Reader's comments on this article Add a new comment on this article

from Eric Cartman Thursday, October 26, 2006 - 15:06 (Agree/Disagree?) Could we perhaps have a page with a full listing of all investigations of the Family, and all th outcomes? I think it would be good for outsiders to see the extent of concern globally against this dangerous cult. (reply to this comment)

From Hanna Friday, October 27, 2006, 01:12 (Agree/Disagree?) I thought of that too, see if there is a way to research any and all arrests, court cases and imprisonments of Family Members. Not just for abuse, but whatever other factors may have been involved. I am positive that at least SOME Family members must have been arrested for prostitution at some point or another. Just not sure how easy it is to gather all of that material!(reply to this comment)

from SeanSwede Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - 15:07 (Agree/Disagree?) That story sure does ring a bell. I think ive read about it in the paper some time ago. (reply to this comment)

from moon beam Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - 14:44 (Agree/Disagree?) This link takes to CESNURS page, that of Massimo Introvigne (often labelled an apologist)http://www.cesnur.org/testi/TheFamily/se_thefamily.htm It provide lengthy documentation of some court cases the Family were involvved in with some notable ommissions; the Ward case in UK (a short and in my opinion rather biased summary is provided), the charges against the group in Tenerife 1977 when Berg was questioned twice by the police before fleeing the island, and the 1979 case in Ohio, USA (subject of the book 'Not for a Million dollars') where an ex member was awarded a judgement of 1 million dollars in the court of Common Pleas. (reply to this comment)

From Peter Wednesday, October 25, 2006, 15:37 (Agree/Disagree?) CESNUR's summaries of the case are very incomplete, misleading and inaccurate. Not only are there a bunch of cases they don't even mention but for the ones they do mention they include only very brief excerpts of the thousands of pages of court records and the hundred of pages of court rulings. Along with the carefully selected (and possibly mistranslated) brief excerpts, they include translations of newspaper opinion columns which aren't persuasive evidence of anything. The France section doesn't even mention the two cases listed below. They don't even have a section for Canada and the two cases there in 1981 and 1982. The Argentina section omits any mention of the Frouman case, the Pickus case, the case in Rosario (which resulted in a number of Family members being sentenced to pay a fine and serve 30 days in jail for fraud and other crimes) and several others. They write: "Since 1987, Family communities have been the subject of 11 investigations in Argentina. Nine of these resulted in court proceedings being instituted against Family members. In all these cases, Family members were acquitted of any wrongdoing." This is false. One of the earliest investigations of The Family in Argentina was in 1976 and a number of Family members were arrested and jailed at that time. In 1977, they were banned in Argentina. There were also more investigations and court cases in the early 1980s. Unless by "acquitted of any wrongdoing" they actually mean "convicted of criminal acts and sentenced to jail and fines" or "fled the country to escape prosecution" then that claim they make is absolutely false. It's also interesting that they write "Since 1987..." The Family has a similar statement at http://www.thefamily.org/dossier/legal/argentina.htm "Since 1987 the Family has been the subject of 11 investigations in Argentina. Eight of these resulted in court proceedings being instituted against Family members. In each case the allegations were unsubstantiated and Family members were found innocent of all charges." In June 1994 they had a slightly different story: http://media.xfamily.org/docs/fam/homearc98/gp_dfo/FUN94_06.DFO.rtf.html "11 previous official investigations into The Family in Argentina, dating back to 1982, had found that all charges brought against The Family were unfounded." In April 1982, police in Buenos Aires began an investigation of The Family and on November 17, 1982 10 Family members were arrested. However, The Family now states that there were no investigations or court cases in Argentina involving members of The Family until 1987. (reply to this comment)

