UOHC Writes to Reb Tickle

For those increasingly concerned that Reb Tickle may gradually be joining the Arsekonim class we have some disappointing news: Reb Tickle is corresponding directly with that august body known as UOHC. The only thing I can say in my defence is that they started it by writing to me first and myself being deferential to authority and submissive to Daas Torah had no option but to reply, about 10 lines for each line of theirs. The missive was in response to Reb Tickle's recent droshe. The sender must I'm afraid remain without a name - no UOHC officer with the right hashkofeh would be seen here even in their finest Purim mask - and the cc list, which reads like an A-class shiduchim list, must also remain classified. But due to UOHC's deeply held conviction on the public's right to know permission for republication was graciously granted and hope is being expressed in certain quarters of awarding Reb Tickle in due course a serving of the recently stewed Keddasia alphabet soup.

I reminded [Reb Tickle] that a special B[eis] D[in] was set up years ago & held preliminary hearings. When the police opened a file the case was suspended. When the police closed the matter discussions were held to reopen the Din Torah, & it was planned that certain ladies would present evidence – fine. The other side insisted that they should be able to cross-examine them; the ladies all refused to agree. The BD ruled that such a situation would be unfair; any defendant has the right for witnesses to be cross-examined. Therefore the case had to be left hanging.

Sorry for the delay in reply. I note what you say but I cannot agree.

I’m at a distinct disadvantage as I don’t have access to a fraction of the information that you have but subject to that caveat I’ll say this:

