Rabbi Feldman’s Far-Fetched Fumfer

Fumfer: A Yiddish word meaning to mumble or be evasive.

Rabbi Aharon Feldman

Rabbi Aharon Feldman

The Daas Torah blog of Rabbi Daniel Eidensohn just posted: Seminary Scandal: Israeli Beis Din Correspondence – Rav Aharaon Feldman letter of July 31.

Almost a week earlier (7/25/14), the Israeli Beis Din (IBD) of R. Mendel Shafran issued a second ruling proclaiming they, rather than the Chicago Beis Din (CBD), had jurisdiction to rule on the safety of the seminaries controlled by Elimelech Meisels.

The IBD claimed Rabbi Aharon Feldman represented  the plaintiffs, by which they meant the students alleging abuse. Feldman is the Rosh Yeshiva (Dean) of Ner Israel Rabbinical Rabbinical College in Baltimore (NIRC) and a member of the influential Aguda Moetzes (Council of Torah Sages of Agudath Israel of America).

Elimelech Meisels

Elimelech Meisels

In this manner the IBD created the appearance of jurisdiction and a fair representation of both sides. Both claims are utterly fraudulent.

Neither the victims, nor the CBD ever designated Feldman as their representative. When a victim’s attorney protested to Feldman he just replied by email, “Thank you.” When members of the CBD protested, Feldman went silent on the phone. This silence is an admission by Feldman that he was not designated as a representative by either the individual victims or the Chicago BD.

For argument’s sake let us suppose that Feldman imagined he was designated. If so, he is guilty of extraordinary legal malpractice. He never spoke up for the victims or the Chicago BD during the deliberations of the IBD. In fact is is possible he did not bother to attend the evidentiary phase of the IBD. The record is clear. According to the July 25th ruling of the IBD, “After we heard the principals and some staff of each of the seminaries separately for many hours, we reached a decision.” That’s it folks! There is no reference to a single word of testimony from any of the students or Feldman as their purported representative.

scales of justice and childIf Feldman was denied the opportunity to speak, he is obliged to protest the corrupt misconduct of the IBD. If he chose not to speak he owes the victims and the CBD an apology for betraying their trust. If he spoke and the IBD misrepresented the proceedings, Feldman again has an obligation to protest the conduct of the proceedings. No matter how you cut it, the report is a transparent travesty even if you believe it accurately reflects the proceedings.

Knowing he is being exposed, Feldman wrote an extraordinary letter to the IBD on July 31 which was posted on the Daas Torah blog:

Rabosai [gentlemen],

The Chilul Hashem r.l. [desecration of G-d’s name, G-d have mercy] is spreading; people have lost their emunas chachomim [faith in the rabbis]; I just heard of two girls who went off the derech [“OTD,” off the religious path] because of this affair. We have to get the Chicago BD to rescind their letter. The only way to do this is to have a joint BD listen to the accusations. Is Rav Shafran willing to do this? They are not at present but I think I can convince them. Bedieved [as an after-the-fact fallback] I have the following suggestion. If I get the accusers to come together, will Rav Shafran agree to listen to them bemoshav tlasa [formally reconvening as a body of three]? This will not stop the effect of the CBD’s letter, but at least it will stop the charges against you that you refused to listen to the accusers. Would Sunday night be OK for this?

I was surprised that Rabbi Malinowitz said (as I understood him) at our conference call that I never apprised the BD that there are serious accusations. Rav Malinowitz asked me at that time (and so I immediately wrote myself a note, which I have) to supply the BD with the names of the accusers. Yet a psak [ruling] was given out without this. I am sure there is a good reason for this, but it certainly needs an explanation, not a denial that it ever happened.

Furthermore, you never apologized for having said publicly that you asked the CBD many times to supply you with information about the accusations and they did not. You could have explained this was a misunderstanding but to insist that you did contact them when R. Zev Cohen claimed so forcefully that you did not (I don’t think a person like R.. Zev Cohen would be able to lie in this manner), made them lose trust in you. It would help if you would apologize to them for this.

Aharon Feldman

Tipping the Scales 1Wow! Wow! Wow! In one letter, Feldman concedes he was never formally appointed as a representative of victims, that the CBD never passed over jurisdiction, and the IBD never considered the question of sex abuse by Meisels (let alone enabling by other staff). In fact one wonders what the IBD discussed with seminary administrators and staff. Did they just spend hours having the staff do an infomercial. As chazal (talmudic rabbis) said of such anarchy, les din v’les dayan (Midrah Rabba, parshat Bereshis), “There is no justice and there is no judge.”

Yet Feldman is still trying to patch things up in order to get the Chicago BD to rescind its rulings. Feldman cannot be trusted as an advocate of students; he is clearly most interested in finding a way for the seminaries to survive. He is so interested that he is desperately trying to find ways to bolster the IBD even though he has all but accused R. Malinowitz of lying, the IBD of not having any legal claim to jurisdiction, and the finding to be defective because of complete non-representation of the plaintiffs themselves or their claim of abuse! Yet he is trying to patch things up and portray himself as a victim of others.

Feldman’s flailing, far-fetched fumfer fails the smell test and will not wash.

Advertisements

98 thoughts on “Rabbi Feldman’s Far-Fetched Fumfer

  1. cant help from being amused by the litvish world they spend 20000 dollars plus to get their daughters sex ed while the chasidishe boys preteens and teens get theirs in Talmud torah or the mikva gratis

  2. Rav Feldman continues his definition of Emunas Chachomim as papal infallibility that must never be questioned. Between his response to Rav Slifkin, and this new letter, he seems happy to blame the victim as long as it can perpetuate an image of the Rabbis that the rabbis themselves are unable to live up to. He needs to reexamine his assumptions.

    • Particularly the assumption that nobody notices or cares about dishonesty. I think most people would rather have fallible leaders than dishonest ones — who, of course, are all the more fallible.

      • Just Dont Get it. IBD repeats over and over that they requested info and never got it. Yet they issued a definitive ruling. What gives? At least they should’ve stated that due to the lack of forthcoming information they conclude….

  3. What is the Rabbinic Hebrew euphemism for CYA? (“CYA” — an acronym for a vulgar phrase meaning roughly, “to present or invent such facts as tend to indicate that the blame lies with someone else.”)

    • in hebrew the term is כסתח – which is a literal translation without the Y part
      what makes the term especially useful is that it can be conjugated

  4. I just posted the link to this letter just this morning on “Updates on Meisles Seminaries” and had the same reaction- “wowww!”

    How utterly embarrassing for the IBD.

  5. How backwards! If anyone went “off the derech” after what happened, it wasn’t BECAUSE of the Chicago Bais Din, but rather DEPITE the Chicago Bais Din! I have tremendous admiration and gratitude for the CBD for the courageous way they handled this whole affair. They are the true representatives of the Ribbono Shel Olam in this saga.

      • I also am lost as to who’s on first, what’s on second, and I don’t know is on third. There seems to be so many people involved that I don’t even understand what each one is trying to say or prove. I’ll admit I haven’t followed up much since the original letter. It would be nice to sum up what the two sides are fighting for and where does each one stand. Concerning the daas Torah blog, as long as he can’t take criticism , and he censors many comments, then you can forget getting the truth from there, that’s why I’m here.

      • At the request of the commenter, I redacted out the first part of the comment re speculations about motives. Yerachmiel Lopin

        I wonder when the Gedolim will realize that more people go off the derech from their own and Rabbanim’s dishonesty, hypocrisy and misrepresenting Torah values, than from seeing that Gedolim or Rabbanim are not perfect.

        The Chillul Hashem that is created when Gedolim and Rabbanim act with dishonesty, hypocrisy and apologetics, as was seen in the Slifkin case, is what turns people off.

        I agree with Yael that if anyone is going off the Derech is not because of the Chicago Beis Din, but because of the Israel Beis Din. It is because after a clear step was taken to protect PEOPLE, Rabbanim stepped in and quickly scrambled to protect AN INSTITUTION, and an institution with lots of money no less, and one which was clear to most people as rotten to the core with a culture of protecting the money source/boss/owner/Meisels. People are realizing that Rabbanim have more of an interest in protecting money, their own jobs and the jobs of their relatives or friends, than of protecting the people they are supposed to be leading, serving and protecting. And that is why people are going off the derech and losing their “Emunas Chachamim.” Because Rabbanim keep acting like dirty politicians and when caught in the act, retreat to “But we have the word of Hashem and you have to listen to us unquestioningly.” People realize this is not Torah, but dirty politics, and they lose trust in Rabbanim and in the Torah they represent.

        • All I know, Mr. Lopin, is that your blog shows complete disrespect for anybody you don’t agree with. You and the comments you allow speak about great men in an extremely disrespectful way. And besides, there are halachos of Lashon Haroh, you know! One of the conditions is that you intentions are completely 100% toeles, with no other motive. If you are missing that one condition, it is completely prohibited, even if it was to save someone, and it would put you on the level of mesaprei lashon haroh which is k’ilu oved avoda zorah. From the style of your writing, and the comments you allow, it would seem you are missing this condition.

          This blog is presenting both sides. It is presenting each sides letters. Not like your blog where there is a clear agenda.

          I really doubt either beis din is making people go off the derech. Whether you agree with them or not,they are all acting l’shem Shomayim. If they would argue it out with each other, we would just here the end result and everything would work out fine. It is the blogs who degrade the stature of our Rabbis who cause people to go off the derech. And the Chofetz Chaim writes about this too! (Aren’t you proud the Chofetz Chaim talks about you so much! You are the perfect example for his sefer!)

          Rabbi Feldman shlita is a tremendous Talmid Chochom and a genius in worldly matters. He does what he feels and knows is write. You talk about him in such a degrading manner. You post comments that he is acting because he must have relatives working there. Mr. Lopin, the same way a monkey cannot understand how a human thinks, you will never understand Rabbi Feldman. Period.

          • You have done everything but address the substance of my questions: what was the logic of Rabbi Feldman. When beis din is corrupted by rabbonim who sign on representatives but they never got that authorization you have a mega-problem. Rabbonim get respect when they behave bikovodik. As long as people like Meisels can get away with their shtick with the connivance of their staff, the toeles is compelling. Also, in light of the fact that all allegations I have made are widely known to the affected parties it is not loshon horah even without toeles.

            • for some reason it seems that istrael is more lenient on these matters we have mondrowitz who came decades ago we have dovid weinberger who we are privileged to havein yerushalayim ir hakodesh i think that rabbi malinowitz has been here long enough and has tried to stop this abuse for many years but realizes in this country it is not easy one of the articles has a few girls asking about pogrow in beit shemesh he gives or gave a shiur in rabbi malinowitzes shul Rabbi MALINOWITZ has recieved calls and e mails regarding pogrow but as usual the victims do not continue with there allegations for fear of shidduchim or retaliation by the culprits so it his hard to try and fight a battle that you know that you cant or wont be able to continue just the same with the therapist who signed an agreement after being caught by dr levits and rabbi rubin in har nof and rav dovid ostrov that he will never see women or counsel or teach women again but six years later he is still seeing women in his givat shaul practice because the rabbonim know that if it goes to court or bais din the victims will be too scared to come forward due to embarrasment to their families if there is a way to set up an anonymous way of complaints to authoroties that would be great as everyone commented these culprits are smart witty charmimg manipulative and it could be mind controlling so the victims are petrified to do anything Rabbi ZECHARYA GREENWALD also had some students that had a kesher with pogrow so maybe a strong joint venture is necessary to help this overall situation hatzlacha to all have an easy fast and may mashiach come and all evil stop

            • A suggestion: Punctuation was devised in order to help one’s writing be understood.

            • I agree or am not directly informed about most of the above. But now, R. Malinowitz is not the strongest of advocates for abuse victims. In fact he has hounded anti-abuse activists in Beit Shemesh, and even punished unrelated tzedakkahs to get at those who are anti-abuse advocates.

            • i just read rabbi malinowitzes letter in letter bais who gave the rabbanim in chicago the right to accept the edus of these girls is there a telephone directory in the shulchan aruch of who to call when you are abused RAV MOSHE SHTERNBUCH says to go to the police are they more musmach than dayanim in chicago RAV MALINOWITZ IS A very big askan and special person i must have misunderstood can someone explain where i misunderstood thanks

            • Yes, R. Malinowitz has been on the wrong side of the abuse issue in Beis Shemesh. However to be fair, R. Gartner and R. Shafran are better than most Haredi rabbonim is recognizing the serious damage of child sexual abuse and sometimes supporting going directly to the police. So why are they disagreeing with Chicago about the danger in these seminaries from other staff who turned a blind eye to Meisels’ misconduct? I am guessing ther are at least four factors all of which relate to the fact that these victims are young adult women. Like many of the commenters that first came out in droves they see the young women as to blame, as truly willing and not victims in any sense at all. Yes they disapprove of Meisels. They have never once defended Meisels. But they don’t understand grooming, enabling, the workings of charismatic control, and the fact that these encounters for these victims are in fact extremely damaging to many of them.

