Civil Law suits happen all of the time.
Criminal prosecutions happen all the time too. So what?
Lawyers and others going after deep pockets, insurance companies, etc., in this case, extracting money from the WTS.
Nothing new about that. It's part of the judicial system in the USA. So what?
All the jury had to do is to believe more likely than not, that it happened, even if he was not guilty (they do not care about that). I am sure you know this.
So what? Criminal courts have found lots of innocent people guilty and lots of guilty people innocent. Because a finding is reached in a criminal prosecution does not mean the result is iron-clad accurate.
You're wrongheaded in your views from the perspective of the system of civil litigation in the USA, and state of California specifically. In the case of Candace's lawsuit a court of law charged a jury to hear evidence and decide first of all whether Kendrick had victimized Candace. If that jury had found insufficient evidence to conclude Kendrick had victimized Candace then the whole thing would have ended right there. But, and this is where you're wrong, the court did find by its charged jury that Kendrick had victimized Candace. Once that determination was made then other issues could be and were addressed by the jury, such as culpability of Watchtower.
Under US federal and state law Candace had a cause of action to take against Watchtower and she acted on it. Her goal was not to spend more time of the POS Kendrick, an admitted child molester. Her goal was to change an institutional policy that left children needlessly vulnerable to people like Kendrick. Apparently this bothers you a great deal.