I was looking at the threads today and there are two that are related, in my opinion. Both Richie's possible DA and the thread about void baptism. Here's a (jstalin) novel legal theory:
In law there is a concept called ratification, which applies to minors. It basically means that a minor can enter into a contract, but at any time while he is a minor, he may disaffirm the contract without penalty. In addition, when a minor turns 18, he may decide to ratify the contract, or not. In other words, minors cannot be bound by contracts. In my opinion, JW baptism could be considered a contract. A JW decides that in exchange for being baptised, he/she will follow the rules of the WTS, including agreeing that he/she should be shunned in the event of a DA or DF. However, in my amateur armchair legal opinion, a minor (Richie) could make the argument that his baptism was a contract entered into as a minor, therefore, the contract is voidable at any time while he is a minor - as though the contract was never entered into.