From Wednesday, October 25, 2006, 19:15 (Agree/Disagree?) Aren't they still legally "banned" in Argentina due to lack of a valid inscription with the Secretaria de Cultos?(reply to this comment)

from Peter Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - 01:27 (Agree/Disagree?) I am also trying to find more information about this. Here is what I've found so far. The man was a former member named Jean Michel Arbolade and in June 1997 he was sentenced in Alpes-Maritimes to 19 years in prison for sexually abusing three children (his daughters) over a period of eight years. His wife knew about the abuse and was sentenced to three years for not reporting it to law enforcement authorities. I don't know any other details such as when he was a member and/or if any of the abuse occurred while he was in The Family. http://www.xfamily.org/index.php/1997 On page 16 of Sam Ajemian's book, there is the following: " FRANCE. A former member of the Family was sentenced to 19 years in prison for sexually abusing his three daughters. He told the court he was teaching his daughters about sex. His lawyer stated that his client’s behavior was a direct result of his indoctrination in the Family. His wife was also sentenced to 3 or 4 years in prison for not reporting her husband’s crimes to the authorities. " The footage.net database has the following summaries of French TV coverage of the case (apparently they used automated translation). Ina Number: CAB97106884 Programme Title: JUDGMENT(SENTENCE) Collection Title: JA2 20H Credits: Masure, Bruno Ina Keywords France ; Alpes-Maritimes ; Justice ; Criminal court ; News item ; Incest ; Sect First broadcast Date: 06/05/1997 Running-time: 000000 Summary: The criminal court of Alpes-Maritimes has 19-year-old condemned person of prison Jean Michel ARBOLADE, father of seven children, the former member of the sect of the Children of God, judged to have violated three of his daughters during eight years. - Short silent shots of the court and the condemned person. Ina Number: CAC97106968 Programme Title: QUITE EMBELLISHED WITH IMAGES: CHILDREN SECT OF GOD Collection Title: SOIR 3 Credits: Soula, Judith ; Cottu, Lionel Ina Keywords France ; Alpes-Maritimes ; Company(Society) ; Justice ; Court ; Criminal court ; Lawsuit ; Sect ; Verdict ; Incest ; Court artist's drawing First broadcast Date: 06/05/1997 Summary: Criminal court of ALPES-MARITIMES: verdict of the lawsuit for incest (rape of 3 of his(her) daughters) of the former member of the Sect of the Children of God, Jean Michel ARBOLAT was 19-year-old condemned person of prison. - PAN SHOT registration(inscription) "Criminal court" / VARIOUS SHOTS in the courtroom of the court / penal code / court artist's drawing / lawyer / the mother, the condemned person also for not denunciation. There is also http://prevensectes.com/claveau.htm which lists the name JEAN-MICHEL ARBOLADE along with a number of others and apparently has something to do with a book about cults. In 2001, another Family member in France was given a suspended sentence of 18 months in prison for "contributing to the deliquency of a minor" for encouraging his child to engage in videotaped sexual play with children of other Family members. The sentence was then reduced to two years of probation and mandatory treatment and his parental rights were terminated. http://www.exfamily.org/art/misc/cult_justice.shtml http://www.xfamily.org/index.php/2001 (reply to this comment)

From Peter Friday, January 11, 2008, 21:47 (Agree/Disagree?) I've found some more information about this. First of all, the name was incorrect. I believe the correct spelling is Jean-Michel Ardolade. Apparently, he was first arrested in June 1993 and then sentenced in May 1997. An xFamily.org article about Ardolade which will be updated soon is at http://www.xfamily.org/index.php/Jean_Michel_Ardolade and there are TV news reports about the case at http://www.xfamily.org/index.php/France_3:_Secte_Enfants_de_Dieu http://www.xfamily.org/index.php/France_3:_Tout_images:_secte_enfants_de_dieu http://www.xfamily.org/index.php/France_2:_Jugement I also found a short article about the case at http://www.humanite.fr/1993-06-17_Articles_-Enquete-judiciaire-apres-la-mort-d-Alain-Mayoud -begin quote- Article paru le 17 juin 1993 "Deux membres d'une secte incarcérés" Un père de sept enfants, se réclamant de Familles sans frontières, résurgence de la secte des Enfants de Dieu, a été mis en examen et incarcéré le 4 juin à Grasse pour viols aggravés sur mineurs par ascendant, ainsi que son épouse pour non-dénonciation de crime. Jean-Michel Ardolade, employé comme jardinier dans un établissement protégé, demeurant à Grasse, a reconnu avoir entretenu des rapports incestueux avec trois de ses filles âgées de quinze, treize et onze ans. Il a été confondu à la suite de révélations de sa fille aînée, qui a dénoncé ces abus sexuels dans un établissement de soins où elle avait été accueillie. -end quote- I don't understand much French so I could definitely use some translation help from someone who does. There are additional French TV programs about the COG at http://www.xfamily.org/index.php/Category:French_Television_and_Film and more may be added soon. (reply to this comment)

