by life is to short 188 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
life is too short --- "I will totally own my words" -- right on! I only listen to the experts of law.
Thanks for response about the door to door horror --- hummmm . . . that would be a great title for book "Door to Door Horror." Can't believe you weren't stoned to death for your efforts. Too bad the entire congregation doesn't stand up and demand they follow laws re/pedophiles. Oh, that's right, it's a totalitarian environ. Unbelievable!
Doc is correct. The case is Jimmy Swaggart Ministries v. Board of Equalization of California (1990) 493 U.S. 378.
What many don't realize is that the WTBTS of New York, Inc. filed an "amicus" brief in that case. An amicus brief is essentially a brief filed by a person or entity who is not a party to the litigation, but whose interests will be impacted by the court's decision in the case. Watchtower lawyers knew that this case would have a signficant effect on their finances. so WT lawyers James McCabe and Donald T. Ridley submitted a written argument via an amicus brief in the Swaggart case.
I have a copy of the amicus brief that was filed. It makes some very dishonest statements. I can post it here if someone can advise me how to post a pdf to the forum.
<<< right on! I only listen to the experts of law. >>>
So what have your "experts" advised you concering the subject matter of these Anonymous threads, and have they at least reviewed all of the posts in those threads before expressing an opinion? Right on, dude!
144001, can you post or email this to me? I will send you a private message momentarily
144,001 said:
The case is Jimmy Swaggart Ministries v. Board of Equalization of California (1990) 493 U.S. 378.
What many don't realize is that the WTBTS of New York, Inc. filed an "amicus" brief in that case. An amicus brief is essentially a brief filed by a person or entity who is not a party to the litigation, but whose interests will be impacted by the court's decision in the case. Watchtower lawyers knew that this case would have a signficant effect on their finances. so WT lawyers James McCabe and Donald T. Ridley submitted a written argument via an amicus brief in the Swaggart case.
I have a copy of the amicus brief that was filed. It makes some very dishonest statements. I can post it here if someone can advise me how to post a pdf to the forum.
Yup, that's the one.
Most JWs don't understand Latin to know that "amicus curae" literally means, "Friends of the court", but any law student knows what it means.... Hmmm, don't I remember someone saying, "friendship with the World is emnity with God"?
Can you imagine Jesus sitting on the steps of the Roman courthouse, writing his unsolicited legal opinions to his friends, the Roman judges inside? It would be one thing if the Society was named as a defendent, but that doesn't apply here. Worse, they were defending Babylon the Great, Swaggart, no LESS!! Sure hope it was worth blowing Jesus' neutrality command for, as well as helping other "false religions" avoid taxation.
Does anyone know how many other amicus briefs the WT Legal Dept has filed? It seems pretty scandalous to me, as if the UN thing didn't do enough damage to their credibility on the issue of claiming non-involvement with political and judicial processes unless they're serving as defendents....
I stand corrected on the Swaggart deal. I knew it was tax related but it was so long ago that I had forgotten it was a state sales tax issue. But, the IRS does have the ability to audit religious organizations
On amicus briefs, I'll bet this wasn't the first time but they'll say they need to fight any challenge to "religious freedom" because they could be next. From a practical standpoint, that makes sense but it certainly doesn't jive with their teachings. But then again, they do a lot of things that they would hammer the rank and file if they did.
I'll bet that on the WTS appeal of the Conti case, there will be other religious organizations that file amicus briefs since clergy privilege is likely to be a focal point of the appeal.
And here I thought we all came here to bitch and complain about the WTBTS. Who cares what Anonymous does, all of ya bitchin at the legalities and "ethics" of doing something like this is pointless. It's going to be hacked, info will be spread and in whatever way it will do harm. 'Nuff said. Am I participating in something illegal? Are you? Can you prove it? Could I prove it? Do I care? Do you?
KS
I have notified the police, that is how I got some of the public records. The police are well aware that JW's send their pedophiles out. It is not against the law where I live for child molesters to go door to door. I was totally blown away when I heard that. I was sure that when I told them they would as you say "arrest them in the act," but unfortunately that is not the case.
What is against the law is for a person to allow a pedophile to hold and interact with children. Like the elders allowing the pedophiles to take care of kids during the meetings knowing that they are child molesters. It sounds backwards to me but that is how it has been explained to me by the police.
So that being the case if an elder takes a known child molester to someone's home and that child molester goes back to harm the child the person who took the molester they could be held responsible. Note the key would could. It may not happen but the elders and whoever the elders deem spiritually mature are putting themselves in the line to be libel just like what happened in the Candace Canti case. It is like playing Russian roulette.
144001 I did not mean to get so upset with you and I understand that you are trying to warn people to not do something stupid with Anonymous and get themselves in trouble. I totally understand that.
It is just that I was an elder's wife and I had no say in putting pedophiles in my car or for that matter having to work with them door to door. I was told by a CO to just get over myself. That I needed to get my feelings under control toward the pedophiles. The CO told me a child molester was no different than a former drug dealer or prostitute that came into the truth, no one needs to know of their past. The CO told me I was the one with the problem. When I told the CO that 90 to 95 percent of child molesters reoffend he told me that was worldly wisdom. When I asked why these child molesters were so into the kids in the hall again I was told I was the one with the problem and I needed to get a handle on my feelings. When I told the CO to read the Life Stories of Jehovah's Witnesses in the bound volumes he just looked blankly at me. I told him as he clearly knew that many of the life stories talk about JW's being drug dealers, bank robbers, etc but none of the life stories ever say I was a former child molester. Why not? The CO never answered me, I wonder why?
Anonymous has never demanded of me to do anything that I feel is illegal like the CO did. Grated KS it is not against the law but it goes against my conscience. As a side note no child molester did go out in service in my car as I still threw a fit and my husband was deleted as an elder because I was not in submission enough.
But the fact is that a Candace Canti could come up in the hall I went too and who is going to pay for the legal fees of the elders who let the child molesters go door to door and be around then new Candance in the hall?
I understand 144001 where you are coming from but I still feel so frustrated by how I was trying to be forced by the religion to go against my principles and to put myself in line to be sued by a child in 20 years when they get to be the age of Candance.
LITS
Rethinking my post the CO was asking me to break the law because I knew that these guys were child molesters, so being I had that knowledge I would be breaking the law. Not the child molester but I would if we called at a home with children or if children were in my car group and the child molester were to be alone with the kids in the car. I was not allowed to tell anyone of what I knew with threat of being DF'ed so the other adult in the car would not know, only myself and if the other adult wanted to leave the child molester with kids alone while her and I were at a door what could I do to stop it with out telling her which I could not do with out being DF'ed?
It puts the one in the know between a rock and a hard place.
LITS
I doubt any skilled, dedicated hackers are working on this. If they were, they would have annnounced their involvement with a leak of information.
This just screams "ex-jw".
Nobody looking at the bigger picture cares about the WT. Sorry - WT is small potatoes. I know some would love to consider the WT the WORLD LEADER in pedophiles..... but get real, it's not. It's made careless misteps, sure. Incompetence is everywhere. But I am pretty certain there are far more corrupt influences on this earth.
If you really care about the cause... going after the WT is really barking up the wrong tree.
- Lime
True it does sound a little too good to be true. The MO of Anonymous is to hack first then talk later after the event. I've read lots of talk but no tangible results considering the way the WTS operates that "file" would never be accessible to a network .remember they are super paranoid to protect info that could tarnish their image. Just saying.
az
