Lawyers: Can a Jehovah's Witness sue the Watchtower Society for Civil Rights violations?

by Balaamsass 46 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    Note that everyone else with legal training provided info. only. Giving a definitive answer would depend on myriad facts and knowledge. Knowledge that cannot be known from the OP's question alone.

    I have no idea why the ACLU is in play. I have worked for the ACLU. The ACLU is a repeat player with expertise in civil rights and civil liberties. They have, on occasion, represented the ACLU, particularly in the Rutherford era knock on door and flag salute cases. The vast majority of ACLU lawyers are law professors and associates/partners at large corporate firms. It gives the firms valuable litigation experience, a change from representing corporations, and a chance to perhaps go up to the Supreme Court. Most American interests have, at time, been represented by the ACLU. The NAACP Legal Defense Fund is anothe repeat player. The Jewish organizations are other frequent litigants.

    I'm sorry. The vibrancy here appeals to me. Hearing about Knorr, Franz, Henschel, Larson --brings back memories of sitting around the kitchen table. I don't dumb myself down. I don't think people would appreciate my cutting and pasting law review articles here. As a member of the bar, something someone else is not, and a person who until recently had a wide range of live clients, I care about the law. There is a right way and a wrong way.

    TV lawyers exist only on TV. Most of the law is spent hunched over law books for hours or hunched over a computer monitor. The moments they show on TV are very rare. Imagine a TV show where people spend hours on end reading relatively boring content. I feared that I could never shoot my mouth off the way Perry Mason did. Or even those lawyers on The Good Wife. I found out there is a process and after you've researched for days with a complete fact pattern, you can form some conclusions. Those lawyers on Nancy Grace, etc. screaming answers are only screaming. Working in a real firm, I have a different take. Where I once shouted obvious answers, I keep my mouth shut. Maybe in the MIddle Ages, a bright student at the Inns of Court could know instantly. I doubt it but maybe. Law is complex.

    As I posted before, you have two legal models before you. Someone fortunate to graduate from a great school, who garnered good enough grades to work for the U.S. Attorney's Office and a large Wall Street law firm. Someone who worked on Supreme Court cases --hardly the lead lawyer. I assume my posts may be searched. And you have the I know everything model from somone who is NOT a lawyer who knows ALL that can be possibly KNOWN.

  • AGuest
    AGuest

    First, my apologies to the OP (peace to you, dear Balaam!). I didn't think my side comment re my experience with the ACLU would "offend" those it did... nor as it did. I should have known better, at least as to one; apparently, whatever I comment offends, so...

    Because I wanted to "see" HOW I so offended, I went back and read my initial post. And I have to say that I find it quite interesting the "offense" taken by at least one. My comments as to the ACLU were based on a comment regarding the ACLU. I didn't take issue with the poster (who for some reason seems to find it just fine to address me/respond to my posts but seems to always take offense when it's the reverse, no matter how "kind" the comment/address)... or with the poster's comment, per se. I just posted my experience with the ACLU with regard to a WTBTS-related matter (I mean, since this IS "JWN"). I did misstate the WTBTS as being a "client", but that really was not the case... and so I took the "heat" that came from that, as well as apologized for the misleadings as a result of it.

    Anyway, I just checked with a dear friend who happens to be the senior partner at a law firm in SF (he plays in my band) who said the ACLU should have at least looked at the situation rather than summarily concluding a "potential conflict," and that whoever told me there was a "potential" conflict was "being lazy"... because the ACLU doesn't necessarily represent anyone, but represents the RIGHTS of everyone. Which is what I thought... as well as that the civil rights of ALL should be protected. I mean, should the ACLU stay out of any and every claim against the WTBTS simply because it supports it on another issue? That was my point and position.

    Given previous discussions regarding the "unauthorized practice of law," however, I refrained from comment as to the issues raised by the OP (except as to his title question, because it was apparently an issue that I did not address the questions). Which anyone can answer.

    I find it interesting that a certain "legal" mind here finds it necessary to be so... well, "territorial", is the word that comes to mind. I gave neither legal opinon or legal advice, but merely addressed a comment raised IN the thread. I don't know why my comment was taken as... well, I can only assume a personal affront (as they usually are by that fine mind - WTFrick...), and thought it odd that I was accused of giving a "highly distorted answer." When in fact I had given no answer, at all, at that time. Not even close.

    I find it curious that such a great mind missed that and so would like to suggest that any great mind that, well, has a mind to, take some time and go back and READ what I posted initially... rather than skim and jump to all kinds of erroneous conclusions simply due to their own PERSONAL bias. I doubt that that will occur, due to the very lawyerly (i.e., anal) perception one perhaps possesses, but there's always hope.

    In the meantime, there is an ancient saying that comes to mind here and I think it appropriate, under the circumstances... for myself (as to the ACLU, perhaps) and my not-so-great mind... as well as at least one other:

    "Do not hurry yourself in your spirit to become offended, for the taking of offense is what lies in the bosom of the stupid ones." Ecclesiastes 7:9

    Again, my apologies to the OP. I hope you find the help you need... and that it doesn't too greatly damage your purse!

    SA, on her own...

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    I'm not replying anymore.

  • AGuest
    AGuest

    Good (although, you just did. )

    Peace.

    SA, on her own...

  • 144001
    144001

    I'm eating beans, just in case you take off your shirt, SA!

  • AGuest
    AGuest

    Then I pity whoever sleeps wit'cha, dear One, 'cause it'll be quite a cold day before you get to see that.

    Peace to you!

    SA, on her own

  • 144001
    144001
    Then I pity whoever sleeps wit'cha, dear One, 'cause it'll be quite a cold day before you get to see that.

    After watching BOTR discredit you in this thread and elsewhere on this forum, I suggest that you save your pity for yourself.

  • AGuest
    AGuest

    I have to agree that dear JT (peace to you!) cleared up my misunderstanding somewhat about screening/ethical walling, at least as far as many large law firms apply it... but BOTR? Seriously? Just because you say it (with the hopes that those who read it will believe it) doesn't make it true, dear One (peace to you, as well!). You must, then, point me to it... so I can clear it up for YOU.

    Again, peace to you!

    SA, on her own...

  • Balaamsass
    Balaamsass

    Still curious..case law....can sworn testimony in a different court...say AUS or GB be used in a California Court or Washington Court. ????

  • lrkr
    lrkr

    Seems the question should be- can you PREVAIL in a lawsuit against WT for Civil Rights Violations. Anyone can sue anyone for anything. Winning is a different story altogether.

    One major stumbling block I see is "damages." You need actual damages to get very far in a lawsuit. If you could prove employment discrimination based on religion- you might have a case. But the run of the mill disfellowshipping.... I dont thing there's much there. "Emotional duress" and "pain and suffering" wont go very far.

    Just my 2 cents.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit