How Good is your Memory?
BY: VISHNUGADA DASA
Jul 05, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA, USA (SUN) — I read Kapila prabhu’s article, "CPO is a Necessary Component of any Societal Organization". While respecting his point of view and noting agreement on several issues, I take issue with a few points for the following reasons.
I’m not sure whether Kapila prabhu noticed, I have many times voiced support for the CPO’s functions of education and its efforts to prevent child abuse. I agree with such prevention efforts as completing background checks of devotees. In fact, I was among those who initially recommended this be done. However, my concern continues to be the poorly executed CPO functions of investigating and trying cases of possible child abuse. The makeshift procedures have led to a number of false convictions. My point has been these CPO systems are unnecessary and are vigilante activity. The civil authorities already have systems in place all over the world to address these problems. Perhaps Kapila prabhu did not read the earlier articles where these points were made crystal clear.
Kapila prabhu used the following tactic: he misrepresented that I want to do away with the prevention activities of the CPO, and then attacked this idea. This is called a straw man argument. He misrepresented another’s point of view and then defeated it. A careful and thoughtful reader will understand that my true points were not addressed at all.
Kapila prabhu then suggests that my stance would be like allowing drunkards and meat-eaters to stay and prey on temple residents. This is an absurd proposition, since I support restrictions and other preventive functions for properly convicted child abusers. However, the CPO and others have had difficulty accepting the possibility of false accusations. His suggestion that my views would lead to drunkards staying in the temple is just emotional rhetoric or, more technically, a “parade of horribles” argument.
I am happy to see that Kapila prabhu and I agree that there should be due process of law used by the CPO. However, in many instances, the CPO has not followed even the simple elements of due process. For example, the prosecution has trained the “judges,” the defense has not been allowed to cross-examine witnesses, the defense has not been given access to evidence, and no one with even a modicum of legal training has been overseeing the process. The result has been a “justice by the seat of their pants”. These and other serious deviations from due process cited in previous postings resulted in the false conviction of Vakresvara Pandit prabhu, and likely others. Another term for this approach is vigilantism. While the GBC admitted to “anomalies” in CPO procedures, there has been stonewalling and refusal to admit even basic mistakes, making the procedure seem like a trial out of a Franz Kafka novel.
Kapila prabhu further argues that CPO punishment is not really punishment at all, because it is only a “regulation of (devotee) association”. Do you have any idea what it’s like to be wrongly accused and convicted of a serious crime? Even your close friends will stay away from you. For a devotee who has been falsely convicted and then defamed by ISKCON, the experience is devastating to their spiritual life and that of their families. Vakresvara Pandit prabhu was honored when Srila Prabhupada accepted him as his disciple and said that his kirtans were “angelic”. Lord Krishna told Arjuna; “For one who has been honored, dishonor is worse than death.” To get insight about how a false accusation of child abuse will affect someone’s life, take a listen to the link below.
Then Kapila prabhu argued that because the statute of limitations elapsed in many cases, the CPO had to adjudicate these cases. In the Vakresvara Pandit case, for instance, the statute of limitations had not run out. The CPO took up the case about seven years after the alleged incident took place in Texas. Texas law states:
Texas Criminal Statute of Limitations Laws
Code Section: Crim. Proc. §12.01; 12.02; 12.05
Felonies Murder, manslaughter, and certain sexual assaults: none;
Thefts involving fiduciaries or officials forgery, sexual assault, indecency with a child: 10 yrs.;
There are good reasons for statutes of limitation. Memories have a tendency to fade and become distorted. My field is psychology, which deals with memory. Most of us believe that memories are like photographs that don’t change. However, research has consistently found that memories do tend to change over time. In general, the more time elapsed, the more the change. Changes in memories can and do take place through suggestion, subsequent experiences, changes in association, changes in life outlook, and by the influence of incentives, to name a few causes.
Here are some examples:
1. An experiment took place in a small town where most of the residents attended a Friday night football game. During the game, a player was knocked out and carried off the field on a stretcher. The injured player was not bleeding at all. A few days later, adult volunteers who had attended the game were asked to recount what they saw. As they sat in a waiting room to be interviewed, there was a copy of the local newspaper lingering on the table. The headlines had been doctored to indicate that the player was all bloody. When interviewed, the vast majority of volunteers reported that they remembered seeing the player bleeding. Memories change by suggestion.
2. In another experiment, individual volunteers were called one by one to sit alone in a room for several minutes. While waiting, each member of Group A was exposed to the brief ringing of a bell. The bell was not rung for members of Group B. The bell was not rung either for members of Group C, but they were exposed to a hypnotic suggestion that they had actually heard a bell ring while waiting, even though they hadn’t. All the volunteers were asked if they remembered hearing the bell one week, two weeks, and three weeks later. They were also asked how sure they were of what they remembered. The majority of volunteers in both groups A and C reported that they remember hearing the bell. However, those in group C, those who hadn’t heard the bell at all but received suggestions that they had, were even more adamant that they heard the bell than those who had actually heard it. Memories change by suggestion.
Here is a fascinating example I found on NPR of how memories can change due to the influence of others. Fast forward past the first few minutes of the Prologue to Act One, i.e., the part relating to memories of child abuse.
We (and our memories) are subject to the four defects. That is not to say that a specific memory of child abuse cannot be accurate. In my work with children, I find that usually they are relatively accurate, especially when the events have occurred within a few years. Nevertheless, a substantial number of such memories are not. False allegations of abuse are, in fact, quite common when a custody dispute between parents is going on, or when the accuser has a grudge against the accused for an unrelated conflict. It also often happens that the details of a child’s memory of abuse change markedly over time. Despite this, the CPO has consistently taken an accuser’s words as true, without probing for possible ulterior motives and apparently without being aware of changeability of memories over time.
Being aware of the above facts, the legal system, which has much more experience in these matters than ISKCON, has opted out of trying criminal cases where the statute of limitations has expired. ISKCON, armed with good intentions, has rushed in with efforts to convict devotees of child abuse 20 or 30 years later. Using flawed procedures so long after the alleged crime is like going after a target using a shotgun instead of a sharpshooter’s rifle. The quarry might be brought down, but several bystanders will likely be taken out too. And that is exactly what has happened. My contention is that for the CPO to adjudicate cases beyond the statute of limitations is simply out of their league and untenable. The CPO system is already plagued with irregularities. Is it reasonable to think that it can reliably extract truth from a tangle of old memories when the legal system cannot?
The evidence presented to the GBC in our recent proposal showed that the original mandate for the CPO was not to set up a court system to try these old cases. It was recognized at the time that such a task would be beyond their capabilities. An arbitration system loosely modeled after truth commissions was recommended. However, under the influence of the first CPO Director, that idea was put aside and the current system was adopted.
I know it is difficult to admit mistakes. I have been aware of CPO “anomalies” for years and wrote some of the recent articles years ago, but chose not to post them, hoping things would improve and not wanting to criticize the CPO. That was probably a mistake. I hope I’m not mistaken once again that the prevailing attitude of ISKCON will continue; that the unlimited of mercy of Lord Caitanya should be made available to everyone except a person falsely convicted by the CPO of child abuse.
Like the secular society, ISKCON was in denial far too long about the abuse of children under its care. Hopefully it will not remain in denial as long about those the CPO has falsely convicted.
If you believe you have been unfairly convicted by the CPO and would like to talk about it confidentially, feel free to email me at vpjustice@live.com.
