SUBM.1022.005.0001
ROY AL COMMISSION INTO INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSES
TO CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE
AT MELBOURNE
IN THE MATTER OF YESHIVAH CENTRE CASE STUDY 22
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF MANNY WAKS
1.
These submissions are made on behalf of Menchem Leib Waks, who was a
victim of sexual abuse perpetrated by David Cyprys at Yeshivah Melbourne
between 1987 and 1990. He was also the victim of another perpetrator at the
Yeshivah in 1988, but these submissions deal with that only to the extent that
they deal with the systemic governance issues which have been exposed in the
hearings and documents, or rather lack of documents. They respond to the
submissions of Counsel Assisting the Royal Commission filed 5 June 2015, and
in particular to the Available Findings contained in those submissions so far as
they relate to:
(a)
the conduct of David Cyprys specifically relating to Manny Waks;
(b)
lhe knowledge of Ye~hivah Centre Melbourne of Cyprys' unlawful
conduct; and
(c)
the response of the senior leadership to Manny Waks' disclosures.
They also briefly address some minority but apparently systemic attitudes
within the Chabad movement in relation to adult homosexuality and
paedophilia.
2.
Manny Waks adopts as accurate the summary of his evidence set out at
paragraphs 102 - 111 inclusive of Counsel Assisting's submissions, save that
the reference in paragraph 103 should be to 1988 not 1998. He supports the
making by the Commission of the Available Finding identified by paragraph
number F33, which is a matter falling within category l(a) above, as well as
Available Findings F28 and F29 so far as they concern him.
SUBM.1022.005.0002
2
3.
The submissions filed on behalf of A VA in relation to Yosef Feldman's
evidence are equally applicable to Manny Waks' case, and indeed it is not only
Yosef Feldman who conflates homosexuality with paedophilia. Manny Waks
gave direct evidence of others in the community making this uninformed and
incorrect conflation (see Ex 22.3: STAT.0460.001.000LR at [l l], [15]). It is
submitted that this view should be the subject of express rejection by the
Commission.
4.
In the interests of avoiding repetition, Manny Waks seeks that the Commission
regard paragraphs 6 and 7 of the submissions filed on behalf of AV A as
incorporated here by reference. It may be that here also Yosef Feldman's
reluctance to denounce unequivocally the harm caused to Manny Waks derived
from his views regarding the reach of the prohibition against loshon horo,
discussed by Counsel Assisting in her submissions, his perception of a need to
keep shameful matters within the community, and the overriding force of
rabbinical authority, as shown in the lengthy email debates between Yosef
Feldman and others as to whether a rabbi should be the investigator of
complaints rather than the police. Like AV A, Manny Waks would also ask this
Commission to give a strong and express clear statement as to the primacy of
secular criminal law over any religious d.octrine, especially where the protection
of children is concerned.
5.
Further, Manny Waks submits that the analysis of the evidence given on behalf
of the Yeshivah Centre set out in Counsel Assisting's submissions shows
clearly that during the period between 1987 and 1990 when he was attending
the Yeshivah Centre, including Yeshivah College, the Centre, and in particular
Yeshivah College, were still highly dysfunctional with respect to protecting
students from child sexual abuse. This was the case although Rabbi Groner had
known since 1984 that Cyprys was a danger to children, having received
information concerning, a victim at that time. Moreover, if there had been any
need for his knowledge of that danger to be reinforced, that need was met
before Manny Waks ever attended, when Rabbi Groner was told again by A VQ,
AVA's mother, in 1986. Yet still Rabbi Groner, as the evidence shows., did
SUBM.1022.005.0003
3
nothing effective to remove or even limit the risk, nor, as noted in the
submissions filed on behalf of AV A, was any record made of that information.
6.
Further, when he was later told in person by Manny Waks himself, Rabbi
Groner urged him not to go to the police, and assured Mr Waks that Cyprys was
getting better. Proposed Available Finding F37 accurately reflects Manny
Waks' evidence on this topic and he submits that that finding should be made.
The involvement of the police seems to have been a preoccupation of Rabbi
Groner; see A VQ's unchallenged account of what Rabbi Groner said to her
when she told him that her son was suicidal as a result of what had happened to
him. She reports Rabbi Groner as asking if she was going to the police, and
when she told him that that would probably happen, dismissing any further
conversation about it. Accepting that Rabbi Groner cannot have this report put
to him, it is striking that it echoes his response to Manny Waks in 1996, and
again in about 2001. This shows that AVQ's recollection of the conversation is
likely to be accurate.
7.
The other thing which is notable about the reported responses of Rabbi Groner
in 1996 and later is that it showed a complete lack of any understanding of the
effect on the victim of what had occurred. This is consistent with the evidence
of Yosef Feldman, accurately summarised in Available Findings Fl 1 to Fl4
inclusive. Manny Waks submits that those findings should be made.
8.
Manny Waks refers to and repeats the submissions of AVA as to the
dysfunction of the school, and more broadly Yeshivah Centre in its extra
curricular youth activities, in protecting children at the time he was attending.
Proposed Available Findings F38 and F39 summarise some of these
shortcomings. He supports the making of those findings by the Commission so
far as they relate to him and to the period 1987 to 1990, which are findings
falling into category 1(b) above.
9.
Manny Waks has shown leadership and resilience in going public, and in
establishing Tzedek to expose abuse and support victims. Yet despite a high
profile public campaign over the last four years, it has apparently taken these
hearings for unequivocal apologies to be made: 25 years after the events, and
SUBM.1022.005.0004
4
over two decades since his first disclosure. In the meantime, Manny Waks has
experienced ostracism, shunning and highly derogatory personal criticism. This
is more consistent with the real views of eg Yosef Feldman, accurately set out at
Available Findings F22 and F23. How many other community members
silently share those views cannot be known, but the sermon of Rabbi Telsner,
the email traffic of eg Mrs Bendel and similar evidence seem to show that Yosef
Feldman is not on his own.
10.
Further, even accepting that at least some of the leadership are sincere in their
apologies, no-one who gave evidence for the Yeshiva Centre was prepared to
sheet home blame for what occurred to Rabbi Groner. It was the passivity of
the leadership, presumably flowing from their view of the spiritual mission of
Rabbi Groner, which allowed what occurred to go on for so long unchecked.
Manny Waks submits that Available Findings F54 to F56 inclusive should be
made.
11.
The media reported on 16 June 2015 that the Board of Management of
Yeshivah Centre has now been dissolved. There can be little doubt that the
scrutiny of what occurred in the hearings in Case Study 22 has been the catalyst
for this change. Manny Waks also notes public statements to the effect that the
Board of Trustees has recently committed to standing down within a few
months. Mr Waks respectfully thanks the Commission for undertaking this case
study, and urges that appropriate recommendations be made with a view to
preventing any school or organisation dealing with children ever again being
able to operate free of scrutiny and accountability. He also respectfully submits
for the Commission's consideration his proposed recommendations set out in
paragraph 105 of his witness statement marked as exhibit 22.3:
STAT.0460.001.000l_R.
Dated: 6 July 2015
K P Hanscombe
Counsel for Manny Waks