I doubt they could appeal to the US Supreme Court.
Why not?
California Supreme Court Case - S226656
by Gayle 164 Replies latest jw friends
-
Fisherman
-
Fisherman
There seems to be 2 issues for review:
Does the church have a legal duty to protect church members and the public from other church members during church sponsored activities, and, Is the WT vicariously liable in this particular case.
-
thedepressedsoul
Is there any chance that the supreme court could increase the chargers?
Also, doesn't supreme court cases get a lot more public and media attention?
I can't imagine it'd look good even if they win.
-
Fisherman
I can't imagine it'd look good even if they win.
I think (and what do I know what the Court is going to do) that ultimately, the Court will not find the WTS legally liable in this case. However, The Court may or may not find the local church and local church elders legally responsible, but it is highly unlikely, but I suppose it depends on the "special relationship" determination between the church and the minor during the related sponsored activities. What will happen is that more pressure is going to be put on the state to provide more physical protection for children from sexual predators they release into the general population, and the state is also going to be held more accountable for unleashing dangerous pedophiles upon society. Inevitably, suchlike cases are having a legal impact on the church. I am sure that safeguards have already been deployed by the church to protect the church from these types of lawsuits in the future. It does not look good for the lower Court and Jury having their verdict reversed. It is a tragedy and an outrage whenever a precious child is harmed by a sexual predator, (I am not saying that it happened in this related case because I do not know what happened) but also, both the parents and the State should not be allowed to escape legal liability.
-
Oubliette
From three years ago:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/239488/candace-conti-wts-appeal-info -
Vidiot
nelim - "Hopefully the Supreme Court will review the case and determine that it is not a too big a burden for churches to warn other parents..."
When I think about it, I can't help but wonder if that was one of the main cruxes of the matter.
The WTS utterly forbids BOEs from revealing JC details to the overall congregation; therefore, if the Org's "right" (see what I did, there?) to keep accusations confidential is overturned by a higher court - even if it only pertains to accusations of child abuse - it will be interpreted by the Org as having their religious policies/beliefs dictated to them by the state (I say "policies/beliefs" because as far as JWs are concerned, they're pretty much viewed as the same thing at this stage in the game).
And nothing gets a fundy's back up like being told what he can or can't believe.
x
nelim - "...and force them to change policies for the better..."
Problem is, as far as the WTS is concerned, their policies are better; therefore, they don't feel that they should change them.
What's more, the methods that their critics and opponents are pressuring them to implement (criminal background checks, involving police, etc...) are - as far as they're concerned - the methods of "Satan's World"...
...which triggers a knee-jerk rejection and causes them dig their heels in even harder (not that they shouldn't be pressured; I'm simply explaining why).
-
Fisherman
Problem is, as far as the WTS is concerned, their policies are better; therefore, they don't feel that they should change them.
It is not about the WT. It is about freedom of religion and it is about the confidentiality of the confession. If they close it down, it will impact all churches not only the WT, and then why should anyone else then also have any privileges of confidentiality, such as attorney client, and then why should only child abuse and not all other crimes... But, the Appeals Court already upheld and reaffirmed that privilege. The new appeal is not about that.
-
iwasblind
This was one of the biggest things that rocked me in awakening.
How we could ever go to court and make the victims re-live their ordeal and see the abuser in court with all of the cross examining and junk that goes on.
If the WTBS was serious they would setup help groups, train elders to help these victims - but we all know that will never happen because $$$ are more important than people to them -
cappytan
James 4:17 - "if someone knows how to do what is right and yet does not do it, it is a sin for him."
The right thing to do is to protect children. Who cares if it's a "legal" obligation or not. It's the RIGHT THING TO DO.
What's worse? Breaking confidentiality or endangering children? Because those ARE the choices.
-
Fisherman
see the abuser in court with all of the cross examining and junk that goes on.
You are assuming that the defendant is guilty. That is not always the case.
