: Adultery
Well documented in the letters. The place to start, Berg's own admission of sleeping with Maria while still married to Eve is in fact adultery. Perhaps members of the Family have forgotten what adultery actually is. Berg is on record endorsing adultery through the Law of Love and FFing letters.
Re: Libel (Slander)
Just pick a few powerful politicians Berg slandered who are still alive today. He slandered whole nations and races, which can be considered hate crimes.
Re: Kidnapping
A court granted $1,000,000 to a mother who lost her children to the Family. It will pose no problem gathering affidavits from exmembers stating that they were counseled to take their children and disappear to other countries, when their spouse was considered a backslider.
Re: Larceny
This is about the easiest to prove in many countries where the Family operates. I will save the details for a private email to exfamily.org
Re: Evasion
Assuming it is illegal tax evasion being refered to, that is a serious punishable crime. Evading police and obstruction of justice are also punishable offences.
Re: Political meddling
Unlawful foreign interference is considered a crime in many countries. The Family was in fact thrown out of several countries for such activities, which are in fact considered criminal.
Now to examine the "found guilty" issue.
Allegations do not have to be proven in court. They are allegations.
For a plaintiff to show that libelous or slanderous statements have been made, the burden of evidence will be on the plaintiff to show the statements wrongful. Libel and slander, are very easy to disprove with the above evidence weighing against the Family.
The Family does not exist as a legal entity, so they cannot technically be found guilty of crimes in a court. However there are legal precedents and weights in favor of exfamily.org safely assuming the Family has been proven guilty by law. Members being deported on grounds of any of the above charges is de facto incrimination by authorities. The fact that a legal action (deportation) was taken against members of the Family, means that technically, a judge or magistrate in a lower court had to approve the action.
The form won't allow me to write more, sorry.
