But back to the issue of the 6 year old boy. The report says that Dave was insistent that he should sleep with the men, even though one of those men had admitted sexually abusing children in the past.

The report says that Dave denigrated the child's mother by saying that she was "over-protective".

Good Lord, thank you for "over-protective" Mothers!

Another clue as to what has happened with the Jesus Christians. Cherry wrote 28/12/2010:

Quote

Right up to the time when we supposedly "imploded" (November, 2010)

[www.jesus-teachings.com]

I have a question for Malcolm, if I may, and if Malcolm feels like filling us in. It is prompted by a statement from Davejc/Cherryjc regarding the tally they kept in Australia of each individual members output of distribution of the Easy English books on the trains in India.

Was Davejc very businesslike in keeping such individual tallies of work done, were donations solicited for these books and did the tally extend to the collection of these?
Was a sense of competition fostered amongst the members to off-load most books/collect most in donations?
Were non-productive members censured or subtly made to feel inadequate if they did not produce?

I am thinking of the enterprise in terms of Davejc's private business and the members as his sales and distribution team and wondering how closely he tracked and monitored the business activities of the various teams.

How much autonomy was there, in business terms i.e. control of the bottom line (product shifted, receipts payable) from the leader who was often absent on another continent?

- Stoic

Dear Stoic,

My "stretch" dates from Christmas Day 1981 to June 85 (the conclusion of the Nullarbor Work)....The Easy English books didn't exist at that time. The India mission commenced while we were in Sydney and I was never entrusted with a ticket across to the "operation" there (I was already a untrustworthy "black sheep" in McKay's eyes")....I don't believe that there was a huge effort to "litness" in India at that time....(there was of course, SOME street book sales activity)

My impression is that the degree of "monitoring" of income received, increased as time went on....you should confirm this with the later "generations"...

personal diaries with such records were encouraged at one point, I seem to remember....

There was never any "autonomy".....David wrote the vast bulk of the material...

you spent your hours selling it for him....that pattern has never altered.

(I liked your previous observation of an experts comment that cults are created to "fulfill" the immature emotional needs, the leader craves attention for....in McKays case, I think it was "recognition" and wider "adulation"....)

(

Quote
Blackhat

Quote
Apollo
I get the impression that Verity has a need to impress Dave. I know Verity previously came very close to joining the JCs cult and it appears Dave still has an emotional hold over her. She is a victim of Dave and it appears she still has some issues which she needs to work through.

Her apologetic behaviour over the word ''Consort'' was manic. She dragged that little episode out for weeks. She even sent a huge email to Dave desperately pleading for his forgiveness despite there being no evidence to suggest she'd even used the word (which isn't offensive anyway). What was that all about???? The only explanation i can come up with is that Dave still has some kind of emotional hold over her.

Apollo, Verity was here long before you, and is not here to defend herself. I cannot for the life of me think why you would want to vilify her. She has protested long and hard against the Jesus Christians.

I was here long before any of the rest of you, and frankly I wish you'd all shut up with the drama-queen stuff and focus on DM and the cult.

But he's got a point, Blackhat: she spends more time over there bitching about this forum and its participants than she does about DM and the cult. Why should she attack me in a place where I cannot defend myself? What's good for the goose...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/30/2010 10:31PM by zeuszor.

Right up to the time when we supposedly "imploded" (November, 2010) the JC's retained their conservative attitude toward sex. Sexual contact was limited to the context of heterosexual marriage. Dave and I still maintain that attitude and practice, and I believe those who have recently left do as well. It would be good if more could be said to indicate this, and if people could retract their claims that Dave or I have mishandled situations involving sexual risk.

"Cherry" (?).....(...the posting reads sufficiently half-witted enough, to actually be Cherry)

I agree with you Stoic, that McKay bears potential criminal liability for any sexual offender, whose "antics" he has simply "papered over" and deliberately overlooked, in his desperation, to retain another individual in servitude to him post the late 90's. (i.e McKay FAILED to report the matter as required by law) Cherry to my mind, would bear a indisputable role here as an accessory to the fact. Her "defence" of David, clearly indicating that she was fully party to all the facts of the matter.

Does a statute of limitations affect prosecution here, I would like to know?

We would only need the tiniest of "kiddy-fondling" on the part of Monty, to make out a case here in my opinion, as there is a "history" that McKay and consort have made clear to us all, that they were fully aware of......

I was trying to hunt down your first posting, Zeuszor....page 6 or 7?...back in 2006?

'(I liked your previous observation of an experts comment that cults are created to "fulfill" the immature emotional needs, the leader craves attention for....in McKays case, I think it was "recognition" and wider "adulation"....)'

Not to mention the absolute power and control, even over a few members....... Oh, those dreams of glory!

I saw a vid clip yesterday of Davejc complaining that everyone else gets a 'movement' but he is still trying.


I was trying to sort out in my own mind how much of a priority the 'business end' of the enterprise is for Davejc, as I have personally known a few very financially astute and competent business people of a similar ilk. I don't get the same impression from Davejc, although I'm sure he's done all right. The profiteering seems a secondary motive judging by the selling of his books on trains and in the street--its hardly likely to bring in the big bucks.

I was just surprised by the assertion that tallies of books distributed daily per individual in India were so closely watched in Australia--it didn't seem to go with the otherwise very slack business model--and wondered at the discrepancy there.
Its of no great import, except to show that Davejc micro-manages his micro-enterprise.

'Does a statute of limitations affect prosecution here, I would like to know?'

The statute of limitations would vary depending on the jurisdiction that the case is brought in. In some jurisdictions there is a statutory limit of 7 years, some no limit at all.

mistake



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/30/2010 11:07PM by zeuszor.

Perhaps, David, has just got it wrong, all down these long, l-o-n-g years...

..focusing all his energies on winning over impressionable and vulnerable youth,

..most of whom have ultimately abandoned him, in their selfish search for lives of their own choosing

..when all along, there has been another less visible "community" that he has left largely untouched,

...that would no doubt, have readily responded to the "affirmation" and "acceptance" McKay offered,

...as long as he agreed to indulge them in some minor personal foibles..... [www.youtube.com]