From Page 89 of Day 4 Transcript - onwards:
Q. As his Honour has raised with you, one of the
difficulties that has been experienced, and this is no
fault of your own and no criticism of you, but the opinion
expressed in paragraph 36 is a compendious opinion,
obviously based upon what you have read and your
experience. Would it be of assistance to you if you were
able to provide a more fulsome, perhaps supplementary
report expressing the reasons and setting out the
documentation that you relied upon in coming to the
conclusion in paragraph 36?
A. It's a small research project, and so I haven't had an
opportunity to do that, where I laid out the years and the
different organisations and the practices that are in
place. If it was helpful to the court, then I could do
that.
Q. So if his Honour were to give permission for you to
provide a supplementary opinion, you would be prepared to
undertake the task of setting out in a more fulsome way the
reasons you have for reaching that opinion?
A. If I were asked to, yes.
.31/07/2015 (150) M L APPLEWHITE (Mr Tokley)
Transcript produced by DTI
15520
THE CHAIR: Mr Tokley, I can appreciate why you ask the
question, but the issue for us at the end of the day is not
who is best.
MR TOKLEY: Understood, your Honour.
THE CHAIR: What we have agreed, I think, is that there
are some problems with the current structure of the
processes. That's clear.
Q. Am I right?
A. Yes.
THE CHAIR:
Q. We have agreed that.
Now, I don't know of any other religious organisation
which, which is how this is framed, which has the processes
with the flaws that we have identified in the Jehovah's
Witnesses. They may have other flaws - indeed, we have
published some reports about other religious organisations
already. So certainly if you wish the doctor to do that
work, that's appropriate.
MR TOKLEY: Thank you, your Honour.
THE CHAIR: But I have to warn you, at the end of the day
the question is not who wins the competition, and what will
remain, as I understand at the moment, are the flaws in
your client's current processes.
MR TOKLEY: That's understood, your Honour, but
Dr Applewhite is here to assist the Commission. As
Dr Applewhite has said, she is not an advocate for any
party, and we consider that it would be, if it is of
assistance to the Commission, it should be offered to the
Commission.
THE CHAIR: What would be of greatest assistance is not an
expression of opinion as to who is best and who is worst,
but an expression of opinion as to what are the good things
and what are the bad things, both in the Jehovah's
Witnesses and in any else's processes, you understand?