              At the same time they are too concerned about mosdos, (organizations/institutions) and jobs. Like many others who genuinely disapprove of abuse, there is a feeling that yaadeinu lo shafach (our hands are clean) — that serial abuse can happen with nobody else responsible. And they keep coming back to the idea that institutions and jobs cannot be endangered. It is this totally uninformed and unbalanced thinking that seems to be driving the IBD thinking.

            • Exactly.

              Reuven, I remember your past comments very clearly. If you care to continue your truly *pointless* questions/assumptions on any of this topic, then please do not do it here.

              This is not the first time we have asked you to only share on this blog if it has substance to it. Again, it lessens the quality of the blog. Please do your “homework” like Lopin and others have and we’d be more than happy to hear your valuable information.

            • I absolutely agree that the shtar berurin is necessary to know who is actually in the right as far as the various sumchuyos of the respective bate din.

              I do not agree, and I would like to see mekoros, as to your definition of bes din kavua. My knowledge of the gemaras and CM does not jive with the claim that a history of ten years and some vague acceptance by the clall constitute a bes din kavua.

              The reason I responded the way I did to the term jurisdiction is not because it is in in english. Rather, it is because it is not a halachik term and therefore has no meaning in dine torah between jews.

              Bes din kavua is indeed something that exists and it is precisely that definition that I would like to see you be mivases.

              The heter for pikuach nefesh that allows reporting to the police must not be misrepresented. It allows yechidim to act OUTSIDE of the system of dine torah to protect from possible danger. Once said danger has been protected from than there is no such heter. If we are having bate din involved at all we are past the point where we are working OUTSIDE the system.
              Reply
              b/c says:
              Your comment is awaiting moderation.
              08/04/2014 at 12:50 pm
              In terms of the halacha we are dealing here with a kala dilo pasik and senu shmuaney (Yuma 85 as far as the chillul hashem aspect MK 17 for sanu (i think dont have sefarim with me)

              There is a takana of the geonim brought in the rama (see aruch hashulchan 408) to use passul edus which for our purposes is essentially an umdena where there is no possibility of koshe edus. The present case of course qualifies.

              That has NOTHING to do with the procedures for ta’not in front of a bes din. Women can also be litigants in a bes din and the rules of shelo bfnei ba’al din apply to them as wel

            • Ask either Rabbi Schwartz or Rabbi Feurst who are highly respected heads of the two batei din in Chicago representing the full Orthodox community the basis that their beis din functions. It was created through the approval of the entire Chicago rabbinate to be the community beis din for issues of abuse. A shter berurim is only relevant to the sides who agree to it and for the parameters that they agree to decide.. It is not clear who is the tovea and who the nitva for the Israeli beis din and what is the specific case.
              No one who is familiar with cases of abuse thinks that it can be dealt with by traditional beis din procedures. It involves different rules of evidence, the use of outside trained experts and the welfare of the community not merely the litigants.

            • So am I correct in saying that
              rabbi/Mr. Lopin admits that he does not understand the halachos or why abuse cases should be different and to what extent that is so.

              You rely on the existence and practices of the CBD as the guideline as to what is and what is not halacha in such cases.

              That R Malinowitz has challenged their procedure as non halachik does not create even a safek in your mind that the CBD has acted absolutely correctly.

              I remind you that in the same tshuva in Igros Moshe (2/7) that you quoted above he states that if the investigating body does not find clear evidence than the fellow in question retains his chezkas kashrus (which leaves the laws of lashon hara for example in place)

              The IBD has declared that they have no clear evidence against anyone besides for Miesels himself.

              It is only partially true that there is no dine mamonos aspect to this case as the damage done to ones financial standing while undoubtedly a grama and not actionable in bes din without tfisa does
              Reply
              b/c says:
              Your comment is awaiting moderation.
              08/04/2014 at 4:56 pm
              create a chiyuv in dine shamayim which is why tfisa is actionable post facto.

              Please do not act as if you have a grasp on the halacha aspects without the requisite grounding.

              That takes away nothing from your expertise with the various other issues involved and the previous track records of organizations in dealing with them.

            • To be mavhir I am not claiming that the laws of lashon hara apply to anyone in this case only that the onus of the proof is on the investigators as it is in ALL dine torah. That is what a chezkas kashrus entails. The IBD is assuming a chezkas kashrus for all the employees it does not have proof against JUST AS r moshe writes in CM 2/7

            • You keep on evading the question. In spite of several replies to earlier questions. As plain ordinary jews they can assume a chezkas kashrush but a beis din in Chicago invalidated that presumption with a psak, one based on evidence from complainants and with shatarei berurin by victims and Elimelech Meisels who testified and confessed to them. The essential question you keep on evading is who made these three outstanding lomdim into a beis din. To be a beis din they need a toveiah (a plaintiff). Without that they are just three learned rabbis with no more power to issue a beis din psak than shmeryl, beryl, yankel the tailors. They have never shown us a single signed piece of paper from victims or the Chicago Beis din filing a complaint and accepting the jurisdiction of the beis din. Show us the plaintiff before you call them a beis din. I will gladly address those other issues once you show us the proof they had a plaintiff to constitute themselves as a beis din.

            • That’s not true at all. There are plenty of times that batei dinim are involved and do not function acc to the halachic norms of beis din and from how you write you seem learned enough that you must know that. Not everything is based on pashut drisha vichakira. Many poskim hold you can even force a pshara baal karcho. Come on. And since when does pikuach nefesh only apply to yechidim(?!) and require you to go to the police if a beis din can take care of it better. Pikuach nefesh has no instructions, you do whatever is necessary. Just imagine if they didn’t go to beis din and instead these “problem girls” went straight to “arkaos”, we would have had another case of the “anti orthodox” legal system trying to make “an example” out of an innocent heilegeh mechanech who gave his life for the community, there would be no rabbinic backing, no one would know what to do and your comment would instead be criticizing them for not going to beis din. Please. Anyways if you’ve been reading the posts you’d see that apparently they did start a criminal investigation.

            • You obviously missed my point.

              And besides, you should brush up on you halachos a bit. You are transgressing one of the most serious forms of lashon haroh and motzi shem ra when you write about Rabonim the way you do. Even if it would be o.k. to write about the one who the allegations are against, to write about the Rabonim is completely prohibited. And according to chazal, lashon haroh is a worse offense than what Meislesis accused of!

