Day 2 - Fessler vs. Watchtower – Thomas Jefferson Jr takes the stand in Jehovah’s Witness Child Abuse Trial

by darkspilver 102 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • ScenicViewer

    Watchtower capitulated on the third day in a shocking admission to the judge and the entire court that elders were indeed clergy. I will be reporting further on this

    Wow, that sounds yummy!

  • Fisherman
    The Watchtower defense was so weak you could say it was crumbling. Or nonexistent to begin with.

    In a Court of public opinion. But in a Court of law, the jury cannot leave the Court room and reach a verdict before the party is over. They are required to listen to the entire case.

    If you can show law that Defendants were found legally liable of anything in this case, you can post it on this thread.

  • ScenicViewer

    More gibberish from Fisherman.

    In a Court of public opinion

    No, it has nothing to do with a court of public opinion. It only has to do with the testimony of this trial. Watchtower's defense, even the testimony of it's own witness Thomas Jefferson, Jr was embarrassing. There was no defense there.

    But in a Court of law, the jury cannot leave the Court room and reach a verdict before the party is over.

    No one said the jury reached a verdict. Reaching a verdict is what Watchtower wanted to avoid the most, and did so by settling. And why did Watchtower want to avoid a jury verdict at all cost? Because it was losing. Big time.

    A verdict would have resulted in more public humiliation than Watchtower has already endured, and likely much more loss of money. And consider the appeals that likely would have followed for years - it would have been another Candace Conti disaster for Watchtower.

    Another verdict is the last thing Watchtower will tolerate, and I don't blame them. They are bleeding profusely as a result of these trials.

    You, Fisherman, know all of this but you continue to hide your Watchtower apologist attitudes behind a cloak of misapplied legal concepts and jargon, such as this....

    If you can show law that Defendants were found legally liable of anything in this case, you can post it on this thread.

    If only you could see your slanted ideas the way others see them. You are humiliating yourself just like Watchtower did in this trial, but you have your head buried so deep in the sand of denial that you refuse to see it. At least Watchtower had the good sense to cut it short.

  • Fisherman
    Based on the testimony, they did the right thing; they quit before it got worse, much worse..

    Maybe, or maybe it was the other way around had the parties not agreed to settle. But maybe you are right.

  • Fisherman
    It only has to do with the testimony of this trial.

    And you have read all Court transcripts of this case or only what was posted with commentary on this thread?

  • Listener

    Richard Oliver - Does anyone know how to get the transcripts for this case the full transcript without commentary?

    Sorry I can't answer this but in Australia we would contact the Court Registrar/Clerk who would advise what form to apply on and the cost. Here they can also reduce the cost at their discretion. They are very costly.

  • John Redwood
    John Redwood

    Never a jw

    Thanks for asking. There are several documentaries in progress right now. I can't give you details in this forum. When the time comes, we will publish information about the projects.

    Regarding the case, I think your statement above is fairly accurate. Watchtower had already spent a significant amount of time and money on this case over the course of several years, and it was clear that they were unable to defend themselves against some of the strongest evidence I have seen in any case involving the non-reporting of child abuse.

    Every organization has the right to defend themselves, and to be honest I was hoping for several more days of testimony. But the testimony we did witness was extremely insightful. The settlement reached will ultimately add to the growing archive of penalties against this organization and others who obstruct justice and fail to report such abuse of minors.

    For the jury, what it came down to for them was one simple bottom line: The men who learned of the abuse of a minor were obligated to report the matter to authorities. It really is as simple as that. It's called doing the right thing, and those who obfuscate and defend inaction are more interested in attempting to defend their own personal viewpoint than in protecting victims. Some things are not that difficult to understand, and this case was a very good example of that.


  • zeb

    The way the wt speakers/lawyers/ witnesses for the wt behave in court is deliberately contemptible; I wish they would be charged with contempt of court..


    For those who seem possessed with the need for facts and court decisions. Consider the Canadian case where the victim refused the settlement (with gag order) as they wished the wt to give an apology. The wt refused to apologise so the settlement was denied. The victim is left with a huge legal bill and justice denied.

  • zeb

    John Redwood,

    My undying thanks for this detailed account of the chicanery and deviousness of the wts.

  • truthseekeriam

    Thank you so much for filling us all in on what happened in the courtroom John Redwood.

    I hope Fessler is able to start the healing process knowing she won't have to deal with those WT lawyers anymore. I'm really happy for her.

    I'm pretty sure if it would have went to a jury to decide the WT would be paying hugely *voice of creepy Trump*!! But then she would have to go through the years of appeals which keeps it going on and on. I wish her all the best.

Share this