The following is from Mark O'Donnell
BREAKING NEWS: On February 6th, plaintiff Lexi Nunez filed an amended complaint in Sanders County Montana, alleging negligence in connection with her abuse. The new claim adds Watch Tower Pennsylvania as defendant, listing more than 1 Billion in assets and securities. Stay tuned!
Montana - new claim adds Watch Tower of Pennsylvania as defendant
The following is from Mark O'Donnell
Lets hope Lexi gets justice and WT/JW is hit with another big payout.
The following link is a little more detailed.
The Montana case has been re-filed!
As of February 6th, 2020, plaintiffs Nunez and McGowan have re-filed their claim in Sanders county, where the original trial was held.
I know I am going to get a lot of questions on this case so please be patient.
To give you the short explanation, this case is being filed on the basis of willful negligence on the part of Thompson Falls elders, Watch Tower Pennsylvania, and Watchtower of New York.
The original trial was predicated upon the decision by Judge Manley that Watchtower had broken Montana's mandatory reporting law. While we believe this to be correct, the Supreme Court decided that Watchtower was entitled to the clergy-penitent loophole, indicating that they had no choice but to allow Jehovah's Witnesses to take advantage of this poorly-written law.
Now that the Montana Supreme court has made this ruling, this case reverts back to some decisions which were rendered prior to the trial involving negligence.
The simple way to say this is that Lexi and Holly's attorneys were not given the opportunity to properly make their case for negligence because the judge had already assessed fault to Watchtower for failure to report.
Hence we are going back to the drawing board in making the assertion that despite Montana's laws, Watchtower and the elders will still willfully negligent in their practices.
Another way to say this is that even when a person or organization is technically innocent of breaking a law, they can still be sued for negligence.
In the Montana case, the elders were absolutely negligent in failing to warn and protect Lexi and Holly after learning of the dangers of being cared for by a known child predator.
Additionally, there have been updates in Montana law following the 2018 trial where the Statues of Limitations for civil liability have been extended, and which allow Lexi to file her case once again without fear of the expiration of SOL.
And finally, we have one more piece of news in this case:
Watch Tower of Pennsylvania has been added as a defendant in this case, despite the vocal protests of Watchtower attorneys from New York. There have been additional revelations and documents secured which contradict Watchtower's original claims that Watch Tower Pennsylvania is not involved in child abuse cases, and that they are only involved in copyright matters.
Documents obtained reveal that Watch Tower Pennsylvania has assets well exceeding one billion dollars, plus multiple offshore bank accounts and investments.
I want to thank everyone who has ever provided leaked information, documents, and details which provide proof that all of these Watchtower corporations are just alter egos for one another and for the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses.
Enough is enough. It's time to pull back the veil of secrecy and hold this organization accountable for its destructive influence upon millions of followers, particularly the vulnerable children who have suffered for so long.
WE'RE GOING BACK TO MONTANA!!
Forgive me if I'm being dumb here, but haven't any prosecution lawyers ever seen
a) the org's own claims that they do not have a clergy, and
b) when a JW confesses a sin to 1 or 2 elders, that information can be freely shared with all the other elders in the congregation, along with the Circuit Overseer, the Branch Office, and more often than not, with the elders' wives and friends.
FACT: There is is no such thing as clergy-penitent privilege amongst JW's - no matter how it's dressed up!
How can you claim clergy-penitent privilege if a) you don't have a clergy and b) you don't have a confessional?
This is a good explanation of what is going on:
Has the client-penitent privilege clause been tested in SCOTUS or only at state supreme court level?