            • 1. Motzi shem ra is not a synonym for loshon horah. One is a falsehood, the other isn’t. In truth, a dayan who misrepresents halachah and powers of BD is more corrosive to orthodox life than an individual molester. Similarly, enablers are worse than molesters. Only a small percentage of adults are lecherous. But they can function because of the many enablers.

              אלו דברים שאין להם שיעור
              חמרות לה”ר ורכילות ותירוצים בעד מוסדותיהם ופרנסתם נגד הנזוקין
              אלו דברים שאוכלים פירותיהם בעוה”ז ועונשם קימת לעוה”ב

      • He originally heard of the Meisels scandal from Rabbi Zev Cohen of the Chicago Beis Din at a closed door meeting of some rabbis at Torah Umesorah in May (over a month before the Chicago psak was issued on July 10th. At the time it is possible that Chicago was hoping to find a way to get Meisels out and the seminaries reformed without having to issue a psak advising against attending. Rabbi Feldman volunteered to help on the Israeli End. Before coming back to to Rosh Yeshiva to Neir Israel, he spent 25 years in Israel so Chicago might have felt he was especially well equipped to navigate the Israeli side. (I do not have the specifics of his offer offer or chicago’s wishes.

        I am going to guess that he contacted his son-in-law, R. Elimelech Kornfeldt, rav of the GRA shul in Beit Shemesh. Kornfeldt is close to R. Malinowitz in Beit Shemesh and may have brokered that connection. At some point Malinowitz seems to have assembled a Beis Din with Rabbis Shafran and Gartner and claimed to have Chicago authorization to take over the case. R. Feldman to his subsequent regret trusted R. Malinowitz, to whom he wrote his email complaining he had been misled into thinking he had Chicago authorization to represent them in BD. While I fault R. Feldman for not directly seeking written confirmation of his designation, I do believe he was misled into his role and is now renouncing it. After the fast is over in Israel, I expect to hear from Beit Shemesh residents about how R. Malinowitz has obstructed confronting the problem of sex abuse.

    • Yerachmiel,

      I’m not sure why you’re not posting more. First of all, I am happy you are friends with R’ Eidensohn and you guys quote each other a lot, but he is CLEARLY disagreeing with you. He is also, an admitted (previously) talmid and mispallel of Rabbi Malinowitz and biased in his favor. DT(Eidensohn) has stated that he goes with the IBD, ” I don’t understand what the CBD is doing or trying to do.” He also states he has a long response from the IBD that agrees with Malinowitz, again NONE of that proves anything. R’Malinowitz in his forceful Hebrew letter posted on DT states that he has proofs of I’m assuming e-mails and letters requesting the info from the CBD. So why don’t you (YL) and Eidensohn just post a screen shot of an e-mail from Malinowitz to the CBD, because the forceful letters saying, “I have proof and everyone else is lying…” don’t prove a thing. I also don’t really think, humbly, that the role of Rav Feldman is the biggest issue here. He is clearly not the toain for the victims. There is a question if he, Rav Feldman, made R’Malinowitz aware of the complaints against them and he alleges that the IBD is making mistakes. Yet, he is still backing the IBD and having them run the show as opposed to the CBD. Either possibility you’re right, it sound slike what Rav Feldman is doing “stinks.” But we’ve got bigger fish to fry.

      But the bigger issue is, is there any credibility to what the IBD is doing or is this just classic rabbinic hustling and sweeping it under the rug? According to Malinowitz it’s not, and according to you, me, apparently Rav Feldman, and a lot of others, it is. So, that is the bigger issue. Who is lying here? Did the IBD try to get info from the CBD and did they try to sit and have a real din with the victims? Where is Malinowitz’s proof? Those are the important questions

  6. Would it be possible to write a post on how this incident is being covered on haredi sites such as yeshivaworld news. When I emailed them about the lack of interest they wrote back “YWN does not cover any scandals – be it in the Lakewood, or in YU. There are plenty of websites dedicated to scandal.
    We pray that all victim of abuse receive the proper recovery / healing, and those who have not done so, to please call the authorities / police.
    YWN.”

    It seems to me that the media is shirking its responsibility in spreading awareness about this case.

    • Dear Sara,

      It is highly unlikely that any of the frum “news” websites will give any coverage to this story.

      Also, there has not, as far as I know, been any coverage in the secular press.

      Dorron Katzin

      • I know it is unlikely. The YWN site told me that their rabbis didn’t want the site to report on scandals. Why can’t pressure be brought to bear on these rabbis that if they run a site for frum people they have a responsibility as a news site to make people aware of things like these. Specially if it can save girls from going to a sem that could be run by inappropriate people.

  7. Daas torah blog has a long detailed response by Rabbi Malinowitz that is apparently so convincing that the author of the blog claims it makes the CBD look like thugs. Anyone want to take a crack at analyzing the response?

      • It’s ok we don’t need your hot air. From the outset you’re just looking to cause damage without knowing the facts. You make that very clear when you accept everything from CBD but when a letter comes out from R Malinowitz you make a stupid comment about not believing him. It is well known that all the members of CBD are like the “peels of garlic” compared to the members of IBD. You’re just a troublemaker ender the guise of protecting Jewish kinderlach but actually doing more harm than good.

        • I gather you don’t like me or garlic peels. Yes, I am more persuaded by the CBD. You are more persuaded by IBD. I am a troublemaker and the IBD is just fantastic. I am malicioius and they are totally l’shem shomayim. Do you have any facts or arguments to contribute to this discussion?

          • It is easier to attack the person than their arguments. This is a typical Yeshivish/Chareidi approach to handling emes that they don’t like.

    • ya. read all the comments on the daas torah blog. they hit the nail on the head about whats really going on. exactly what we all new. unfortunately most people were conned by _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ n’s follies.

    • You have 18-year-old girls being victims of a sexual predator while they are 5,000 miles away from home, who just happens to own the schools in which he finds his victims. You have the very quick “transfer” of control of the school to a friend of his. And you have Rabbonim squabbling about “jurisdiction,” with one Beis Din acting to protect future potential victims, and another acting to protect the 4 wealth-producing seminaries where the sexual offences occurred. Is it really that difficult to figure out what is going on, or who to trust? It doesn’t take “Daas Torah” to figure this out. It takes common sense.

