by Gadget 77 Replies latest jw friends
Little toe..
I recieved a email from a 'ex' jw friend...guess she forgot to take me out of her address book...it was CC' lol.
anyway...they must be going into over drive about it, because in this email it was...incredibly nasty stuff.
"she was greedy see what happens...it backfired'' etc etc...
I hit reply , and didnt get once answer back. Typical.
our unequivocal abhorrence of child abuse, our sympathy for victims and our desire to protect children from such heinous acts has been a matter of public record for many years.
How many years?
Jourles is correct!
The asking for court costs to be paid by Vicki can only be a threat/deterrent for future lawsuits. It clearly does send a message to anyone thinking about stepping up and suing the WTS over child abuse.
This whole thing upsets me!
Thank you Gadget!
~Aztec
Gadget,
An amazingly rapid reply from the WTS - they must be breaking some sort of record here!
The UK Branch is far more likely to be disgruntled at the attitude of the CAD Branch over this matter than first appears. There is little love lost between the UK and Transatlantic Branches and Brooklyn policy is often vigorously challenged. Having read numerous letters from the Service Desk over the years, I have to tell you that this letter is as sympathetic as they are allowed to get.
What should be clearly noted is :
1) The WTS are not denying that Vicki Boer's case was valid.
2) They accept that they lost the case
3) They accept that they used the full measure of the Law to make sure that Vicki Boer emerged from this case financially ruined.
For any of the JW lurkers who are reading this post, next time your elders tell you that the child abuse issue is 'apostate lies' you know that it is they that are lying - YET AGAIN!
HS
The asking for court costs to be paid by Vicki can only be a threat/deterrent for future lawsuits. It clearly does send a message to anyone thinking about stepping up and suing the WTS over child abuse.
I know of several people who were waiting to see the outcome of this case before considering filing lawsuits of their own. They've abandoned their plans to do so.
Walter
our sympathy for victims and our desire to protect children from such heinous acts has been a matter of public record for many years.
Are those doggy years or catty years?
Gadget, I'm actually far more interested in seeing the letter from the politician. Any chance of that?
Expatbrit
As he often does, Hillary cuts to the chase with this summary:
What should be clearly noted is :1) The WTS are not denying that Vicki Boer's case was valid.
2) They accept that they lost the case
3) They accept that they used the full measure of the Law to make sure that Vicki Boer emerged from this case financially ruined.
We should all file this away for further use.
Even if, regrettably, on isolated occasions allegations of child molestation might not have been handled with appropriate sensitivity and understanding, our unequivocal abhorrence of child abuse, our sympathy for victims and our desire to protect children from such heinous acts has been a matter of public record for many years.
This gem goes onto my yahoo profile; straight from the WT's mouths.
HS, excellent point here:
For any of the JW lurkers who are reading this post, next time your elders tell you that the child abuse issue is 'apostate lies' you know that it is they that are lying - YET AGAIN!
Right! If and when these this letter gets up on the net, it too will go on my profile to show exactly your point.
At this time I'd like to say this:
I am sorry for my terrible attitude for the past few months and would like apologize to you, Scully, Alan and hawkaw.
I received an 'attitude adjustment' recently and I am feeling much different about 'things' and have set out on a new course of action.
Sincerely, sKally
Astounding that they can have no hint of conscience in this matter
our desire to protect children from such heinous acts has been a matter of public record for many years.
How do they protect children when they BAN any warning about proven abusers in congregations? Going so far as to DF anyone who does pass on such warnings.
As others have noted this case was all about precedent and striking financial fear into the hearts of others who have legitimate claims against the WT etc. Lets hope that in some way the publicity backfires on the stinking scum in the Service & Legal Departments who uphold and promote this charade of an image.
I have had to censor my reply as what can only be rage came over me when I read the letter from the Britain Branch Office.
There is absolutley no reason to apologize to me sf. But you are very kind to do so.
I still hold you in high regard.
Hillary, I loved your post. Well thought out.
As for those who are not going to launch civil action as a result of Vicki's case .... have said this before and I will say it again ... it is so important that people see the good and bad and critically weigh going through one of these lawsuit. There are high highs and low lows and ... you have to testify and be cross examined both at the deposition phase and then at the trial phase. It will take years and many appeals if you win. You have to withstand everything and be prepared to lose which can be a hard thing to do. I always try to recommend that you seek the best legal council possible, such as what Barb Anderson has done in Ed Bell (right "waiting" - snicker) and if you do go forward with the lawsuit you must be prepared to focus on it and take it all the way - not just relying on your counsel or others to guide you.
Vicki's case was a little different than most in that it was a case about the "confrontation" more than the failure to report and protect which a lot of other cases are about and sadly, she received very poor legal counsel, especialy at the trial and costs phases in my not so humble opinion (which was no fault of her).
Anyway just some thoughts. I still want to see a scan of that letter from the the UK Bethal
hawk
Here is what others are starting to say about this disgusting miscarriage of justice.
