DOCUMENTS: Candace Conti v Watchtower – Court of Appeal Decision - April 2015

by jwleaks 11 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • jwleaks
    jwleaks

    JW LEAKS has published the Court of appeal decision and documents relating to Conti v Watchtower, including appeal documents and jury trial transcripts.

    JW LEAKS | Conti v Watchtower (court documents)

    Congratulations Candace on your win and thank you for proving Watchtower was negligent in your suffering and in not protecting children. One person can make a difference.



  • DATA-DOG
    DATA-DOG

    AWESOME. So did the WTBTS lose once and for all??

    DD

  • geevee
    geevee
    Hit them where it hurts, they don't give a #@ck about Candace, only the loss of money! Typical... Go Girl!
  • Garrett
    Garrett

    REKT!

  • Ruby456
    Ruby456

    wonderful news jwleaks - this should be shouted from the rooftops. I doubt very much that Watchtower will appeal.

    there is a lot of detailed material to read but I think I have the gist and there is enough regarding that watchtower did not render enough safeguarding during ministry towards Candace.

    congratulations Candace you won what you desired.

    a few excerpts

    Here, Conti was harmed during a church-sponsored activity, and defendants’ control over that activity placed them in special relationships with Kendrick and Conti thus requiring them to take reasonable steps to prevent the harm from occurring. (top of p.23)
    We therefore conclude that defendants had a duty to use reasonable care to restrict and supervise Kendrick’s field service to prevent him from harming children in the community and in the Congregation. Conti’s testimony provided substantial evidence that defendants breached this duty (p.23)
    Defendants contend that Conti’s parents could be found at least partially responsible for the harm she suffered because they were negligent in supervising her and entrusting her to Kendrick’s care. However, the court properly refused to allow attribution of fault to Conti’s parents given the absence of any evidence they had reason to know Kendrick was a threat to her. (See Chaney v. Superior Court (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 152, 156–158 [parent must have actual knowledge of threat of molestation to be liable for negligent supervision of the victim; such knowledge was not established by perpetrator’s allegedly “excessive” gift-giving and attention paid to minor].) (p26)
    As for the state of the evidence and as we have said, there was substantial evidence to support a finding that the Congregation failed to take reasonable precautions to ensure that Kendrick was accompanied by an adult during field service, and did not end up alone with Conti during that activity. (p24)
  • jwleaks
    jwleaks

    If the Watchtower Society and Jehovah's Witnesses were really Jehovah God's true organization and representatives on earth then the following is what the judges really said...

    [Jehovah God] contend that Conti’s parents could be found at least partially responsible for the harm she suffered because they were negligent in supervising her and entrusting her to [Jehovah God's] care. However, the court properly refused to allow attribution of fault to Conti’s parents given the absence of any evidence they had reason to know [Jehovah God] was a threat to her. (See Chaney v. Superior Court (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 152, 156–158 [parent must have actual knowledge of threat of molestation to be liable for negligent supervision of the victim; such knowledge was not established by perpetrator’s allegedly “excessive” gift-giving and attention paid to minor].) (p26)



  • smiddy
    smiddy

    On another thread about this case it appears the Watchtower won , with just a slap on the wrist so to speak.

    Smiddy

  • defender of truth
    defender of truth

    Smiddy, they only 'won' in that they don't have to pay the the punitive damages.

    Because they are usually paid in excess of the plaintiff's provable injuries, punitive damages are awarded only in special cases, usually under tort law, where the defendant's conduct was egregiously insidious.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punitive_damages

    The Watchtower was still found GUILTY of negligence in this case.

    Well done to Candace and Rick Simons!! :)


  • DATA-DOG
    DATA-DOG

    Remember that Candice was not after money. So a lack of a huge payout in this particular case in not indicative of a failure.

    She wanted to set a precedent. She wanted the WTBTS to re-think its interpretation of the "two-witness" rule. She wanted to help open the door for other victims. She did all that.

    Not asking for a huge sum was very wise. We can easily produce a copy of the official court documents for dubs, which clearly show that Candice was not after money.

    Suck it, GB!!!

    DD

  • Ruby456
    Ruby456
    smiddy this is not just a slap on the wrists for the wts cos imo the significance of the appellate judges finding that a special relationship does exist and thus a duty of care in the ministry part of JW activities is that now the question can be asked as to how much grooming of children by pedophiles takes place in the field service? from what I have observed quite a lot of friendships and trusts are built in the field service even if the abuse happens off of the territory.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit