Candace Conti's Sur-Reply is Very Effective

by DNCall 41 Replies latest jw friends

  • mind blown
    mind blown

    Churchs in the 21st Century don't have the power they once had over the masses, and it doesn't seem the world at large is putting up with pedophilia in the church place. It's my hope the US court system makes an example this will not be tolerated.


    12:48 AEST Tue Aug 21 2012

    Victoria's most senior Catholics have apologised for the sexual abuse of children under the church's care and say they will continue taking decisive action to protect children.

    In a letter to parishoners the church said it was "deeply sorry" for the suffering and trauma endured by children and the betrayal of trust.

    The letter, which is a statement on the Victorian parliamentary inquiry into child abuse, acknowledges abuse and suffering is a matter of continuing shame for Catholics.

    "The sexual abuse of a child was, is and always will be a crime, and is contrary to all we believe in," the letter says.

    "We know that parents especially feel an intense betrayal of trust, that even one child could have been so grievously hurt by people whose call it is to serve others.

    "The church has apologised for these failures. Today we renew this apology to victims and their families. We are deeply sorry."

    It says the church will co-operate with a Victorian parliamentary inquiry into child sex abuse in religious and other organisations.

    Lobby group Adults Surviving Child Abuse welcomed the apology but said it needed to be coupled with action.

    The group called for a royal commission into religious and institutional child sexual abuse, saying a full inquiry was needed to "prise open" the truth.

    "The findings need to inform current practices so that child protection is prioritised with all suspicion of abuse reported immediately to civil authorities," ASCA president Cathy Kezelman said.

    "Church and other such institutions must be made accountable to the same legal processes which all other citizens must follow."

    The Archbishop of Melbourne Denis Hart said the letter speaks of the difficult time ahead for victims and the need to learn from past failures.

    "Mistakes were made and we apologise to victims and their families for these failures," he said in a statement.

    "The church has learnt from these failures and our response has changed. We are focused on the needs of those who have been abused and have taken action to prevent future abuse."

    The letter is signed by Archbishop Hart, Diocese of Ballarat Bishop Peter Connors, Diocese of Sale Bishop Christopher Prowse and Diocese of Sandhurst Bishop Leslie Tomlinson.

    The president of Catholic Religious Australia, Sister Annette Cunliffe, and the organisation's Victorian president, Sister Helen Toohey, also signed the letter.



    PHILADELPHIA | Fri Jun 22, 2012 7:37pm EDT

  • DNCall

    The order that was entered yesterday may reference the order awarding costs to Candace (around 30K or so), and not the order re Watchtower's JNOV. We may have to wait a few more days for that.

    I would also like to point out that the duty of care is the same for any organization, religious or not, namely to protect children who are part of that organization. The Boy Scouts, the high school swim team, the Catholic Church, Penn State University are all held to this standard. This is not a First Amendment issue, such as refusing to salute the flag, or preaching from door-to-door. Basically the judgment is that Watchtower knowingly and maliciously abandoned the duty of care it owed to Candace, in favor of a policy that was thought to make it appear to its members and to the public that it does not have a child abuse problem.

    Without a constitutional issue, I think it's doubtful the US Supreme Court would hear a case like this. All further rounds of appeals will accomplish is to further publicize that Watchtower does have a child abuse problem and that it falls woefully short of the standard of care in dealing with it.

    BTW, Watchtower has also submitted a brief. If you have the patience to read it, you will see it's all about the money!


    The order has just gone live on the court webiste for download. You are correct, it relates to costs being awarded and added to the judgement.


  • james_woods

    I suspect that (as posted above) this will be dragged out in the courts for several years.


    The brief makes interesting reading and as mentioned above, it's all about money. However, the response to the Watchtower brief by Simons is a far more interesting read. Every case law point made by the Watchtower is proven to be misunderstood by Watchtower lawyers. It seems that they read the first few lines of a previous case and throw it in hoping no one will notice that it actually supports the Conti case. Laughable!!


  • DNCall

    Not unlike Watchtower' publications' quoting out of context authorities it think's backs it up.


    so true

  • sir82

    Didn't someone somewhere on one of the dozens of posts about this case, mention that the WT appears to have sent their "B Team" of lawyers to this case, fully expecting it to be settled out of court?

    If so, that might explain their poor efforts described above.


    That could be true. I'm certainly no lawyer but I've been stunned at some of the arguements put across by the Watchtower. And the longer this is going on the more desperate they seem to be clutching at silly ideas.

  • james_woods

    But I would presume that after losing the first round (if they did send team B) they would have team A here for the appeal? - that is, after losing 2x million dollars in the initial judgement?

Share this