I went back into this forum a little ways and found quite a bit of discussion on the Walsh (1954) For those newly out or those who don't know of what I write, you should really check it out. Anyone who is a JW or studying with JW should see material from this trial. My take away...the printed materials of the WTBTS were to believed over the Bible and if you didn't believe the WT teachings over the Bible, ( even though they admit to false prophesy )you would be disfellowshipped and deserving of death. This was all brought out in the trial under oath by Fred Franz, and Hayden Covington and Grant Suitor ...///The JW haven't changed their tactics to this day...and that is why everyone should learn about this trial.
bringing up the 1954 Walsh Trial
by enoughisenough 15 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Vidiot
Yup.
One difference, though…
…say what you will about those OG guys, but at least they had the balls to own that shit. How they still acquired tax-exemption after that fiasco is beyond me.
I think it’s the main reason WT Legal seems to have bent over backwards to shield the WT leadership from the courts.
I suspect that today’s GB - convinced God’s got their back - would try to lie through their teeth, get caught doing so (because of all the WT internal correspondence and documentation any legal opposition would have by then), and would be eviscerated on the stand, or worse.
If they’re forced to acknowledge, under oath, how wrong they really are about everything, it - like the testimonies of the Walsh Trial - becomes a matter of Public Record, and therefore way, way harder to hand-wave away as “apostate lies” or Satanic propaganda (particularly in the Information Age, where - like the Aussie ARC inquires - we’d have full audio and video).
I think they’d sell their souls to avoid that kind of exposure, because the inevitable loss of legitimacy and authority in the eyes of any rank-and-filer with half a brain who sees it (and I suspect there’d be a lot) would be a fucking disaster.
-
Beth Sarim
It was revealed in the Walsh trial that Fred Franz was caught lying.
-
St George of England
The first I heard of the Walsh trial was when we studied the book "Jehovah's Witnesses in the Divine Purpose (1959)". This would be in the early 1960's I guess. I never read anything about it in the press, despite it being held in Great Britain and the case reached the House of Lords. So all I knew was the very selective account in that publication.
It wasn't until I joined this site some 12 years ago that I read the details of it including the transcript. If only we had the internet back then!
George
-
LongHairGal
I remember reading about this Walsh trial years ago at the beginning of my ‘Fade’ and thought it was very damning.
I was particularly shocked to read where (somebody) said that unity was important and that everybody had to believe something no matter how wrong it was and that change had to come from the top - or words to that effect. I thought it was all about ego and extreme arrogance.
-
LostintheFog1999
If this post from enoughisenough has piqued your interest and you want to know more, you can find the full 800+ page transcript of the Walsh Trial here online.
-
AudeSapere
A quick search for 1954 on this website (JWD/JWN) will bring up a few good discussions - and comments from a few memorable, insightful, prolific posters.
Warning: I might lead you down a rabbit hole if you click on the posters and read more of their posts.
-
slimboyfat
The Walsh trial is old hat 🎩
You want some really juicy nuggets get reading the Moyle v. Franz libel case of 1943, in full on the archive website
https://archive.org/details/OlinR.MoyleTrial
Or an easier to read version here
https://vdocuments.site/1943-olin-moyle-trial.html?page=1
Actually on another look the second site is not any better than the archive site. They both strain the eyes after a while because the text is not sharp. (At least for me)
I’ve read most but not all of it. It has some surprising information I’ve not seen mentioned elsewhere.
-
enoughisenough
slimboyfat, the Walsh case may be old hat, but I had no knowledge of it until this mid 2022. Now you have intrigued me about the other case.
-
TonusOH
Ray Franz had shown some of the Walsh trial transcripts in CoC. It was fascinating to see how easily the attorney got them to admit that the most important thing was that the rank and file accept what they were told, regardless of whether or not they believed it, and regardless of whether or not it was right.
I think what struck me the most was realizing just how they had been lying to us all those years. It is one thing for them to tell you who they are when in an environment that they control and where you cannot question them without suffering a severe penalty. But when they were in court and not allowed to tell blatant lies, they told a very different story. They know that they are lying to you. They think they have to.
The GB are the original Twitter- they thrive on followers, not on honesty or truth.