Court denies summary judgement for Laurel Jehovah's Witnesses congregation

by OrphanCrow 161 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  Fisherman

  Simply put, in light of the forgoing and what is common knowledge of the JW procedures, there is no confidentiality.

  Not according to your conditions, but it is nonetheless confidential because the church does no report to the police.
• 

  Fisherman

  in which the Judicial branch interprets the laws

  And that is why I said (if you stop reading conclusions) that JW will be vindicate in the Higher Court

  Just because you don't like the way such laws were interpreted doesn't make the court's decision invalid.

  I never said that a Court decision is not valid (legal). I said that in my opinion it is wrong (error of law) referring to disqualifying JW from 909 or enjoying imunnity (church confidentiality) based on JW version of confession and the language used in 909.
• 

  juandefiero

  JW will be vindicate in the Higher Court

  Fisherman: What evidence do you have for that statement? Or is that pure speculation and hope?
• 

  JW GoneBad

  The legal concept of confidentiality is relatively simple. If someone provides information to someone else on the basis that, and in the expectation that, the information will be held in confidence, there is a contract of confidentiality. That is, to state the obvious - no information will be divulged to anyone.
  Simply put, in light of the forgoing and what is common knowledge of the JW procedures, there is no confidentiality.

  To Joe Grundy's point:

  The following is a very common scenario between JW elders and other buddies in the congregation:

  Me (out to dinner or other event where alcoholic beverages are being served): Hey brother elder, whatcha been upto lately?

  Bro elder (relaxed, his guard down after wine or a few drinks): I've been busy with congregation matters.

  Me: Oh ya! I've heard from others that our congregation has its share of problems.

  Bro elder (by now loose lips and very chatty): I'm on a JC with bro Brown and bro White involving sister so and so. Me and bro Jones and bro Smith are on another JC involving bro so and so.

  By the end of the night I'm told what the next 'Local Needs' part is all about and why; who is getting public reproof and why; who is getting booted out of the congregation and why! Now if that all it takes for a rank and file brother to find out what is going on behind closed doors in JCs, imagine how easy it is for an elder's wife to slip her elder hubby a 'mickey or joy juice' and likewise find out so called 'Penitent/Clergy Confidential' stuff.
• 

  Fisherman

  pure speculation

  Evidently, opinion. That is how I see the chess board.
• 

  juandefiero

  Evidently...

  LOL...
• 

  Joe Grundy

  (Probably my last comment on this point).

  RC (and perhaps other institutions, I don't know) mandate that the confession between penitent and one priest are sealed. Fine. Confidential. Secret,
  

  JW rules are not. (Two elders, JC, notes made, reported to branch, etc.) Not confidential. Not secret.

  THAT'S the f**cking difference!
  
• 

  the girl next door

  Privileges are always subject to exceptions in certain circumstances. For example, the attorney-client privilege is subject to the “crime-fraud” exception, which removes the privilege when such communications are “in furtherance of contemplated or ongoing criminal or fraudulent conduct.” This exception applies regardless of the severity of the “criminal or fraudulent conduct” at issue.

  Similarly, every other privilege is subject to certain exceptions, so the questions becomes, what makes the clergy-penitent privilege any different?

  This is particularly true given that the clergy-penitent privilege did not exist at common law, but rather is a creature of statute which must be narrowly construed.

  The United States Supreme Court has held, “exceptions to the demand for every man’s evidence are not lightly created nor expansively construed, for they are in derogation of the search for truth.”

  
  The clergy-penitent privilege, like all privileges, is in “derogation of the search for truth,” and, as such, is properly subject to limitations in certain circumstances. One such circumstance is the reporting of child abuse, where clergy members are often uniquely situated to obtain information which may help prevent such atrocious crimes.
• 

  Sugar Shane

  But, Fisherman said that it's confidential if it's simply NOT reported to the secular authorities. I believe he researched this definition from the "pulled it out of my ass" law dictionary. Or, perhaps it's based on his extensive background in....umm...err. Nevermind. I guess I'm with Grundy (and just about everyone else) on this.
• 

  Fisherman

  Not confidential. Not secret.

  Not reported to the police. Not your definition. US government has no authority to dictate to church how to practice religion in matters of confidentiality among themselves except to compel reporting to the police not regulate confidentiality within the church.