  8. Yerachmiel, I just read R Malinowitz’s letter. It definitely requires a quick response. His claims fly in the face of what you’ve been saying this whole time (shtar berurin and all). People are starting to question the whole case-read some of the comments there. I tend to still agree with your version but it definitely needs explaining. Do you actually have a source in the CBD where you’ve been getting info? Either someone is lying or there’s been an extreme miscommunication. This whole thing has a rotten smell at this point.

    • It’s been a whole day later and nobody has produced this alleged shtar beirurin. Don’t you think that if they had it they would have produced it already? Enough words have been said in the IBD missive, but not one shred of proof that the shtar exists.

      And just what do you mean by “question the whole case”? Meisels already admitted it, so what’s left except for a determination of whether the sems are safe or not?

      One thing I agree is that there’s an extreme miscommunication in my opinion. How could the IBD believe that they are in charge of this? That’s one of many major communication problems.

  9. Yerachmiel, I just read R Malinowitz’s letter. It definitely requires a quick response. His claims fly in the face of what you’ve been saying this whole time (shtar berurin and all). People are starting to question the whole case-read some of the comments there. I tend to still agree with your version but it definitely needs explaining. Do you actually have a source in the CBD where you’ve been getting info? Either someone is lying or there’s been an extreme miscommunication. This whole thing has a rotten smell at this point.

    • I expect to have a reply up tomorrow. I am just stressed with other commitments till then. On first brush I am not persuaded but I agree it deserves a translation, analysis and commentary. Not that he does not attach any documents supporting his claims.

  10. Many of the chachomim from whom daasTorah exudes (supposedly) are totally out-of-touch with reality. How can a man who reports that he “heard”, about 2 girls who have gone astray, be taken seriously in an Halachic context?

  11. It gets better. R Eidensohn just put up a longer response from the full IBD. It seems this whole thing might just devolve into a fight of batei dinim while the victims and real issues just fall by the wayside. At this point there is just a lack of clarity. Someone needs to step forward with a verifiable timeline of the events.

    • “It seems this whole thing might just devolve into a fight of batei dinim while the victims and real issues just fall by the wayside.”

      “Torah True Judaism” and “Daas Torah” at its finest.

  12. You have 18-year-old girls being victims of a sexual predator while they are 5,000 miles away from home, with the sexual predator just happening to own and run the schools in which he finds his victims. You have schools with a culture of teachers and administrators looking away, putting their own jobs before the protection of students. You have the very quick “transfer” of control of the school to a friend of the sexual predator. And you have Rabbonim squabbling about “jurisdiction,” with one Beis Din acting to protect future potential victims, and another acting to protect the 4 wealth-producing seminaries where the sexual offences occurred. Is it really that difficult to figure out what is going on, or who to trust? It doesn’t take “Daas Torah” to figure this out. It takes common sense.

  13. If you read all the letters carefully it now looks like R Feldman was appointed by chicago as a shliach and became the hapless man in the middle. And it could be that he did sign a shtar berurin. This is what happens without a clear designation of responsibily/authority. One would think that in the modern era of communication at least this part could have been avoided. Very unfortunate.

  14. Ok- some major points everyone needs to take into consideration-

    1) we do not know details. Ppl keep saying “the CBD should do this and that etc”- there are REASONS why they havnt done certain obvious things (like give the IBD evidence etc).

    2) this guy “Yosef” slammed the CBD on “DaatTorah.com” calling r fuerst etc liars. Yosef, if you are reading this then pls do us all a favor and do your research like I very much have.

    I do not like hearing things second-hand. So I have been in touch directly with the CBD and IBD thru phone.

    In short, I was told by the IBD that:

    – they nvr got in touch with victims bc they see no point. No one (NO ONE) thinks Meisles is innocent. It is clear to ALL that he confessed and he was ridden of.
    – they feel they don’t need to jeopardize the entire seminary since they got rid of Meisles already. They had no interest in hearing whether the victims told teachers etc. NO INTEREST. There was NO investigation.
    – they think the claims of the Yarmush sale being a sham is nonsense.
    – they didn’t mention Meisles name in their original letter bc they felt his name was overly exploited and critizied and there was no point in continuing the emabrasent (in my humble opinion- this is ridiculous).
    – they do not feel staff knew about it (but they had no interest in asking the victims this, don’t worry).
    – they have asked the CBD for evidence (not sure why. They seemed to have come to a conclusion before they did proper research), but supposedly the CBD has ‘refused’ to give it (I am SURE there is good reason WHY).

    After getting off the phone with the CBD it was crystal clear that their objective is to save the seminaries. I can see why he’d want to…many staff members are innocent. They truly are…but the IVD did a ridiculous thing by coming to a verdict BEFORE an investigation.

    Ok. Just an update for ya’ll. Hope it helped anyone.

    • Ok, this makes no sense…both Batei Din have no idea what theyre doing.
      It could be the IBD just told u what u wanted to hear

    • TruthSeeker, I have been following this story for a while now and I would like to tell you that the only positive thing I have taken out of it is that despite all the problems we have as a community, somehow our chinuch system produced someone like yourself (I assume you’re parents were also somehow involved). Someone who is ready to stand up for what is right and not get sidetracked or drawn into needless personal attacks and bashing. Please keep posting – you really have no idea how much of an influence you’ve had. I am truly envious of the mother your future children will have. It is people like yourself that give me faith in the future of yiddishkeit. Yasher kochacha.

      • My goodness, I am undeserving of such a post. Thank you very very much and I am super glad I am helping ppl in ways which I am not even aware of.

        Hope to help more in the future as well. Thank you again for that very thoughtful post 🙂

    • Thanks, TruthSeeker. No surprises. “[T]he IBD did a ridiculous thing by coming to a verdict BEFORE an investigation.” I guess some believe in Torah min ha-shamayim, and others believe in Torah from Wonderland. Did the IBD indicate why they “think the claims of the Yarmush sale being a sham is nonsense”? Did they examine the documents? Better yet, did an impartial and knowledgeable lawyer examine them and explain everything to the dayanim? The IBD may be correct, but what they have shown of their methods does not inspire confidence.

      • Kevin- in the case of the Yarmush sale, it boils down to “he-says-she-says.”

        The IBD says that Yarmush and Meisels aren’t bubbies. But the CBD thinks they have ties.

        The IBD said Yarmush got a (quote) “gold mine” for a great price. The CBD thinks it’s a sham that Meisles may still have control/make a comeback (the IBD thinks this is preposterous).

        There have been no leaks of documents of the sale.

        • TruthSeeker @10:53,
          On the contrary, Truthseeker, all informed people know that they tell “bubbie” meisehs, and that they are buddies, as well……

        • I would hardly expect the sale documents to be leaked — although now nothing would surprise me– but I would expect confirmation that the dayanim had reviewed them.

          The IBD issued a very broad opinion on 7/13 stating that [YL’s translation] “[t]he problem … reached resolution through the removal of the party responsible from every function and connection [מכל תפקיד וקשר] with the seminaries.” In the secular world, no lawyer or judge would issue a legal opinion, particularly one upon which others would rely in making important decisions, stating that transactions having certain legal consequences had taken place without having reviewed the documents. However, it does not appear there was anything to review. The sale of the seminaries and the name of the buyer was not announced until 7/24, while in the week in which the IBD issued its opinion, the seminaries put out a statement that “Rabbi Meisels resigned eight weeks ago [though no one had heard about it] and is no longer affiliated with the institutions in any capacity whatsoever … [although his name continued to appear on seminary websites]. The schools will be [note the future tense] under new management and G-d willing, in the coming days, an announcement will be forthcoming about the addition of a new menahel …..”

          It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the IBD’s statement that Meisels had been removed from every function and connection with the seminaries was simply false when it was made, and the IBD ruled based on Meisel’s promises and the IBD’s belief they could enforce them. Now that there seems to be a sales agreement in place, if the IBD is pooh-poohing the notion that the sale is a sham, it is reasonable to ask whether they have reviewed the operative documents, whether they understand their legal effect, and whether they are consistent with what they declared had already been accomplished three weeks ago — or are they taking Meisel’s word for it?

          • Moreover, the Chicago Beis Din is being responsible and prudent in refusing to believe Meisels is out until they see the relevant documents. Since this is a not-for-profit (NFP) there also needs to be proof that the officers, and board (if one exists) have resigned and been replaced with individuals who can and will credibly shake up that place. In fact, any sale of a NFP is a violation of tax law and would probably involve some sort of money laundering.

  15. I’m not sure if any of you read through the correspondence posted. What is crystal clear is that the IBD thinks (and it is hard to see how they are not correct) that

    A. gviyas edus was done shelo bifney baal din by the CBD.

    B. The CBD or rather the plaintiffs through R Feldman as an apitropos signed onto a shtar berurin giving them shlita over the case

    I would add on that what R Lopin keeps nattering on about jurisdiction is a legal term that only applies when there are kavua batei din for cities and towns. That has nothing to do with any special BD in Chicago. (Igros Moshe CM 3/3)

    • But there is not a shred of written proof that CBD did any of this. R. Feldman admits he never saw it. Malinsky and the IBD poured out streams of words claiming this when the simple and quick thing would have been to send r. Eidensoh the image of the relevant designation of Feldman as apitropos (guardian/representative/agent).

      The so-called “Special Beis Din” of Chicago was created in 2000 and has heard at least a dozen cases since then. The other battei din of the Yeshivish/Aguda community and of the CRC for the MO accepted this “Special Beis Din.” It has existed with that name and with acceptance of the authority of all other groups for Chicago area since 2000. It is a BD kavua (permanent established with local authority). Specialization is irrelevant. sorry you don’t like the English word jurisdiction. But it is an efficient English word for whether a BD has authority on its own or can only function by mutual shtarei berurin. The Shafran BD is not a BD kavua. therefore it needs authentic shtarei berurin (arbitration agreements) by both parties. Thus, if as CBD claims, and now Feldman claims, there was no authorization by CBD or by victims, this is not beis din with any authority. It is just 3 rabbonim who can write kol korehs with no binding authority. Until and unless the IBD can produce written proof gviyus edus and designation of Feldman as Apitropos, everything else, but everything else in the Malinowitz and IBD letters is completely irrelevant. If you believe IBD, get them to produce the proof. Till then all their words are just words, with no halachic force. they can scream about Gottesman, they can claim I am gottesman or he is using me to attack them, etc, etc. Screaming louder, having longer letters, complaining more, is nothing but halachic obfuscation. it isn’t even convoluted pilpul; it is just distracting from the issue.

      • Admittedly, some of us laymen need a course on Proper Halachic Standards of Beis Din 101.

        For the record, I take full responsibility for my rants against the current rabbinic establishment (otherwise known as “The Gedolim of our generation”). I, as well as many others, have developed a distrust of rabbinic authority, regardless of how well they can learn, how popular they are with yeshiva boys, how many people think they are important, who they learned by, how much yichus they have or how long their beard is. I judge Rabbanim based on the Torah values they uphold, one of them being standing up for justice and protecting those in our society who are weak and can be easily taken advantage of. The yesomim and almanos of the Torah are today’s victims of sexual abuse. So far the Rabbinic track record for protecting victims has been the opposite of justice, with Rabbinic protection thus far being offered only to perpetrators and the well heeled of society. ONE bold Beis Din stands up for protection of victims, and attempts to make sure none of the teachers and school administration who enabled years of abuse are able keep the schools open for “business as usual,” and then lo and behold, in march a chorus claiming “My Rov in Israel is bigger than your Rov in Chicago.” I don’t buy it.

        • Seriously? at 3:01 AM:
          You nailed it. My sentiments exactly. No one could have articulated it better. Kol Hakavod. Finally, sof kol sof, a bais din, a Rabbinic court, cares about victims of sexual abuse, and rules as such, FINALLY (is there any precedent????) i think not, but perhaps YL can interject if there has been.
          Great comment.

    • “shelo befnei baal din”?? That’s what I don’t get. I have always understood the CBD’s role as that of removing a public danger. They don’t operate the way a standard beis din operates when they deal with sexual abuse.

      Now here comes the IBD and they put it under the rubric of a standard case, applying the rules of choshen mishpat, when the CBD has been acting for more than a decade under daas Torah without ever having been questioned. All of a sudden the IBD believes that they are the ones in charge and that the “regular” rules apply. This, after having given their own psak that the seminaries are perfectly SAFE after not having followed those same rules themselves????

      Something has gone severely wrong, and there has been a great misunderstanding. But one thing is clear: the Meisels supporters have now come back in force and have been twisting this apparent misunderstanding as somehow to be a vindication of their cause. In fact, it’s just a whole mess of misunderstanding.

      • It is not a misunderstanding. The IBD keeps saying we were authorized by Chicago and we sent them all sorts of requests to which they did not respond. Hey, I can send each of you letters saying I insist you give me access to your bank account and your ATM PIN. So what! That does not give me the right to your bank account. On the other hand, if you give me written permission to take control of your account that is something.

        For all the halachic thumping, Neither the IBD nor Rabbi Malinowitz have offered a shred of proof, a single signed document from Chicago, which says, here IDB, we pass over control of all aspects of this case to you. Like they say in Missouri, “Show me.” Instead of wasting screenfulls and reams of electrons, bits and bytes, IBD should have given us at least one image of the alleged Chicago signatures. Given their verbosity, aggressiveness and lomdus, I am sure they would have shown it if they have it. They have no authorization and thus no standing to supersede Chicago on a case started by Chicago.

        Can at least one pro-IBD commenter pause long enough to show us the proof.

    • This is a misunderstanding of the Iggros Moshe. In Choshen Mishpat 2;7 Rav Moshe writes that in a dispute about firing a principal for improper behavior you need a thorough investigation not a formal. Beis Din.

  16. United Nations Secretary General Bonkey Moon has proposed a 24 hour ceasefire between the CBD and IBD supporters to take effect at sundown Tisha-b’av. Ambassador Emes Ve-emunah has agreed to be a 3rd party observer.

  17. The posts posted within the last 10 hours are embarrassing and sad.

    So much bashing from individuals of the CBD suddenly/so many bashing Lopin.

    One thing to say- if Lopin has gotten ANYTHING wrong on his site he will CHANGE it immediately. Guaranteed. He is only looking to help.
    Those of you who sit by your comp/iPhones ready to bash him have helped the world in no way and there is no substance to hour arguments- only anger.

    Triangle has made a good comment-

    It seems as tho the Meisles supporters are back once again. First it started off with them saying “he didn’t do it” and now its “the CBD id corrupt” once this letter has come out.

    Like I said before- we do NOT know all the details. Whichever coward is so ready to call someone of Rabbi Fuersts’ stature a liar/thug, gather some courage and CALL THE CBD.

    I have. Numerous times in fact. If you TRULY care to get the real story, simply CALL Rabbi Fuerst. Your approach to slamming him on the internet instead of doing proper research for your answers is shameful and shows how weak you are in your pursuit of Emes.

    CALL THE CBD. No need to be afraid. Just pick up the phone and call. Guarantee you there will be answers to all this.

    Let’s not stray off the topic- Meisles is guilty as guilty can be and EVERYONE knows it, even the IBD.

    Have an inspiring fast everyone and may be see the rebuilding of the 3rd BHMK”D B’Meheira.

    • Truthseeker, things are not as simple as you are seeing it. There is a lot here that is surfacing and the picture is way broader and delicate, particularly the ins and outs of the BD procedures and the dynamics between the Israeli and Chicago courts. You happen to be incorrect, as is clear from the Rabbi Melowitz’s letters the Israeli BD might actually be in the right and the perspective with which we’ve been viewing the CBT may need to altered given the broadening picture. I ask that the truthseeker inside of you be more open to the new facts and willing to change your perspective. Things are not simple. Not at all.

      • Much in halacha is complex, very complex. But some specifics are simple. For example, either CBD did or didn’t hand over authority to IBD. If it didn’t, the thousands of words by R. Malinowitz and the IBD are completely besides the point. If Chicago handed over authority to IBD, as they claim, why hasn’t IBD offered up a single proof, a single image with a signature transferring their authority. Now if the IBD wants to claim authority with no delegation by CBD, they can try, but they know it will not stand up to scrutiny so they haven’t. So we are back to a simple question: Why has the IBD never offered up a single document signed by the Chicago transferring authority? I keep asking this question and none of the IBD’s defenders even try to answer it.

      • Reuven- if you have read any of my posts you would know that I, out of so so many, only seek Emes.

        I have zero desire to tag along with the crowd and simply hear things second-hand and accept what “rumors” are going around.

        Indeed, things are complicated. But why must I repeat myself? I have done the research so many are afraid to do. I have called both BDs and ppl on both sides. So so many phone calls and seeing it from all different sides. Please do not lecture me to be more “open-minded”.

        Like I said, we do not know all the details. Iy”H, things will become clear soon…

      • You mean that the 8 hours the IBD spent on the matter without any testimony from the victims was far more accurate that the CBD’s many month investigation? How so? Everything produced so far has been quite damning and damaging to the IBD and others. R’ Feldman’s communication made things even worse.

  18. Another point that needs to be made: The IBD, for some reason, writes from the perspective that it is in charge of everything, all the way from kabbolas eidus (which, according to them, needed to be done in front of the other baalei din) to every other aspect. The CBD are merely there to help out.

    Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. Nobody has produced anything in writing that says CBD abdicated their authority to the IBD. As I understood from the beginning, the IBD was only there to implement and monitor the sale of the sems, which is basically a function of pure choshen mishpat.

    Now, they want to take up other issues that encompass far more than what there were delegated. IBD says this b’ferush when they say that “CBD knows that we (IBD) are the yoshev kisei” in this case. HUH? CBD never delegated any authority, and there’s no written proof that it ever happened.

    If I had to guess, this is much more about cultural differences between America and EY (in other words, “ha lon v’ha l’hu” if you will). The IBD is not used to another bais din being competent and taking care of business. CBD never imagined that the IBD would want to go through the entire case from the beginning after the CBD spent months and months doing the heavy lifting. Likely a cultural misunderstanding.

    But as others have said, none of this has anything to do with protecting our holy daughters. This misunderstanding is simply an excuse for the Meisels defenders to come out and sow the seeds of confusion when there really is none. It’s quite simple, really. CBD continues to say that the sems aren’t safe. All of the other details are mere minutia, and should be kept in proper perspective. Only Chicago acted to keep our daughters safe.

    Ironically, without even following their own advice, IBD declared the sems to be safe, AFTER ONLY HEARING ONE SIDE. Who is interested in the safety of our daughters? Obviously, it’s the CBD.

  19. I absolutely agree that the shtar berurin is necessary to know who is actually in the right as far as the various sumchuyos of the respective bate din.

    I do not agree, and I would like to see mekoros, as to your definition of bes din kavua. My knowledge of the gemaras and CM does not jive with the claim that a history of ten years and some vague acceptance by the clall constitute a bes din kavua.

    The reason I responded the way I did to the term jurisdiction is not because it is in in english. Rather, it is because it is not a halachik term and therefore has no meaning in dine torah between jews.

    Bes din kavua is indeed something that exists and it is precisely that definition that I would like to see you be mivases.

