Recently an experienced investigator published an allegation against overseer Merlin Affleck (British Columbia, Canada).
WINGS did not report that allegation as our policy has been to only report court cases and convictions that are on public record (newspaper or court), as our team does not have the resources to vet all allegations and could face legal action for defamation.
Since then, Merlin has posted a denial, stating that “the allegation is completely false”, so WINGS is now providing this commentary on those public posts.
Merlin’s post raises a number of issues.
The 2021 Child Safe Policy for British Columbia states that:
“Any person under police investigation …. will not be permitted to participate in gatherings that provide access to children without permission being granted by the professionals involved in the investigation.”
WINGS understand that the allegation was reported to FBI and to local law enforcement in Canada, so:
- Did the professionals provide approval for Merlin to continue to attend gatherings where children were present (as required by the Child Safe Policy)?
- Why was the investigation not acknowledged publicly when it was first known?
- Why does Merlin claim that “there are no investigations involving this allegation”?
Does he mean no current investigations?
Does he know that FBI do not have a current investigation?
Why didn’t he acknowledge that RCMP did undertake an investigation, even if it is now closed?
Historic cases may be difficult to prosecute or prove as there may be no corroborating evidence and it is a ‘he said / she said’ dispute. However, publishing the allegation may lead to further cases being reported, or for additional evidence being provided that may support or disprove the allegation.
This case shows that a Child Safe Policy or Code of Conduct is not sufficient to handle allegations if
- The policy isn’t applied; or
- Management don’t respond to allegations openly and honestly.
WINGS does not take any position about the veracity of the allegation against Merlin, but observes that failing to disclose details of allegations does not achieve a good outcome.
Discover more from WINGS for Truth
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
WINGS for Truth 
Merlin, the only reason you are shocked is that someone actually filed allegations against you and your behavior despite your position in the church. Nice attempt at deflection with the half-truths. You know that the allegation was not filed with RCMP, but with local LEOs. You know the survivor so they are not a stranger. They were once a part of the fellowship but are no longer. You and you alone smeared your testimony with YOUR behavior. You are continuing to do so with your half-truths.
It will be interesting to see how leadership responds! Thanks for a well written post .
I have doubts that anyone in in the work as long as him could ever so catagoricaly deny that he never, ever in 40+ years found himself in a situation that could have felt uncomfortable or unsuitable for a little girl! Remember workers live daily amongst families! Many with children.
The ugliness of his denial leaves a message of unreliability to me! “I don’t remember” or “I am sorry if it seemed that way” would been a more honorable and believable denial wording. — and still been a denial.
Then the direct character attack on the survivor made it all even more aggresively unpleasant — and was clearly designed for nothing else than to inflict moral damage.
I can’t make any judgement about the current allegation against Merlin, as I only met him once. But from what we’ve seen in Europe, some overseers live a double life. They are living a lie, so lying becomes second nature. They will discredit anyone who threatens to expose them.
We knew of one Australian worker who, when concerns were raised, and a detective started investigating, he phoned around insisting it was a “witch-hunt” and that his accuser was unstable. According to public court records, he later pleaded guilty to nine counts of gross indecency (sexual) with minors (one aged around 10), resulting in jail time. That case showed how easily positions of trust and spiritual authority can be abused and how likely they are to deny and lie when being exposed.
One needs to keep in mind that this is an ‘allegation’ — not a formal charge. However it has been closely examined by proffesionals .. and deemed to satisfy the conditions of a sexual abuse ‘allegation’. There are hundreds of them floating around within 2x2ism … Most are not issues proven in a court of law and probably never will be.
For the interests of safety most decent caring parents wish, at least to be made aware that ‘allegations’ have been made. Then they can choose what to do about them, and what level of caution they decide to take is up to them. For many parents the safety of their children is of prime importance. Hopefully exceeding loyalty to any religions idea or to any leadership position.
The workers themselves have made recommendations regarding what steps to take— (which they mostly disregard themselves) — In reality the last years have proven that any advice or reliability that 2x2ism would claim in this regard is worthless –
Anyone need examples?