Neil Bantlemann Guilty!!

[hallier]

lulutooz wrote:
> Hallier -
> thanks for posting those links - much appreciated.

You are welcome - I can imagine that any teacher currently working in Indonesia must find this case very frightening.

[mamava]

I think the situation really highlights the vulnerability of international teachers and students, whatever the country. International schools don't have the community and social services that we often rely on in our home countries when something happens and we are often at the mercy of legal systems we don't understand and may not be transparent. Schools need to take steps to ensure that children are protected, and also that teachers are as well. The recent case of the teacher that molested children all over the world before killing himself showed that we are all vulnerable and need to take every precaution possible.

[lookingforlefty]

Teachers are the lowest-class form of western expat, and so we are never really safe. We are always at the mercy of the corrupt rich people we serve. Neil Bantlemann's case is remarkable because he had all the advantages: white, good school, well-connected, administrator. He shouldn't have had his life ruined in this horrible way. The odds were heavily against it.

But multitudes of other teachers without those advantages have had their lives ruined by bad schools and bad countries in less obvious ways (or more obvious, if you look back on some of the more notorious incidents of the past two years).

[auntiesocial]

PsyGuy, you are forgetting that the Indonesians have not even applied their own standards of jurisprudence in this case. You can take a moral relativist stance all you like, in this case it makes you a moral coward. By your standards of logic I could accuse you of the same crimes here on this forum and you would have no way of proving your innocence. I can go on to suggest - like you have - that my accusation alone should tarnish your reputation. You should now never work in an international school again and rightly so. You would very quickly change your tune if I discovered your personal details and spread rumours about you.

It strikes me as completely insane that you can use second hand information to make dogmatic value judgements about a school, accuse posters of being 'admin cheerleaders' by their posts, yet remain defiant against a tide of evidence suggesting that this whole case is a cynical money grab.

Just what is it that you are trying to prove to people on this forum? I stronly believe that you need to seek professional help.

[hallier]

Posters may be interested in this link. Kristof is a prominent journalist in the USA, esp. in the area of humans rights.

https://twitter.com/NickKristof/status/ ... 69760?s=04

There is a reference to the McMartin Trials in the 80s in these tweets. There are definite parallels with this case. In both the trial of the JIS cleaners, and the trial of the 2 teachers, the defence had expert witnesses from overseas come in to explain the McMartin trials and what is now best practice in regards to interviewing children about suspected sexual abuse. Sadly, all of their evidence was ignored.

What follows is a statement that has been released by Neil Bantleman.

Neil Bantleman’s statement

"I would like to start by thanking everyone who has stood by Tracy and me and our families over the last nine months and who continue to do so. We are truly humbled by the support and love that we have received and take great comfort in knowing we have so many wonderful people in our lives. This has solidified our faith in the goodness of humankind. I feel fortunate to have the unconditional love of my beautiful wife, family and friends and could ask for or want nothing more. The individuals, groups, friends and strangers alike working on our behalf to share our story, to fight for us and for justice have been truly heart warming and reassuring. I thank you all. We must continue to be strong and to fight for justice and truth; failing to do so is a threat to freedom and justice everywhere.

The decision rendered on Thursday April 2nd by the panel of judges was an appalling demonstration of the current state of the judicial capacity of the South Jakarta District Court. We are saddened by the decision, yet not entirely surprised. We have become painfully aware of the challenges for those seeking justice and the lack of consideration for actual evidence or expert testimony. World-renowned experts presented the judges with current research, scientifically based medical evidence and examples of best practices. Yet they chose to ignore it all and be willfully blind to the truth.

The panel of judges dismissed every expert and factual witness presented by the defense, as well as the submission of exculpatory evidence and relevant information that casts serious doubts on the allegations of abuse. What the judges chose to admit was unscrutinized and unsubstantiated information from a police dossier that contained numerous flaws in theory, practice and legality. The inclusion of testimony from an entirely different case, which was never entered into court proceedings, medical conclusions that violated doctors’ oaths, and opinions based on hearsay from unqualified clinical psychologists acting outside their areas of expertise are just some examples of the multiple issues that exist. This decision was merely based on a repetition of information copied from a police dossier. No valid legal consideration was used to draw their conclusions. When the entirety of a defense is ignored, twisted or omitted, this must raise serious questions as to how anyone could ever put forth a defense?

The judges held the trial behind closed doors, allegedly due to child protection issues, but then completely violated this article of law by releasing the names of all of the alleged victims, and the acts allegedly committed against them, during the open court reading of the verdict. This demonstrates a complete lack of understanding or commitment to the fundamentals of child protection. Standard practices, such as the embassies’ attempts to gain access to the court, the defense discussing the case in the media and writing letters to the district court, and the submission of thousands of letters of support, were grossly misinterpreted as tactics to force a certain decision and to intimidate the judges. The same actions were then listed as aggravating factors in the sentencing.

This conviction is a malicious attack on Ferdi and on me. We were the targets of a judge who seemed to be set on seeking vengeance on an entire school community, the media, and international diplomatic representatives. This decision was not based on legal facts but was the culmination of a highly questionable investigation, prosecution and court proceedings. It is our hope that these proceedings will shed light on the many issues that have arisen and instigate change in police and legal processes within Indonesia.

For those charged with the responsibility for change, the time to act is now. Don’t let the mistakes of the past affect the potential for the future. We are hopeful that the next level of the judicial system will scrutinize this case carefully and seek to rectify the numerous issues and errors committed, setting Indonesia back on the path to true justice and the elimination of corruption and evil. For the sake of all, justice must be served. Our fight is not over yet. I have lived in Indonesia for 5 years and never once has my admiration and respect diminished for the community of Indonesians I have met; it has only grown stronger each and every year. Though I have been tested and tried, and treated inhumanely like this, I still have faith in Indonesia. The people of Indonesia are better than the label of a corrupted country. Together, Indonesians will break free from the stigma – letting truth and justice be upheld in the struggle to live a righteous life."

[PsyGuy]

@pds86

Who cares if they came for the socialists, the topic is criminal child sex offenders. My problem is why skip ahead to socialists, lets take care of the criminals first.

@wrldtrvlr123

Who got "lynched" did someone make these guys fly (they may have sailed) to Indonesia at gun point or bound in chains? These ITs were convicted by a seated jurist in a internationally recognized court of competent jurisdiction, not just "someone".

@mamava

That would be generally true domestically as well. A private/independent domestic school doesnt generally have the resources and services to handle a similar scenario. A domestic school would likely produce similar results at the school level. Parents and parent groups have a lot of wait, ownership and as a result admin/management has to listen to them, and if you had the same accusations a domestic school and IS would have similar procedures and practices.

ISs arent supposed to have a wealth of social services and resources they are in the IE business not the legal and social justice business. At institutions world wide, if your wrongfully accused the likely resources you will get is some basic assistance by the legal counsel.

This will sound cold, because it is but its cheaper, easier, and more expedient to replace ITs than it is to protect and defend them, especially in barring misconduct scenarios.

@lookingforlefty

I agree, a lot of bad things happen to ITs that they effectively can never work in a region or country again. The opposite of that coin though is that it is incredibly easy for predators to thrive in IE. Most ISs only require a western/home CRB clearance, and if an IT ghosts a particular IS or region, its very difficult to properly investigate. Embassy schools typically have a contact with the embassy that can query various international databases, but that typically requires an already advanced incident and investigation. It also can not be ignored that there are HOS/admins/management that conceal misconduct so as not to effect the "business" model of the IS.

@auntiesocial

That is common however, Indonesia is pretty sloppy and loose with its judicial system for everyone. Thats what happens in corrupt regions, does any IT think Indonesia is a bastion of fairness?

You could accuse me, but I dont need to prove my innocence, your not a jurist and this forum isnt a judicial court. These guys had their day in court ( a bad day, and an unfair day, but their day none the less, and they do have several appeals), but they were convicted, and sentenced thats a significantly different declaration than an empty accusation.

There is nothing more than second hand information except for a few pieces of FACTUAL information, including:
1) There is an accusing victim.
2) They were convicted.
Those facts are not second hand information, they arent even first account opinions, those are facts. Are you disputing the position that those two points are facts?

What is my position? To articulate it again, simply its that no one (save a few people), neither you or I, or any other . on this forum, int he media etc truly, definitively KNOWS what happened and what the reality of this event is. The convicted could very well have actually committed these crimes or some portion of them, and no one on this forum can claim with absolute 100% certainly regardless of how improbable or unfair the judicial process was that the events were utterly impossible.

