Here are some relevant thoughts by R’ Mordechai Kuber, a well-respected Rav in Telzstone:
In Defense of the Undefended
Follow-up
On Erev Shabbos Parshas Vaeira, I posted an article about the Chaim Walder tragedy. Since then, I had the opportunity to engage in a number of discussions, including with a well respected Posek. Although I still stand by the basic principles of my original piece, it is important to clarify some points and further elaborate, based on that which I have learned since then:
• I am not, and no Rav that I know is or ever has been, in favor of ignoring allegations of abuse. We all recognize the horrible, lifelong consequences of abuse and the need to act swiftly and resoundingly to protect victims from predators.
• Despite these shared concerns and goals, we all must be aware that the Torah’s laws guide our every action. We may do, say, and believe that which the Torah permits, and we must refrain from that which the Torah prohibits. No end, as important and critical as it may be, justifies prohibited means.
• Some of the technical issues that could stand in the way of the acceptance of an allegation of sexual abuse are the absence of the accused and the lack of witnesses.
• Despite these issues, any allegation in a Beis Din of abuse will lead to Beis Din’s immediate demand that the accused maintain complete distance from the victim, which affords full protection for the future. If the accused violates this injunction, Beis Din will enforce it as necessary. Any implication from that which I originally posted to the contrary was unintentional.
• If there are multiple allegations to the point that Beis Din suspects that the accused is guilty, even in the absence of witnesses, Beis Din will warn him to cease and desist from anything resembling inappropriate contact immediately. If he ignores this warning, Beis Din will banish him from the community with full force.
• Today, in Eretz Yisrael, there are Batei Din that specialize in this field, which are fully proficient in the laws governing when the requirements for the presence of the accused and male and/or adult witnesses could be waived.
• In general, one is not allowed to believe or pass along any negative information about another, even if it is in the newspaper.
• In general, people expose themselves to needless amounts of unnecessary information about goings on through their ownership of certain devices and their subscription to various services. Blissful ignorance of the world around is infinitely preferable to a self-inflicted information barrage. I was very pleased to learn that most people without these devices and subscriptions were almost completely unaware of the CW tragedy, and very sad to learn that those who indulge were well informed of an astounding amount of harmful, sordid details.
• Even when one is allowed to pass along negative information, it has to be for a constructive purpose. The most common constructive purpose is the protection of the one who will be hearing it, but there are other possibilities. There are many other conditions that have to be met regarding content and tone, and tests of altruism that must be passed. This is true even in cases of allegations of sexual abuse.
• In a case of multiple reports of distinct sinning, the case has moved from the category of an alleged crime to that of one who has developed a reputation of sinning. Multiple reports are not equivalent to staggering evidence in support of the allegations. Nevertheless, developing such a reputation is a transgression in its own right, which allows Beis Din to punish the accused for it, and allows others to relate this information to the extent that it is purposeful.
• In the CW case, the reports of sinning had reached this stage, allowing others to pass along these reports to the extent that it is purposeful to do so and that it is one’s intent. But it is not license for random slander. As always, one has to be very careful of his intentions. There is great harm to all concerned in relaying damaging information, even when permissible and even when necessary. Sometimes there is no choice, but it should be passed along with a heavy heart.
• With CW’s passing, there is no longer any purpose in spreading these reports, even if there had been before. It has been explained to me by those with intimate knowledge of the Gedolim’s opinion that they desire that continued discussion of this topic should be brought to a halt immediately, because it is harmful to all concerned, especially to the young.
• It is undeniable that CW left this world by taking his own life. Suicide is absolutely forbidden and it is equivalent to murder. Regardless of whatever he was going through, there is no justification for such a terrible act. This is a terrible, final legacy for him to have left his many present and potential future followers. Therefore, I was advised by a prominent Rav, in contradiction to my previous opinion, that there is no choice but to purge his books from the stores, from the libraries, and from our homes. It is certainly sad to have to give up one of the few truly valuable and appropriate series of contemporary books, but to hold on to them would only condone in some way this terrible crime. We cannot allow our children to think that suicide is ever acceptable, and that it is anything but murder. In addition, since the reports of other sinning had created their own reality of transgression, there is the risk of condoning that as well.
• This tragedy should reinforce in us all the importance of avoiding situations of prohibited yichud. No one is immune, and it is asking for trouble.
• It should also reinforce for us the dangers of inappropriate devices and social media. It exposes us to an overload of harmful images and information and enables widespread damage with a few thoughtless clicks. Yes, I mentioned this above but it is worth additional mention. Kosher phones are the best, by far. They prevent much grief and keep at a distance the sadness and unsavory details of the world at large.
• Let us all pray for b’soros tovos.