From moon beam Wednesday, October 25, 2006, 14:31 (Agree/Disagree?) CULT JUSTICE A cult member condemned for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. AIX-EN-PROVENCE (Bouches-du-Rhone), 16 may, 2001 (AFP) A member of "The Family" an association which derived from the cult "Children Of God" dissolved in 1978, was condemned Tuesday by the Criminal Court of Aix-en Provence (Bouches-du-Rhone) to 18 months in prison with suspended sentence for contributing to the delinquency of a minor, judicial sources said Wednesday. The court reduced the sentence to 2 years of probation with the obligation to seek treatment. It also deprived the subject of all parental rights. The assistant DA Annie Brunet-Fuster had sought a penalty of 18 months in prison with suspended sentence. The guilty party who recognizes his membership in the cult, was charged for encouraged the delinquence of his 8 year old son notably by encouraging (sexual) interplay with the children of a couple of friends, also members of the "Family". A video of this scene and another filmed by the guilty party showing his son nude in a dubious position, was siezed by police during a search. In his summation, the DA reminded that the cult pacticed "FFing" which consisted of using sexual relations as a means of proselytizing and to obtain advantages for the group. The Family also considered sexual relations, particularly those of children, to be the best way to get to heaven. The mother of the child and the nation union for the defense of the Family constituted the civil party (prosecution). This conviction comes as the result of a long procedure which began in 1991 with an investigation into the cults activities by the gendarmes (state police) in 2 villages of Bouche- de-Rhone. 22 members of the community, were accused in 1993 for "aggravated proxenetism" (pimping), "violent child abuse", and "confining and corruption of minors". Charges were dropped in January 1999 due to a lack of proof. After appeals by the civil parties the anullation of charges was confirmed in February 2000 except for the case of the recent conviction for which there were sufficient charges. (reply to this comment)

From Nick Wednesday, October 25, 2006, 14:49 (Agree/Disagree?) And they say the banned this kind of behavior in 86. Just goes to show what liars they all are. Sorry, I meant "deceivers yet truers", not liars....(reply to this comment)

From Hanna_Black Wednesday, October 25, 2006, 02:33 (Agree/Disagree?) Another cover-up revealed. If TF does know about this case, then their statment of "we were always found not guilty of charges" is bogus. (reply to this comment)

From conan Friday, October 27, 2006, 13:49 (Agree/Disagree?) of course the family knows about this case and of course the "we were always found not guilty of charges" claim is bogus too. did you really believe them?(reply to this comment)

From Hanna Saturday, October 28, 2006, 03:04 (Agree/Disagree?) Well, I never believed it, but so far I had found no evidence like this, about someone actually being convicted. I mean, the Judge actually ruled that "as a direct result of TF teachings" these girls were abused. Course, Lord Justice Ward didn't see TF as a safe environment either, but TF could easily twist that into saying "see, they didn't take the kid away!" simply because the Family Member got to keep their kid. The difficult part b4 for me was trying to prove to CURRENT Family members that no, they were found guilty. (reply to this comment)

From sar Saturday, October 28, 2006, 03:39 (Agree/Disagree?) The kid got to continue living with them, but I believe still is a ward of the court. They also agreed not to live in a family home and send their children to public school. As far as the Ward Judgment goes, it was clear that abuse went on. Peter's own affidavit was incriminatory. Peter was sent as if someone who had played a part in writing what was pubished had gone to England, there would doubtless have been a warrant put out immediately with a subsequent custodial sentence. The family only denies abuse as they have a very different definition of abuse to what the law or even society at large would consider abuse. I think all it would take to them to prove that they are guilty is to show them what the law says on the matter. They seem to have mixed feelings that (a) it didn't happen, and (b) it wasn't abuse. There's no reasoning with them.(reply to this comment)

From Hanna Saturday, October 28, 2006, 04:59 (Agree/Disagree?) Yeah, I guess there just is no reasoning with them. (reply to this comment)