@hallier

Sounds like the typical condemning denial of every convicted criminal. "Im innocent, its not fair, etc."

[PsyGuy]

Too the IS admins/management:

Knowing what you know, and the fact that the parties were found guilty and convicted would YOU personally hire the accused for your IS?
Defend them to your ownership, parents, students, faculty, community, and to your accrediting bodies inspectorate?

[pds86]

I think you missed my point. It's nothing to do with socialists at all. It's the opening line from a poem about cowardice re: speaking up for those you believe have been done wrong by. Google it then pretend you knew about it already.

In my opinion they have been let down by the judicial system there. My opinion - based on what I have read about the evidence. Of course that's not the full evidence but it's enough to form a preliminary judgment, in my own mind anyway. You, having seen the same evidence, have disagreed. That's fine but merely repeating your point about they have been tried by a court of law ad nauseam isn't going to change my opinion, or probably many others' either.

Incidentally, do you have a pathological need to have the last word in any argument or discussion?

[Mr DepTrai]

Wonder if he will face charges back home. Definitely in the US, he would be brought up on charges. Even if it was a BS trial in Indo. Some POS d.a. would be looking to make a name and would stick charges on him the instant he stepped on US soil, if he was from US.

[hallier]

I am not trying to convince PG - his mind is made up.

However, I thought I'd summarise with 5 reasons why I am convinced the verdict is wrong. I will later describe the evidence that was cited by the judge in her reasons for the verdict.

I think this is important, because the idea of fellow international school teachers not throwing whatever support they can behind these innocent teachers makes my stomach churn.

None of what follows is conjecture - it was all presented in the court. Anything that I claim that the prosecution used as evidence was read out by the judge when she gave her verdict.

As you may know, the judge refused to let any of the media, human rights representatives and consular officials enter the court room. She also gagged anyone from commenting publicly on the case. So the only way we can know what evidence she heard is from what she read out at the end of the case (she took about 8 hours, counting breaks) or what the defence at the end of the case presented to the media.

Basically, from her speech/presentation, the world got to hear the complete prosecution case against the 2 men. There is nothing that happened in the court that was used to convict the 2 men that we do not know - the judge told us in her closing presentation.

Here, first, are my 5 reasons why I think the verdict was wrong.

1. The location of the alleged assaults was in a public space. At first, the police claimed publicly that the assaults took place in Bantleman's office and the faculty lounge. It then emerged that these spaces had glass walls and were in some of the busiest sections of the elementary school. According to the police, the assaults took place during the school day.

Later, the police tried to speak of there being a ‘secret room'; however, they were seen on CCTV camera being shown by one of the victims where the assault took place. Watch this clip – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaDvrPsqs-s

It would be impossible to commit multiple assaults in such a visible, high traffic, location during the school day.

Unless you want to believe that the police and the mother of one of the children mis-spoke and meant to say they took place in the so far undiscovered secret room.

In her summing up, the judge referred to a secret room, an office and a toilet (in the case of Tiong).

For the record, not one person who works in the space shown in the video were interviewed by the police. Testimony of those who work in that space during the trial was rejected by the court.

2. The police said the accused produced a ‘magic stone’ from the air and inserted it into the child so that the child would not feel pain when raped. This stone was never produced. Nor was any evidence given of any pills or tablets in existence that would anesthetize a child from the top of the legs to the stomach.

The judge accepted the existence of the magic stone as part of the teachers' modus operandi, stating that the stone was used exactly as I described - to anesthetize the victims. In this way, the men could rape the boys without the children making any noise.

3. The only medical examinations that found signs of abuse were at the Police Hospital in Jakarta. The child whose mother initiated the case was examined in 2 other facilities in Jakarta, as well as one in Singapore.

These places found no evidence of rape. Consider the physical damage that multiple rapes would do to 5-6 yr old boys.

The court rejected the medical evidence of all the hospitals bar the police hospital.

The court also rejected medical testimony that such rapes (one child was found by the court to have been raped by 5 cleaners and the 2 teachers over a period months) would cause extreme physical damage and possibly cause the death of a child - they would certainly prevent the child from returning to the classroom without showing any physical/emotional distress.

The judge did not explain why she rejected the other testimony, except to say that the Singaporean evidence was not permissible for use in an Indonesian court - this was despite the fact that it was certified by the High Court in Singapore and used in a defamation suit by the teachers against one of the mothers that the teachers won.

4. The boys attended school during and after the times of the alleged rapes (the police never specified an exact date for the rapes; rather, they said the rapes occurred over a period of many months). At no time during those months did the children show any physical or emotional distress or fear about being at school. They were captured on film and in images being happy and playful at school.

Testimony was given by the boys' teachers, as well as parents of their classmates, attesting to this. All of this evidence was ignored by the court. The judge offered no explanation for ignoring this evidence in her explanation to the court for the guilty verdict.

5. Peer reviewed expert psychologists (I think one was from Oxford University) were called by the school to talk about the best practice methods necessary to interview children about suspected sex abuse. A lot of these methods arose after the fiasco in the USA of the McMartin Trials in the 1980s when "suggestive questioning" by well-meaning counselors and psychologists led to children claiming they had been raped when in fact the rapes did not occur. The McMartin case has terrible parallels with the JIS case, right down to the existence of secret rooms.

This expert testimony was ignored by the court - when they were giving evidence, the judges questioned their expertise. When announcing her verdict, the judge did not explain why she did not accept their opinions.

However, she did accept the evidence from the local psychologists – including one who claimed that the fact that Bantleman only had sex with his wife once a week was a possible explanation for sodomising little boys. His ‘rationale’ was that normal men needed to have sex 2-3 times a week, and he would be seeking a ‘release’. The judge stated this when announcing her verdict.



To Mr DepTrai, welcome to the ISR Forum - I would suggest it is highly unlikely that the Canadian authorities will pursue Bantleman. Both the US and British embassies have publicly criticised the verdict. Although the Canadians have been silent, I would think that their prosecutors would only proceed if they had confidence in the evidence used to convict Bantleman.

This was the evidence. There is nothing else:

1. Three 5-6 yr old boys said they were assaulted. This is certainly the most credible evidence produced by the prosecution. However, the major problem with this evidence is that (1) the stories changed over time, including in the court room and in published witness statements (2) the methods used to interview the children did not follow the procedures currently used in the USA or Canada (or any nation that uses contemporary methods to interview suspected victims of child abuse).

In most jurisdictions, the testimony of children that young can not be used as evidence without corroborating evidence.

2. One piece of corroborating evidence was the medical testimony from the police hospital. As I outlined earlier, the mother who initiated the case against the teachers went first to two doctors in Jakarta who did not find evidence of rape. She then went to Singapore and got the same response. She got the diagnosis she was looking for at the police hospital (who also subsequently found the other 2 victims were raped. Surprise surprise.).

3. In Bantleman's office, the police found some rope and an orange sash. They claimed the rope and the sash were used to tie the victims up. This was the only physical evidence used against the 2 men.

The police did take a blender from Bantleman's office and a picture taken of the court room did show the blender being in the evidence box (with the sash and rope).

Here is an extract from the Sydney Morning Herald which might explain why the blender was presented in the court room. The journalist directly quotes from the witness statements in this extract (I do not know whether these exact words were used in court).

"One of the boys alleges that school principal, (I am removing the name) mixed a blue-coloured drink to drug the children, then videotaped sex attacks. XXXX has been questioned a number of times by police but has never been recategorised as a "suspect," remaining a "witness" only. One boy said in his statement that, when he refused to drink the blue drink, "the boss" (referring to Mr Bantleman), snapped his fingers and a magic stone appeared in his hand.

"The boss would get a magic stone that the boss would take from the sky," the boy said, according to the report of the witness statement. The stone would be inserted into the boy to anaesthetise him before he was raped."

Source: http://www.smh.com.au/world/bizarre-det ... 0hww3.html

Bantleman's defence was that he used the blender to make blueberry smoothies. However, the judge did not bring the blender up when she announced her verdict, preferring the explanation that the stone was used simply as a suppository being inserted into the childrens' buttocks.

It has been suggested that the judge ignored the blender because the prosecution did not want to pursue the Principal, who was a US citizen and female.

4. Bantleman only had sex with his wife once a week. The Indonesian psychologist saw this as a reason why he would rape little boys. This was used as evidence to prove Bantleman's guilt.

