by Room 215 57 Replies latest jw friends
The government did indeed pay for Ruby Ridge. In cash. Several Million.
And I don't think the first amendment is a bar to prosecution for libel. That's why the WT is usually so careful about how they announce disfellowshipping. They have implied that Barbara is some sort of sinner and at some point they're going to have to substantiate their claim. Look for a lie (Duuuuuh). And then we'll see if Barbara files suit.
This could get interesting.
Francois
In this instance, ROOM 215 is asking whether Barbara has a "defamation" case against the WTS for their publicly stating that she is being investigated for "serious sins" other than her "activism".
Thanks MA/AXJW.
Its good to have you around.
hawk
Than ks Angry for your comments.
I'll check back, but I believe the WT mealy-mouths alleged (unspecified) ``serious sins'' in their statements for public consumption and ``apostasy/causng divisions'' within their own precincts, the latter to ``poison'' her reputation among the friends, as you say.
As we know, the latter are considered the gravest of sins by the dubbies, an opinion unlikely to be shared by John Q. Public, whose curiosity WT strategists feel is better dealt with by being allowed to ponder just how ``serious' the ``serious sin'' might be.
Hi All,
I thought we were all serious sinners, serious enough to be killed by God. Can't you hear the WT lawer explaining that in court?
Ken P.
Ken,
We're all sinners, but not all of us get kicked out on our butts, and ostracized from the only family and friends we've ever known.
The cause of action would be libel. Libel is governed by civil and not criminal statutes. Religions are not exempt from civil or criminal actions. Libel is hard to prove, however, and even harder to set a value to the action. If you call me a S.O.B. in a public place, have you libeled me? If so, how much damage was done, and thus, how much monetary award should I get?
Religions are only exempt from government interference with respect to matters of faith, church government, and to a large extent taxation. The government is not to establish any particular sect or denomination as the preferred sect. While government can regulate how commerce-business must run its basic corporate laws, it is limited in this with respect to a religion. Although even here, if a religion decides to incorporate, which most do, they must still comply with such statutes that govern non-profit corporations.
If a religion violates criminal statutes, even in matters of faith, they can and will be held liable. A religion cannot choose to murder or use illegal drugs as part of its protected religious ritual and sacraments. Religions cannot commit financial fraud as part of protected church government. And religions cannot libel people without facing consequences.
Does Barbara, Bill, or the Pandelo's have a case for libel? Their respective attorneys can best advise them under the laws of their respective states. Even if they have a cause of action, the time and cost and potential recovery of these in a sufficient monetary award are what must be considered. In my personal opinion, it is a 50/50 shot. The Watchtower did strongly imply that there were 'other sins' outside the Dateline program ... and this could be taken as libel ... on the other hand, the statements were generalized and vague as to what exactly the allegations were. The Pendelo's and Barbara Anderson are now DF'd ... so, if the Society cannot show any proper ground for this within their own existing rules at the time their hearings took place ... this might be interesting to get into the courts. It is a matter of protected church government ... but it is also a matter of libel if there was no basis in fact or truth to charge them and make public comments about them.
Does the Watchtower have a cause of action for allegations made against them? This too must be fairly considered. The fly in the ointment for the Watchtower Society is that if they filed suits for libel against Bill, Barbara, and the Pandelo's, they would then be subjecting themselves to counter suits and to the expose' of the truth and facts. My bet is that the Watchtower knows the truth and does not want to get itself entangled in court. or the media.
Edited by - Amazing on 13 June 2002 9:40:55
I think Anderson has an excellent case for libel and slander, based on public statements made by J. R. Brown for which he presented no evidence, and for which the Society has no evidence. If a slander lawsuit is brought, the court will be forced to look at the evidence, 1st amendment or not. Even religious bodies have no right to slander people with impunity. Imagine trying to explain to a court what is involved in "causing divisions" or "undermining confidence in Jehovah's arrangement". Based on what they've done in the past, and the fact that the Society wants to claim that it is not involved in DF'ing matters but these are handled purely locally, the "divisions" could only be among the local elders themselves.
Now imagine a lawyer asking them, "So boys. You claim that you were 'divided' in some way by something that Mrs. Anderson said, and this being 'divided' is the sin that Mr. Brown referred to. Just how were you 'divided' amongst yourselves? Does that mean that some of you agreed with Mrs. Anderson's statements and others did not? Is that Mrs. Anderson's fault, or is it yours?"
Now imagine trying to explain to a court exactly what "undermining confidence in Jehovah's arrangement" entails. Translated into plain English, this means that any and all criticism of the Society amounts to "undermining confidence". They would be forced to admit that JWs are required by church law to treat the Society as infallible -- something they absolutely would not do.
If Anderson pursues a case, I think she'll win, and the Society knows it. They're dead meat.
AlanF
"Serious sins" such as "Apostasy" and "Causing Divisions" within the JW Church are left to the WTS's discretion to define. To try to dispute such in the Courts would require a court to intrude on ground prohibited by the US Const.
So perhaps the lawsuit could deal with the effects of the "Apostasy" and "Causing Division." charges. If she can show that she sustained damages as a result of the aforementioned she may have a case. Especially, if she can prove that the charges were false. Of course, these damages have to be substantiated and so it would be a good idea for her to begin seeing a mental health specialist and tell him of the psychological damage she is suffering, perhaps even get medication as well as show that she is no longer interested or could attend to her day to day activities. These matters have to be challenged in the courts. Even religions can be held responsible for the decisions they make.
The watchtower may consider this a nuisance suit and pay her off just to get rid of her. Its been done before. Then again, maybe not. They won't want the exposure but they are not afraid of it either. They can go to court and lie and evade the issue, just as they have done in the past.
What do you think, AngryXJ?
I'm afraid your Ozzie's gonna act the devil's advocate on this one, so my response is, why bother?The WTS have long conditioned its members to believe that "there is nowhere else to go". So I suppose much depends on whether the potential litigents believe that the WTS is really representing "the Truth" and is worth busting yourself to remain a member of, or whether it's just another human, imperfect organisation.
For myself, I would say that now's the time to "seize the nettle" and make the most of the time available. Use it to investigate where the real truth lies. Start on the "road to freedom" and if it means having a personal "crisis of conscience", then that's just great. At least then you'll have started to break down the barriers that the borg has placed around you. It really isn't the REAL Truth at all. But then you will need to investigate for yourself. If genuine, the scales will fall from your eyes.
Cheers,
Ozzie (of the real Truth seeking class)
