ALERT: NEW LAWSUIT settlement - $13 MILLION

by Watchtower-Free 300 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • JWdaughter
    JWdaughter

    I think that the WT did this knowing what would happen. Lengthy appeals and the "right" to say that they had not been allowed to testify or present their case. So, they can say that this was not a real trial, yadayadayada. Nothing was proven.

    Another why----they would rather be convicted on one sided case than convicted after the facts of their perfidy was shown beyond a reasonable doubt and their own documents and files put into the court record.

    Now they will try to have the whole thing overturned with prejudice.

    Cowards

  • FreeGirl2006
    FreeGirl2006

    I just got off the phone with one of my sisters who is a dub. Not an uber one, but definitely entrenched. I got tricky with her--I brought up the topic of the breaking news by saying it brought up a lot of crap from our respective experiences with how the eldubs handled our abuse case (her father was an eldub and basically given a pass on my case since there were not 2 witnesses and he went on to abuse my two sisters and who knows how many other girls). I was able to do some subtle TTAT in the guise of having to off-load my emotional "trauma" and while she flipped into apologist mode I could tell I rattled her cage a bit.

    I have to admit, all the current news about these cases does dredge some things up for me, but not to the extent I led my sister to believe. I just wanted to reach the authentic sister and make her think if only for a moment how bad things were for us and how her daughters could be in danger with the policies that are in place within the congregations.

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    I read a UPI report concerning this case. As in Conti's case, the WT had notice. I wonder if the reason GB members did not comply with the discovery orders was to avoid disclosure of a database of pedophiles.

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    This forum is NOT real life. I have no duty to read legal documents. The issue of notice to WTBTS is pending in the Conti appeal. I'm not checking but I believe both Conti and this case happened before CA's legislature enacted a mandatory reporting law for clergy. The WTBTS can argue that it had no notice that its behavior would subject it to liability. We don't pass laws in the United States making past conduct that was lawful at the time unlawful. Larger issues than the WTBTs are at stake.

    .Unless the legal department had actual notice and counseled Witness elders to ignore the pedophile behavior, I feel it is unfair to impose liability on the WT. The link to individuals to WTBTS is tenuous. It becomes confusing b/c the Witnesses are in their own world so it is hard to compare to other religions. I did defense work for corporations so I admit bias. Fundamentally, I just don't see how you ignore a discovery order. There was massive litigation years ago in the Kodak case. A partner in a very prominent law firm took a few documents home and did not produce them. He had guilt pains and confessed to his partners immediately before trial. It was a big scandal. The legal system cannot work unless you produce yourself and documents. The days of surprise at a trial as in the Perry Mason television show are over. For younger people, Perry Mason was a television series where Perry one every case he handled. The audience demanded that he lose a single case. Bad people always lied on the witness stand but Perry "broke" them on cross-examination and they confessed.

  • JW GoneBad
    JW GoneBad

    As is the custom, the WT GB will be meeting this Wednesday to review and discuss spiritual matters pertaining to the organization.

    Scenario: It is Wednesday morning and all the GB members are meeting behind closed and locked doors at New York Bethel 25 Columbia Heights. GB Losch is Chairman of the meeting.

    GB Losch: 'Are we still good with the scheduled program for this weekend's Branch Meeting or should we modify it somewhat to address the recent court order and judgement to payout $13.5 million for child molestation?'

    Bro Lett: 'Dah...I think....dah....(suddenly and miraculously Jesus enters through the locked doors and proceeds to slap each and every GB member up the side of the head, turns over their conference table and demands...)

    Jesus: 'I want everyone to leave this room....NOW!' (Jesus now alone in the room prostrates himself onto the floor with his arms and hands extended out, weeping he prays...)

    Jesus: 'Please forgive me Father for selecting these nincompoops to spiritually lead your earthly organization.....).'

    Needless to say this weekend's Branch Meeting is canceled until further notice!!!

  • AnnOMaly
    AnnOMaly

    Hmm.

    This forum is NOT real life.

    I don't know what that means. This is a forum where matters pertaining to real life are discussed.

    I have no duty to read legal documents.

    Nobody here has a 'duty' to read legal documents but reading at least one of them is helpful if we want to contribute to the discussion in a meaningful way.

    The issue of notice to WTBTS is pending in the Conti appeal. I'm not checking but I believe both Conti and this case happened before CA's legislature enacted a mandatory reporting law for clergy. The WTBTS can argue that it had no notice that its behavior would subject it to liability. We don't pass laws in the United States making past conduct that was lawful at the time unlawful. Larger issues than the WTBTs are at stake.

    You're not checking, so you are unaware that the mandatory reporting issue was not a factor in the judgment against Watchtower in the Conti case.

    Unless the legal department had actual notice and counseled Witness elders to ignore the pedophile behavior, I feel it is unfair to impose liability on the WT.

    You haven't checked, so you are unaware of what Watchtower and the elders were actually found liable for.

    Fundamentally, I just don't see how you ignore a discovery order. ... The legal system cannot work unless you produce yourself and documents.

    Precisely. That was what exasperated the court, and the Plaintiff argued the latter point. I'm glad you've now read the short UPI news report at least. However, may I respectfully suggest, BOTR, rather than spend lots of time reading this thread and typing posts saying how you have no time or duty to read legal documents but offering an opinion anyway, why not use a little of that time to scan through one of the documents so that any comments you wish to make about this case are more on the mark. Given your time constraints, I recommend THIS ONE. As I say, it's a respectful suggestion.

  • ScenicViewer
    ScenicViewer

    BOTR, are you sure you are a lawyer? I ask because lawyers are educated people whose job is to communicate clearly, but your posts are often hard to follow because of garbled language and run-on sentences that lack good punctuation.

    Sometimes you use a wrong word that is more than just a typo or a simple misspelling.

    Perry [Mason] one every case he handled.

    Do you not know the difference between one and won?

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    No! If you want me to read legal documents, pay me legal fees. I am tired of explaining the legal process and providing legal information. So, so tired. As one lawyer on this forum said to me long ago, make them pay fees. Every law suit filed, especially alleging sexual abuse, does not have merit. Testimony at trial is a better measure of truthfulness. Appellate courts do not review facts a jury or trial judge reached b/c the experience in the courtroom tends to lead to truthfulness. And, may I ask, what have the nonlawyers done with the information? It is not accurately reported. If I specialized in an area, I would learn the basics. No one is suggesting extensive legal knowledge. There are a host of websites providing free legal information. The information imparted here is biased. I have yet to read a neutral, factual summary. Yes, the Andersons are guilty of not providing crucial information and using newspapers whose reporters never did a Google search of basic legal terms. Your better newspapers do report accurately and the reporters are not lawyers.

    A balance is needed. IF the WT has/had a secret database so they had notice of pedophiles in KHs, throw the book at them. No statutory duty to report sexual abuse existed at the time of these incidents. Personal injury lawyers receive a one third fee of the damages. Perhaps a common law duty to protect children existed at common law. I don't know. It would take weeks to research CA law. There is no compelling reason for me to research CA law. Grow up! Sophistication is not evil. If normal, prudent businessmen ran the WT, the "two witness rule" would be dropped with New Light. These are the men who endorsed the blood doctrine, shunning of family members that leads to great despair and often suicide. The GB chose to quote a Nazi theologian convicted at the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunals recently. Women are subjugated to men. Domestic violence is encouraged by the story of Selma and Steve in the WT. Steve beats Selma. The WT advice is that Selma must be obedient. These men clinch the story by relating that Steve converts to JWism after 15 years. The pressing issue of whether he stopped beating his wife was never addressed. I don't believe real life Steves stop beating their wives

    It is unlikely that the WT will cave b/c of this trial court decision. I expect an appeals court to intervene. Unless there is substantial WT involvement, I believe it is wrong to impose liability on organizations. The WT would be far more intrusive if they administered tests for pedophilia. Roman Catholicism has a completely different structure. I expect hate posts. The ignorance will pile on. I am not raising any issues that are not already in the court papers and will be argued on appeal. Knowing the WT, however, and the no show for deposition makes one wonder what it is hidden. I am not on the WT's side. Education and experience are resources that should not be squandered.

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    RE: Not showing up for routine discovery. Older people may remember Watergate and the "secret" recorded tapes of all Nixon's White House conversations. I recall that a Senate hearing into the Watergate burglaries proceeded. There was no compelling evidence implicating Nixon in "high crimes and misdemeanors." The Senators and their staff had no knowledge of the recording system. A WH administrator, called Butterfield, was called before the committee. The hearings were dragging. People were losing interesting. One of the legal counsel asked a question, not knowing the answer. The Witness answered truthfully. The recordings were produced with 18 1/2 minutes suddenly missing from a crucial conversation. President Nixon blamed his secretary The most right wing Republican officials told Nixon he must resign. He resigned while impeachment proceedings proceeded. President Ford pardoned Pres. Nixon for criminal conduct. If I were innocent, I would not accept a presidential pardon. His key officials, including the Attorney-General of the United States, John Mitchell, the nation's top law enforcement officer, went to federal prison. The cover-up is worse than the original crime.

    The situation was so bad that the special prosecutors were fired. We had a few attorney generals in quick succession.

  • AnnOMaly
    AnnOMaly

    No! If you want me to read legal documents, pay me legal fees. I am tired of explaining the legal process and providing legal information. So, so tired.

    Aren't you overreacting? You are participating on this forum on an informal, casual basis primarily to discuss things relating to JWs. You are not on this forum for your legal expertise. You, like the rest of us, can choose to read the documents out of interest. It is ridiculous to say, in this setting, you're not reading them unless you are paid to do so.

    If you are not apprised of the facts of these cases, then you will not know which points of law have been applied and judgments made on and further, you cannot justifiably declare that these law suits do not have merit (? kind of an insulting thing to say, don't you think?). You cannot claim inaccurate reporting and bias unless you have acquainted yourself with the details of the cases. You cannot accuse the Andersons of withholding crucial information if you refuse to read the information contained within the documents. Getting all worked up doesn't alter this basic principle.

    Nobody is compelling you to research CA law; the lawyers and judges involved have already done it and will continue to do it throughout the appeals process. Nobody is seeking your legal opinion; you are offering it voluntarily. However, if doing so causes you so much distress, don't do it. Leave us non-specialists to stab around in the dark. You have better things to do, evidently.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit