The Danger of Settlements
Dubstepped, suppose a child abuser came to you, and for some reason
Lets say you felt a moral duty
Lets say they arrest the man
Suppose he is found guilty.....Fisherman
Suppose WBT$/JW Apologists stopped making shit up..
And for some reason they did..
Lets say WBT$/JW Apologists fell over dead from being honest..
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.
In theory would not be better for the JWS elders upon first hearing of an accusation of pedophilia to make a point to contact the local police so that they could carry on with their own investigation. At this time the suspect would be place on temporary noticed of having their privileges withdrawn in the Congregation until the police investigation is completed.
This action would remove the WTS from legal liability of guilt of cover up for nondisclosure. If the police investigation finds the person in question is guilty, then the elders can proceed with DFing and making an announcement of that decision.
Also this might stop perpetrators fleeing as many do once they been caught and identified, which would also make the general public in a safer position.
The privilege would prevent the information from being used in trial,
Richard Oliver Thank you you kindly for posting clear unbiased facts. I think it is Federal Rule 506 that prevents the information to be used as evidence. But consulting with an attorney just to be sure what is legally required in that jurisdiction. Of course if a person sees a crime, he is a witness to the crime and confidentiality does not apply. He must testify to what he saw and heard and knows and believes. But again,I speaking with an attorney before speaking with the police. Speaking to the police without an attorney present or without an attorney giving you the ok may get you in trouble. I am not saying that it will, I am saying that it could.
I have no reason to doubt you Richard Oliver that such person is released from liability but laws can change and why take a chance of having to defend a lawsuit. The safest thing to do is to get legal help unless it is an emergency then one should call 911. But depending on the emergency some people call their lawyer first. even before calling 911
Richard Oliver, sorry I posted without carefully reading your post and understanding what you meant by "in good faith." I figure that you mean that a minister that discloses protected information not knowing that by doing so he is breaking the law and or believes that he should report the confidential information he is doing so in good faith. Is that correct?
Richard Oliver assuming that in one jurisdiction "good faith"reporting is exempt from liability, does the inverse also apply in such jurisdiction when a minister does not report "in good faith." Is such minister also exempt from liability?
The only real danger of the WTS making out of court settlements is that they can wave a bunch of money in front of people and arrange a gag order about the case so the WTS/JWS can further protect its outward public image.
....... thats where the danger comes into play for all of the general population.
Approximately 29 States carry penalties in their civil child protection laws for any person who willfully or intentionally makes a report of child abuse or neglect that the reporter knows to be false.In New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and the Virgin Islands, making false reports of child maltreatment is made illegal in criminal sections of State.
Nineteen States and the Virgin Islands classify false reporting as a misdemeanor or similar charge.12 12 Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming. In Florida, Illinois, Tennessee, and Texas, false reporting is a felony; while in Arkansas, Indiana, Missouri, and Virginia, second or subsequent offenses are upgraded to felonies. In Michigan, false reporting can be either a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the seriousness of the alleged abuse in the report. No criminal penalties are imposed in California, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, and Nebraska; however, the immunity from civil or criminal action that is provided to reporters of abuse or neglect is not extended to those who make a false report. In South Carolina, in addition to any criminal penalties, the Department of Social Services may bring civil action against the person to recover the costs of investigation and any proceedings related to the investigation. Eleven States and the Virgin Islands specify the penalties for making a false report.13 13 Connecticut, Florida, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming. Upon conviction, the reporter can face jail terms ranging from 90 days to 5 years or fines ranging from $500 to $5,000. Florida imposes the most severe penalties: In addition to a court sentence of 5 years and $5,000, the Department of Children and Family Services may fine the reporter up to $10,000. In six States, the reporter may be civilly liable for any damages caused by the report.14
Anyone reporting any incident of child abuse or neglect as required by law is immune from any liability, civil or criminal, that might otherwise be incurred or imposed unless the person was grossly negligent, acted in bad faith or with malicious purpose, or provided information knowing the information to be false.
If the family court determines that a person has made a report of suspected child abuse or neglect maliciously or in bad faith or if a person has been found guilty of making a false report pursuant to § 63-7-440, the Department of Social Services may bring a civil action to recover the costs of the department's investigation and proceedings associated with the investigation, including attorney's fees. The department also is entitled to recover costs and attorney's fees incurred in the civil action authorized by this section. The decision of whether to bring a civil action is in the sole discretion of the department. If the family court determines that a person has made a false report of suspected child abuse or neglect maliciously or in bad faith or if a person has been found guilty of making a false report, a person who was subject of the false report has a civil cause of action against the person who made the false report and is entitled to recover from the person who made the false report such relief as may be appropriate, including actual damages, punitive damages, a reasonable attorney's fee, and other litigation costs reasonably incurred. It is unlawful to knowingly make a false report of abuse or neglect. A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned for not more than 90 days, or both.
Any person who makes a report or allegation of child abuse, abandonment, or neglect knowing the report is false, or who reports or alleges the same in bad faith or with malice, shall be liable to the party or parties against whom the report was made for the amount of actual damages sustained or statutory damages of $2,500, whichever is greater, plus attorney's fees and costs of suit. If the court finds that the defendant acted with malice or oppression, the court may award treble actual damages or treble statutory damages, whichever is greater.
All other statutes states knowingly and intentionally. These three states lower the standard to a bad faith report. These are the criminal liabilities that are taken into account.
The states of Arkansas, California, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, North Dakota, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming, do not provide immunity from civil liability for a false claim.
The states of Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Louisana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tenessee, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wisconsin along with the US territories of Washington DC American Samoa and Guam, provides civil immunity for people who assist in an investigation of child sexual abuse.
Richard Oliver, what is relevevant in the statutes that you posted now is the protected penitent communications as it applies to the state laws that you quoted:
Richard Oliver, can such "anyone" still be held liable under Federal Law?
Also,can any injured party resulting from a "good faith" report file a suit in a state court having subject matter without having the Court dismiss it prima facie challenging the "good faith" and is the good faith the only basis for a law suit. What is the burden of proof for "good faith" and who has the burden of proof should good faith be challenged?
What a lot of people do just to be safe than sorry when it comes to anything legal that may involve them legally is to as ask an attorney first -one may have good intentions but the Courts may bnot see it that way and could get a person in trouble.