1. The entire BD process at the time was farcical. The story broke immediately after Simchas Torah and the BD announcement came a few days before Chanukah, so a delay of about 2 months. During that time the community was dragged through the mud with no one able to assert authority. I don’t intend repeating the details and the records are there for all to see. At no point did anyone say anything about the victims or even breaches of kedushe and tznius which we claim first and foremost to stand for. There were reliable reports that Reb Sholem F. had raised the issues in the Elul prior to the story breaking or thereabout and it was hushed up. Someone told me that they had heard from a victim in 2011 while the story broke in October 2012.
2. The BD announcement was extracted from an extremely reluctant establishment who could no longer resist the clamour for some kind of action. We all remember the horse trading over its composition, the ambush of Rav Padwa in GG, the letter and retraction and retraction of retraction of CH’s shul remaining a UOHC member, and the months’ long farce when the system broke down. Once again the plight of his victims and the issue of him continuing to see women was forgotten in the circus. CH had an input in the BD but I don’t recall the victims being consulted or having any voice. There weren’t reports of the Rabbinate or their representative meeting with victims. The rabbonim may have had sufficient information as it is but it would have been assuring to the victims and the community that the allegations were taken seriously.
3. There was a fog surrounding the entire BD and other than its existence no further details were released. The remit and parameters of the BD were never made clear. It would have been akin to a professional misconduct hearing because as far as I know no one was demanding money from him and of course the BD would have no powers to punish him except for communal sanctions. But what were they looking for? Criminal activity, acts forbidden al pi haloche or chasidus or simply conduct unbefitting a rov. Most importantly, would the findings have been made public? Some of these may be technical points, but the BD was set up to assure the public and how could the public be assured if the entire process was shrouded in secrecy with the leadership that had betrayed them in control? And if he was found guilty, what would happen next? If his conduct was criminal would he be reported to the police? If his conduct was halachically forbidden would he face communal sanctions? Would the rabbonim apologise to the victims and the community for the chilul hashem? I think we can reliably guess the answers.
4. When the BD finally sat, it was widely reported at the time of women being intimidated with Moshe H. and other CH supporters including his son being present at the venue. The women he saw/sees are vulnerable at the best of times and especially after they’d been through his “treatment”. Many were also in abusive marriages and they could have no faith in the BD. I do not recall any assurances given to witnesses on their safety and wellbeing. One victim said that she drove past and kept going after seeing who was milling about outside. She said it would have been like walking into a ‘lion’s den’.
5. The points above relating to the BD and its remit apply equally to the current “investigation”. There are reports of the appointment of a KC which is assuring but still we are in the dark. The KC (assuming this to be true) will presumably be instructed by UOHC who will pay the fees, set the parameters and decide on the consequences. So what are they? It may be early days but no one’s holding their breath. Even now with more allegations, has anyone from UOHC been in touch with the girl or her parents or with other victims? Has someone independent with a clean, solid reputation and with experience in this field been appointed as a representative for the victims so they can be contacted in confidence and he or she can then relay the allegations and concerns to the Rabbinate and lay leadership?
6. Putting all this aside, the BD issue, as important as it is, was just one of my points. That vulnerable women were sent to CH after all that was known about him, or even rumoured about him, beggars belief. The BD constantly makes pronouncements on far lesser issues and acts much faster but here was something that goes to the root of who we are but we remained silent. If there is one thing that is irrefutable it is that rumours have swirled round him for years yet no one stopped women from seeing him. And all the more so vulnerable women who require counselling. I had heard over the last ten years that he was still seeing women which I found difficult to believe but now I see that I knew not half of it. When a tailor on Dunsmure Road was rumoured to be striking up inappropriate “friendships” with local women, UOHC issued a notice about him. So where was the notice for CH? Speakers and events are banned at almost no notice for far lesser crimes. So what discrete representations were made to rabbonim and communal figures who deal with sholom bayis and similar issues to stop people being sent to him? He is said to have admitted to hand wrestling women with some phoney heter. In any other context such practices would be decried in the strongest terms and rightly so. Yet here nothing was done and he was just allowed to continue.
7. Separately, was CH warned that if he didn’t stop seeing women he would be shamed? Did he have any conditions imposed on him and if so who was to supervise him to ensure he complied? Whether he was banned from seeing women or he was subjected to strict conditions which he then disregarded, it is clear that he breached his “bail conditions” so to speak but nothing happened as a consequence and no action was taken. I’m referring here both to investigations and beth dins and also that no simple precautionary measures to protect women were taken.
8. This is of course not an isolated case and not long ago there was the cover up with Roth and Paltiel S’s notorious letter in defence of a notorious abuser plus a string of other cases. It’s hardly a defence to say that UOHC isn’t unique in the Charedi world and probably not the worst either. There is a fundamental inability in our leadership to face up to one of the most serious problems of our times and which is one of the main reasons of our youth falling away in increasing numbers. This is besides the huge chilul hashem of the well-founded accusation that we tolerate abuse in our midst. It’s no good pointing to the Harvey Weinstein case because he was prosecuted in the end and he’s locked up. Abrahams was sacked in no time, the Chief Rabbi issued a letter and that was the end of it. But here it rumbled on for a decade and it’s still not over. There has been a complete culture change in the wider world but when ofsted raises safeguarding in our schools we protest. And when scandals like this break we do nothing and just hope it will go away. Even for reasons of self-preservation it would have been prudent to deal with it decisively and move on, but which hasn’t happened. 
9. This is a true situation of במקום שאין איש. We have an aging rabbinate and the two new recruits hardly represent a large swathe of Stamford Hill. The extremists may make a lot of noise but there’s a huge crowd completely detached and whom UOHC has nothing to offer. If you don’t believe me go and see how GG restaurants are full of our locals, see how readily people will institute their own eiruvin and the terror tactics needed to stop them, listen to the contempt that our communal institutions are held in. These repeated incidents of abuse and the way we handle them blacken our name and do immense damage to our communal image externally, casting a shadow over our many positives, plus it erodes trust and confidence in our rabbonim and leadership internally. These points may not concern you or others at the top, but people are watching and drawing their own conclusions. Whether by ignoring and ridiculing rabbonim and communal bodies or leaving Yiddishkeit altogether.
10. Doing nothing was never an option though it might have worked in the past. But not anymore. Ban smartphones as much as you like but the statuses tell a different story and I can assure you that people don’t pull out flip phones when they’re chatting to me. I don’t have all the answers but few things are as black and white as the impunity we as a community allow for abusers. And I can only repeat במקום שיש חילול השם אין חולקין כבוד לרב.

Kol tuv

[Reb Tickle]