5. Is the 'magic stone' evidence? It was mentioned 4 times by the judge when she announced her verdict. Of course, an example of such a stone was never produced in the court as evidence.


Mr DepTrai - I suspect that when Bantleman returns to Canada (hopefully soon), he will be fine. Any prosecutor who tried to convict him on that evidence would not only be laughed out of court, but would also probably lose their job.

I was bemused to read PG's statement that the 2 men "were convicted by a seated jurist in a internationally recognised court of competent jurisdiction, not just "someone"?"

In reality, Indonesia is 'internationally recognised' for having an incompetent and corrupt judicial system. It took me a couple of minutes to find this. You can also find out more at https://www.transparency.org/

http://www.gallup.com/poll/157073/corru ... nesia.aspx
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/20/world ... d=all&_r=0
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/joko-wido ... mdawv.html

I did laugh out loud when I saw the reply to @pds86 post.

Here is the poem, written by Pastor Martin Niemöller about the cowardice of German intellectuals following the Nazis' rise to power.

"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."

This did become a rather long post and probably far too verbose for you English teachers out there - sorry about that.

Well done for getting to the end of it:)

[hallier]

PsyGuy wrote:
> Too the IS admins/management:
>
> Knowing what you know, and the fact that the parties were found guilty and
> convicted would YOU personally hire the accused for your IS?
> Defend them to your ownership, parents, students, faculty, community, and
> to your accrediting bodies inspectorate?

I am not an administrator.

Will administrators hire Bantleman if he is released? Many will not.

However, a lot of heads of school in this region have publicly stated their support for him.

And the school was just re-accredited by WASC and CIS. In their report, the bodies commended JIS for their handling of the crisis and publicly supported the accused men.

Bantleman has also been publicly supported by both the owners and administrators of his former school in Canada, Weber Academy.

Does that mean they'd give him a job? You'd hope so, but you may be right. I would hope that schools that espouse the values of justice, compassion, integrity and resilience would employ him (and his wife) and make the case to their stakeholders. However, as we have seen in the many reports of schools on this site, the behaviour of administrators is often very different from the values they stick on their schools' websites.

However, I imagine employability is the least of the poor man's problems right now.

[wrldtrvlr123]

hallier wrote:
> PsyGuy wrote:hallier wrote:
> I am not trying to convince PG - his mind is made up.
------------------------
The sad part is that he actually probably agrees with everyone else but at this point he just can't resist playing the attention wh***.

[EUExplorer]

Exactly, World Traveler! I learned to ignore Psychoguy years ago. He's dangerous for this forum because about half the "advice" he gives is accurate, the other half complete nonsense. He must be a lonely dude with a lot of time to spare.

[PsyGuy]

@pds86

I never read it, never heard of that poem.
I dont know if there has been anything morally done wrong. The convicted may very well be guilty, regardless of the fairness or impartiality of the criminal proceedings.

They may have been "let down by the judicial system" but thats the norm in Indonesia. Legal protections in Indonesia work best for the affluent and the influential. Thats just how it is, and any IT traveling to Indonesia should or should have known that, and accepted those risks when they made the journey.

@Mr DepTrai

Not likely in the US, and if so it would be an assistant US attorney not a district attorney that would file and prosecute the case., the extraterritorial sexual exploitation of children is a federal crime. It would be a VERY difficult case in this situation to secure a conviction, an element of the crime requires the accused to travel with the intent of engaging in a sexual relationship with a child. An IT would easily make the defense that they were traveling with the intent of working. That doesnt mean some prosecutor couldnt files charges and try the case anyway.
Canada has a similar law in Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 7(4.1). which grants extraterritorial prosecution of sexual offenses against children. In general a crown prosecutor in Alberta is unlikely to file charges in such a case, but given the media nature and the status of the accused as an educator it could happen.

@hallier

Supporting someone verbally does not mean they would hire him.
The provincial authority in Alberta has revoked Neils teaching credential in the interim pending an investigation.

@wrldtrvlr123

I dont actually, I dont believe the trial was fair, but that doesnt make the accused innocent. Personally what I think is that there was some inappropriate misconduct, something happened, what I dont know.

[sitka]

The trial tells us a hell of a lot more about the judicial system in Indonesia than it does about the guilt or innocence of Bantlemann.

The guy was railroaded in a kangaroo court.