    The heter for pikuach nefesh that allows reporting to the police must not be misrepresented. It allows yechidim to act OUTSIDE of the system of dine torah to protect from possible danger. Once said danger has been protected from than there is no such heter. If we are having bate din involved at all we are past the point where we are working OUTSIDE the system.

    • In terms of the halacha we are dealing here with a kala dilo pasik and senu shmuaney (Yuma 85 as far as the chillul hashem aspect MK 17 for sanu (i think dont have sefarim with me)

      There is a takana of the geonim brought in the rama (see aruch hashulchan 408) to use passul edus which for our purposes is essentially an umdena where there is no possibility of koshe edus. The present case of course qualifies.

      That has NOTHING to do with the procedures for ta’not in front of a bes din. Women can also be litigants in a bes din and the rules of shelo bfnei ba’al din apply to them as well.

  20. Why we are grateful to Lopin

    I am a parent who was scheduled to send to one of the affected schools. Without Lopin doing this, the CBD would have made their psak and only passed it on to principals of BY. We did not hear from my daughter’s high school and neither did many other people. This was not on media anywhere. Without this exposure, everything would be the same except that M. would take a sabbatical to learn for a year. The psak would have had no legs. The CBD wasn’t taking out ads or creating a social campaign. my daughter would’ve spent a year in a very poisonous atmosphere. I don’t know all of the halochos and nuances of loshon horah, but I am happy that I wasn’t relying on people like the above posters to make my decision. I wonder if they would have their daughters go under these conditions. However we didn’t base our decision on Lopin alone. We now knew to contact the CBD and to speak to daas torah as well about this. We were advised repeatedly by whoever we spoke to, to stay away.

    • My neighbor also spoke with Daas Torah on the matter and was told there is no issue. Unfortunately, this Daas Torah personality also has a daughter who teaches in the same seminary and whose livelihood depends on it. I am sure there was absolutely no bias when he told them that right? Someone on that level wouldn’t even tell their opinion if it might be construed as being biased, right? Or do they rely on being dan lechaf zchus and give their opinion even if it could be understood by some in the wrong way? No, because they will rely totally on the fact that they are very very big and everyone is totally obligated to trust them regardless – that is the Torah way after all. Reminds me of when I went to Daas Torah to ask where to give $15,000 in tzedoka and was told by the Daas Torah personality to put it in his fund… Yep, true story.

  21. So am I correct in saying that
    rabbi/Mr. Lopin admits that he does not understand the halachos or why abuse cases should be different and to what extent that is so.

    You rely on the existence and practices of the CBD as the guideline as to what is and what is not halacha in such cases.

    That R Malinowitz has challenged their procedure as non halachik does not create even a safek in your mind that the CBD has acted absolutely correctly.

    I remind you that in the same tshuva in Igros Moshe (2/7) that you quoted above he states that if the investigating body does not find clear evidence than the fellow in question retains his chezkas kashrus (which leaves the laws of lashon hara for example in place)

    The IBD has declared that they have no clear evidence against anyone besides for Miesels himself.

    It is only partially true that there is no dine mamonos aspect to this case as the damage done to ones financial standing while undoubtedly a grama and not actionable in bes din without tfisa does

      • You keep on evading the question. In spite of several replies to earlier questions. As plain ordinary jews they can assume a chezkas kashrush but a beis din in Chicago invalidated that presumption with a psak, one based on evidence from complainants and with shatarei berurin by victims and Elimelech Meisels who testified and confessed to them. The essential question you keep on evading is who made these three outstanding Israeli lomdim into a beis din. To be a beis din they need a toveiah (a plaintiff). Without that they are just three learned rabbis with no more power to issue a beis din psak than shmeryl, beryl, yankel the tailors. They have never shown us a single signed piece of paper from victims or the Chicago Beis din filing a complaint and accepting the jurisdiction of the beis din. Show us the plaintiff before you call them a beis din. I will gladly address those other issues once you show us the proof they had a plaintiff to constitute themselves as a beis din.

    • You keep on evading the question. In spite of several replies to earlier questions. As plain ordinary jews they can assume a chezkas kashrush but a beis din in Chicago invalidated that presumption with a psak, one based on evidence from complainants and with shatarei berurin by victims and Elimelech Meisels who testified and confessed to them. The essential question you keep on evading is who made these three outstanding Israeli lomdim into a beis din. To be a beis din they need a toveiah (a plaintiff). Without that they are just three learned rabbis with no more power to issue a beis din psak than shmeryl, beryl, yankel the tailors. They have never shown us a single signed piece of paper from victims or the Chicago Beis din filing a complaint and accepting the jurisdiction of the beis din. Show us the plaintiff before you call them a beis din. I will gladly address those other issues once you show us the proof they had a plaintiff to constitute themselves as a beis din.

  22. What am I missing here?
    Two of the key players in this saga are people who are known to cover up sex abuse. Yerachmiel correct me if i am wrong is this the Rabbi Feldman who knew/knows that there is a serial sex offender living on the Ner yisrael campus as we speak? (Moshe Eiseman).
    And Malinowitz who I know from personal experience covers up for molesters in Ramat Bet Shemesh.

    Are these the people we trust to provide the truth?

    Pray tell me…what am I missing?

  23. What am I missing here?
    Two of the key players in this saga are people who are known to cover up sex abuse. Yerachmiel correct me if i am wrong is this the Rabbi Feldman who knew/knows that there is a serial sex offender living on the Ner yisrael campus as we speak? (Moshe Eiseman).
    And Malinowitz who I know from personal experience covers up for molesters in Ramat Bet Shemesh.

    Are these the people you are trusting to provide the truth?

    Pray tell me…what am I missing?

  24. Can I ask a simple “business” question? If Yarmish and Meisels are buddies then any appearance by Meisels on or near any of the properties would explode across the internet torpedoing any remaining value in these institutions. I would actually prefer the purchaser to have some connection to Meisels to prevent Meisels from showing his face. If the buyer is some random gold-digger then Meisels has nothing to lose by revisiting his old haunts.
    What am I missing?

    • Meisels, i believe is playing for the long term. When enough time has passed the abuse will be denied and chalked up to one crazy girl with a rich father who pressured the Chicago BD and with the passage of time he will reappear. I have seen ohters forced out in scandal who made it back in (e.g, Ben Zion Sobel was barred by psak of R, Elizer Man Shach. He reappered after Shach died. Then rosh Moetzes Elya Svei forced him out so he reappeared when Svei got too ill to tend to these matters. Etc.

See Commenting policy ( http://wp.me/pFbfD-Kk )

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s