The Danger of Settlements

by Tech49 182 Replies latest jw friends

  • Tech49
    Tech49

    I was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against WT, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie. Conti, Fessler, Lopez, etc).

    In each of these, WT has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each. I know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread I'm sure.

    I was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just WT). In effect, the quicker the settlement, and/or the larger the settlement (even if specifics are not known), creates in itself a dangerous paradox. It exposes their willingness (or weakness), financially, to ignore the right thing to do and just get rid of the problem, to buy it out, to cover it up.

    Once a company or organization goes down the settlement road, a horrible, irreversible precedent is set. I think there is even a specific legal term for it, but cant think of it right now.... That company's cards have been shown (figuratively). They have just shown onlookers that they have a fat wallet, and are willing to cut a check, because ultimately they really don't care about anyone but themselves.

    So now, anyone who has been on the fence about what to do about their particular situation is shown a better option or possible outcome to a lawsuit that they may initiate. Likely, a long trial process will never come to fruition.

    EXAMPLE: I run a small company. If there is EVER a problem with products or services with my name on it, I will do anything and everything in my power to resolve the situation personally. Even if a lawsuit is initiated, I will do my very best to be honest, explain all the circumstances, show documented evidence, and then take my knocks if they come. (Fortunately, this has never happened, and our customer service is second-to-none). I would NEVER just say "lets settle, here's a check". If I were to do that, then anyone could sue me for anything, as that precedent has been set. My company and reputation would be trashed in no time. Granted, this is a small-scale example, but I think you see the point.

    My thought was this: Has WT made an even LARGER mistake by going down this road, repeatedly? Would it not have been less painful in the long run to admit mistakes, make policy changes, and take things to trial, even accepting monetary FINES and punishments? It seems to me that everything WT does is extremely SHORT-sighted. Even if settlements are reached AFTER a trial has concluded, would not the long-term benefits outweigh the short term gratification of making the "problem" go away? After all, no problem, or discussion of child abuse and outright lies and deception never really goes away. The internet has a way of making this stuff come up so often, that even the most die-hard JW's will see it, and after they keep seeing it time and time again, sooner or later they will look it up and read about it. WT can only say "apostate news items" and "apostate websites" for so long, as more and more LOCAL cases will educate their flock about what really goes on.

    You could even begin to think that the "collateral damage" that comes from some of their members learning the real "truth" is an acceptable percentage of loss. A "calculated risk", if you will.

    After all, as long as their total membership and percentages of "growth" continues in the plus column, who cares about the "truth"!

  • sir82
    sir82

    I dunno, people sue, and settle, against huge corporations all the time, and the corporations continue to thrive.

    People still buy Big Macs even though McDonalds settled the case about the lady spilling coffee on herself.

    I get your point about your own business, but with large corporations (such as the WTS), they have extravagantly well-paid attorneys who are very smart and who determine the (non-monetary) "cost" of settling vs. the "cost" of seeing the corporation name in a negative light via splashy headlines about a months-long trial.

    Believe me, the corporations (WTS included) always choose the path that results in the least damage to their brand. If they settle, it's because people way beyond the pay grade of you and me see that that is the least-damaging course to take.

  • Richard Oliver
    Richard Oliver
    Conti case was not settled. The Lopez and Padron cases are ongoing cases and have not been settled.
  • Londo111
    Londo111

    The Conti case was eventually settled.

  • Richard Oliver
    Richard Oliver

    No, the Conti case was not settled out of court. The case reached a verdict. Watchtower filed a motion to set aside the verdict, the verdict amount was lowered by the trial court. Watchtower appealed the case, and the appeals court lowered the damages down even further. The final amount is recorded in the Appeals court decision.

  • Finkelstein
    Finkelstein

    After all, as long as their total membership and percentages of "growth" continues in the plus column, who cares about the "truth"!

    The real truth is that the WTS has been intentionally hiding acts of pedophilia within its own organization to protect its own public image or as they proclaim god's solemnly chosen organization.

    I think the recent Catholic pedophilia public awareness has influenced certain JWS members to come out and point their finger at the WTS for doing the very same thing.

  • Finkelstein
    Finkelstein

    The settlements themselves is indicative to the fact that the WTS has been guilty of influencing its members to not report instances of pedophilia to the proper law authorities.

    The WTS has been avoiding responsibility in spite of the fact it knew that pedophilia was a serious crime in most countries. The organization just took it simply took as another sinful sexual behavior, such as adultery or fornication.

  • Tech49
    Tech49

    To Sir82: yes, I suppose so, as in "too big to fail"? Sad part is, most of the flock no longer realize that the religion that prided itself on being loving and personal is no longer that. It is not even a book-selling religious business any more. Its a corporation.

    To Richard: let's not argue the minutia, I think you get the point of my opening comments. Cant we all just be friends?. Sheesh.

    To Fink: Yes, agree. Settlements (at least from WT in these cases) are a chicken-shit way of saying "ya, we're guilty, so what?" And they will continue to ignore the simple fact that children and families are getting run over with the big corporate wheels of religion.

  • Crazyguy
    Crazyguy

    The fact is the guys at the top are arrogant narcissistic scum. They think thier shit don't stink and would not even gone down the settlement road until some of thier attorneys told them they should at least do this to keep the reputation clean.

  • Richard Oliver
    Richard Oliver

    When u are dealing with the law the details do matter.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit