The factors of the Rowland v. Christian case were applied to arrive at the latest Conti ruling, according to an article entitled 'In Childhood Sexual Abuse Case, California Appellate Court Finds Church has No Duty to Prevent Its Members from Harming Each Other':
"The sole basis for the punitive damages claim was the contention that the defendants failed to fulfill their duty of warning members of the congregation that the Witness had molested a child.
On appeal, the reviewing court found that the alleged duty to warn could not be justified on the basis of a special relationship because there is “no authority for any such broad duty on the part of a church to prevent its members from harming each other.” The court also applied the factors of Rowland v. Christian to determine whether a duty existed..."
www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/in-childhood-sexual-abuse-case-californ-19456/
......
Now take a look at this:
" California Civil Code section 1714 imposes a general duty of ordinary care, which by default requires all persons to take reasonable measures to prevent harm to others.
In the 1968 case of Rowland v. Christian, the court held that judicial exceptions to this general duty of care should only be created if clearly justified based on the following public-policy factors:
*.the foreseeability of harm to the injured party;
*.the degree of certainty he or she suffered injury;
*.the closeness of the connection between the defendant’s conduct and the injury suffered;
*.the moral blame attached to the defendant’s conduct;
*.the policy of preventing future harm;
*.the extent of the burden to the defendant and the consequences to the community of imposing a duty of care with resulting liability for breach;
*.and the availability, cost, and prevalence of insurance for the risk involved. "
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_of_care
So, do you think that the Watchtower should have been found to legally have a duty of care, bearing in mind the above-quoted factors?
Or do you think that the appellate court decision was correct?
defender of truth
JoinedPosts by defender of truth
-
6
The Rowland v. Christian case was used to arrive at the Conti decision... But should there have been a legal duty to prevent harm?
by defender of truth inthe factors of the rowland v. christian case were applied to arrive at the latest conti ruling, according to an article entitled 'in childhood sexual abuse case, california appellate court finds church has no duty to prevent its members from harming each other':"the sole basis for the punitive damages claim was the contention that the defendants failed to fulfill their duty of warning members of the congregation that the witness had molested a child.on appeal, the reviewing court found that the alleged duty to warn could not be justified on the basis of a special relationship because there is no authority for any such broad duty on the part of a church to prevent its members from harming each other.
the court also applied the factors of rowland v. christian to determine whether a duty existed..."www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/in-childhood-sexual-abuse-case-californ-19456/......now take a look at this:" california civil code section 1714 imposes a general duty of ordinary care, which by default requires all persons to take reasonable measures to prevent harm to others.
in the 1968 case of rowland v. christian, the court held that judicial exceptions to this general duty of care should only be created if clearly justified based on the following public-policy factors:*.the foreseeability of harm to the injured party;*.the degree of certainty he or she suffered injury;*.the closeness of the connection between the defendants conduct and the injury suffered;*.the moral blame attached to the defendants conduct;*.the policy of preventing future harm;*.the extent of the burden to the defendant and the consequences to the community of imposing a duty of care with resulting liability for breach;*.and the availability, cost, and prevalence of insurance for the risk involved.
-
-
defender of truth
-
11
Latest on Otuo v Jonathan David Morely & Watchtower Bible and Tract Society + Otuo v Watchtower Bible & Tract Society
by Adwoa Kromo ina month ago someone inquired about where the case against watchtower in otuo v watchtower was at currently.
firstly the claimant has brought two separate claims against the watchtower .
case 1 relates to a suit in slander premised on the words , "frank otuo is no longer a jehovah witness".
-
-
defender of truth
Thank you so much for posting this.. few people seemed to take note of how big this case could be. Please can you keep us updated?
Earlier thread here:
-
754
Theists, why does God allow suffering..
by The Quiet One in..specifically, the suffering of animals.
you can talk about free will/sin/people choosing to not listen to god etc to explain human suffering being allowed.. but how can you love a god that allows animals, that haven't sinned or chosen to not have anything to do with god, to have their short lives ended in often long, drawn out, painful ways.
i could list stories i've read that would probably make you feel ill, but i'm not looking to shock anyone or start an emotional debate.
-
-
defender of truth
In this discussion, Michael Murray (he's a theist who wrote a book called nature, red in tooth and claw) defends the concept that a 'good' God could allow animals to suffer and die for millions of years.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPTvxlkSJzg
This is is a review of Michael Murray's book for anyone who is interested:
www.apologetics315.com/2014/03/book-review-nature-red-in-tooth-and.html?m=1
Please share any thoughts or questions that you have on the discussion.
-
22
Do you want to take action to support mandatory child abuse reporting? (UK or US mainly)
by defender of truth inthis quote is just for discussion purposes, not my political bias or anything... .
" a 'revolution in attitudes' is needed to safeguard children from sex abusers, according to the shadow home secretary, yvette cooper.in an interview with the independent on sunday, ms cooper said that the problem was wider than the historic cases uncovered through the jimmy savile scandal and the abuse of hundreds of children in rotherham.she said that childrens voices must be heard by organisations which had failed to act in the past, and pledged that a labour government would make the reporting of abuse a legal requirement... we need to introduce mandatory reporting so that no institution can ever be tempted to think that the reputation of the institution matters more than the protection of the child ... there has to be a stronger obligation to report and to act.labour has included mandatory reporting in the partys pre-election manifesto and has also said it will set up a cross-whitehall unit to tackle child protection.
"http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/child-sex-abuse-shadow-home-secretary-calls-for-revolution-in-attitudes-to-safeguard-vulnerable-10077725.html.
-
-
defender of truth
Why Online Petitions Work
Think of it this way: What if your company received thousands of emails from valued customers asking you to use a different supplier for your parts? What if you started to receive emails from each of your neighbours asking you to stop playing loud music at night? How quickly would you act?
That’s the unique thing about creating an online petition on Change.org: when you specify an email address for your target, each time a supporter signs your petition, an email is automatically sent directly to that person. Governments, companies and individuals value their reputations and feel accountable to their neighbours, constituents and customers. When hundreds or even thousands of emails arrive in their inboxes, the message is very hard to ignore.
www.change.org/en-GB/guides/how-an-online-petition-works
" MandateNow, supported by Survivors UK, Respond and The Survivors Trust, the national umbrella agency for over 130 specialist sexual violence and childhood sexual abuse support organisations throughout the UK, are petitioning for the introduction of legislation to significantly improve the culture and delivery of child protection in faith settings, schools, sports organisations, the NHS, care settings, and other institutions in which children are looked after by trusted adults. "
www.change.org/organizations/hadley_residents_association
Thanks to the likes of jhine and snugglebunny, there are now only..
" 85 signatures needed to reach 7,500 "
www.change.org/p/educationgovuk-introduce-law-requiring-adults-working-with-children-to-report-alleged-abuse-mandatenow -
27
A coordinated effort to bring up Watchtower pedophelia to the public's attention.
by Village Idiot ina statement that phizzy made on jonathan drake's thread on flyers gave me the following ideas.. we should make a flyer on the issue of the watchtower pedophilia issue written with the object of alerting the public about the jw door to door activity.
phizzy suggested the title, "the paedophile at your door".. on that flyer should be the contact information of our most informed member on the subject who's willing to talk to the media.
barbara anderson perhaps?.
-
-
defender of truth
I think it would be far more effective to join other groups campaigning for the mandatory reporting of abuse cases.
Fair point. I also support that as a way to make a difference, for the safety of children.
" MandateNow, supported by Survivors UK, Respond and The Survivors Trust, the national umbrella agency for over 130 specialist sexual violence and childhood sexual abuse support organisations throughout the UK, are petitioning for the introduction of legislation to significantly improve the culture and delivery of child protection in faith settings, schools, sports organisations, the NHS, care settings, and other institutions in which children are looked after by trusted adults. "
-
27
A coordinated effort to bring up Watchtower pedophelia to the public's attention.
by Village Idiot ina statement that phizzy made on jonathan drake's thread on flyers gave me the following ideas.. we should make a flyer on the issue of the watchtower pedophilia issue written with the object of alerting the public about the jw door to door activity.
phizzy suggested the title, "the paedophile at your door".. on that flyer should be the contact information of our most informed member on the subject who's willing to talk to the media.
barbara anderson perhaps?.
-
-
defender of truth
I can't get involved in a campaign, I'm still in due to living with JW family.
But I hope that these are helpful...
Best of luck :)
(Who's knocking at your door? Pedophile Flyer)
www.aawa.co/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/ABUSE3.pdf
(spanish version)
www.aawa.co/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Qui%C3%A9n-est%C3%A1-tocando-a-su-puerta-Whos-Knocking.pdf
(AAwa child abuse flyer)
www.aawa.co/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/AAWA-child-abuse-flyer.pdf
The child abuse flyer is also available in French, Portugese, Romanian and Italian..
www.aawa.co/publications/flyers-and-handouts/ -
754
Theists, why does God allow suffering..
by The Quiet One in..specifically, the suffering of animals.
you can talk about free will/sin/people choosing to not listen to god etc to explain human suffering being allowed.. but how can you love a god that allows animals, that haven't sinned or chosen to not have anything to do with god, to have their short lives ended in often long, drawn out, painful ways.
i could list stories i've read that would probably make you feel ill, but i'm not looking to shock anyone or start an emotional debate.
-
-
defender of truth
BTTT for any believers.. Please share your view, or answer to the above post. -
56
Question for atheists and nonbelievers
by pressman ini profess to teach the truth to you all and get you to all to think and believe.
believing in christ through his words and not through evil religious cults, like hoj and jw, can and will save you.
do you all realize that every time you are victorious and receive something of value through your hard work and sweat, it was our holy god who blessed you.
-
-
defender of truth
That isn't a question, it's a speech..
I have a question for Theists.. (answers to be posted on the following thread please)
www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/222352/theists-why-does-god-allow-suffering
-
9
Court Partially Reverses Judgment in Church Molestation Suit
by defender of truth incourt partially reverses judgment in church molestation suit.
panel says jehovahs witnesses had no duty to warn congregants, but should have kept known molester away from children.
by kenneth ofgang, staff writer.
-
-
defender of truth
When the “clergy-penitent” privilege was codified, the justice noted, the California Law Revision Commission commented that the decision to reveal or keep confidential such communications was “better left to the discretion of the individual clergyman involved and the discipline of the religious body of which he is a member” than become the subject of legislation.
“Courts should likewise be wary to intrude in this realm,” Siggins wrote.INDIVIDUAL clergyman involved?! How does that apply in this case?
He and another elder, Gary Abrahamson, went to the family home and discussed the matter with Kendrick, his then-wife, and the daughter.
Clarke said he wrote a letter to the parent organization, Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York, Inc., reporting on the meeting.
-
9
Court Partially Reverses Judgment in Church Molestation Suit
by defender of truth incourt partially reverses judgment in church molestation suit.
panel says jehovahs witnesses had no duty to warn congregants, but should have kept known molester away from children.
by kenneth ofgang, staff writer.
-
-
defender of truth
www.metnews.com/articles/2015/jeho041515.htm
Court Partially Reverses Judgment in Church Molestation Suit
Panel Says Jehovah’s Witnesses Had No Duty to Warn Congregants, but Should Have Kept Known Molester Away From Children
By KENNETH OFGANG, Staff Writer
Church elders who knew that a member had molested his stepdaughter had no duty to warn the congregation, but did have a duty to supervise the member’s subsequent participation in the church’s field activities, the First District Court of Appeal has ruled.
Div. Three Monday upheld the award of nearly $2.9 million in compensatory damages against officials of Jehovah’s Witnesses, holding them responsible for Jonathan Kendrick’s abuse of Candace Conti from 1994 to 1996, when she was between the ages of nine and 11 years old.
The court said the congregation to which Kendrick and Conti’s family belonged, and its parent organization, were liable because the two were allowed to do “field service”—going door-to-door to spread the church’s beliefs—together even though the elders knew that Kendrick had previously molested his 14-year-old stepdaughter.
No Punitive Damages
The panel, however, overturned an award of more than $8.6 million in punitive damages against the parent organization, because it was based solely on the untenable theory that the church had a duty to warn Conti’s parents and other members that Kendrick was a child molester.
Conti, who left the church as an adult, testified that Kendrick abused her several times a month. In an interview with “ABC Nightline,” she said she told church elders of the abuse, but they refused to act because she did not have two witnesses to the molestation.
The television program reported that about two dozen others who claim to have been abused as children by fellow Jehovah’s Witnesses have brought suits since Conti won her verdict.
According to the trial evidence, Michael Clarke, an elder of the North Fremont congregation where Kendrick’s and Conti’s families belonged, was told in November 1993 of an incident four months earlier where Kendrick had touched his stepdaughter’s breast. He and another elder, Gary Abrahamson, went to the family home and discussed the matter with Kendrick, his then-wife, and the daughter.
The elders testified that Kendrick told them the touching was “inadvertent,” but that they didn’t believe him. They said they neither encouraged nor discouraged the victim and her mother with regard to whether to call police, contrary to the ex-wife’s testimony that she was told to keep the incident private.
Clarke said he wrote a letter to the parent organization, Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York, Inc., reporting on the meeting. A heavily redacted version of that letter was introduced at trial.
Removed From Position
In the unredacted portion, Clarke said the elders were going to remove Kendrick from the role of “ministerial servant,” meaning he would no longer be allowed to perform administrative functions such as distributing literature to members. Clarke testified that congregation members were told that Kendrick was no longer a ministerial servant, but were not told why he was removed.
The defense also presented testimony that under church policy, a known child molester may engage in field service, but not with a child.
Conti’s lawyers introduced a 1989 letter from the Watchtower society to all elders in the United States. It said that elders must “give special heed” to the biblical warning not to “reveal the confidential talk of another,” in order to avoid “serious legal problems for the individual, the congregation, and even the Society.”
It also warned that “[w]ordly persons are quick to resort to lawsuits if they feel their ‘rights’ have been violated” and that the church’s adversaries “readily take advantage of any legal provisions to interfere with it or impede its progress.” In cases of child abuse, elders were told to protect victims “from further danger” and to contact the society’s lawyers “immediately,” while “protecting” written material, avoiding “[u]nauthorized disclosure,” and maintaining confidentiality.
Friend of the Family
Conti testified that Kendrick befriended her father and became a regular visitor to their home. During that period, he repeatedly drove her to his home after meetings or during field service, and molested her, he testified.
Some congregants, however, said they never saw Kendrick and Conti doing field service together, or leaving church together for that purpose, and did not see Kendrick hugging Conti or having her sit on his lap at church. Conti and one other congregant testified otherwise.
Conti initially sued Kendrick, the congregation, and the society. Kendrick—who told “Nightline” that he was never alone with Conti and never behaved inappropriately with her—settled by agreeing not to defend himself at trial or harass Conti or her witnesses, in exchange for a covenant not to execute any judgment against him. Journalists were able to locate Kendrick because he is a registered sex offender, having been convicted of a misdemeanor in connection with the touching of his stepdaughter and then convicted in 2004 of molesting his current wife’s 7-year-old granddaughter, according to sources.
Jurors found Kendrick liable for molestation, and the congregation and society liable for both failure to warn and failure to supervise. They found Kendrick 60 percent responsible, and awarded $7 million in compensatory damages and $21 million in punitive damages, reportedly the largest verdict for a single plaintiff in a church sexual abuse case up to that time.
Of the compensatory damages, $130,000 were economic damages for which all defendants were responsible. Of the $6.87 million in non-economic damages, 60 percent were allocated to Kendrick, 27 percent to the society, and 13 percent to the congregation. The punitive damages were allocated entirely to the society, but Alameda Superior Court Judge Robert McGuiness reduced the award to $8.61 million.
Justice Peter Siggins, however, writing for the Court of Appeal, said there was no basis for a plaintiff’s verdict for failure to warn, and therefore no basis to assess punitive damages on that claim.
While neither the privilege for penitential communications nor the mandatory reporting laws applied in this case, the jurist explained, the public policy underlying those laws “militates strongly against imposition of the duty claimed here to inform congregations of such communications.”
When the “clergy-penitent” privilege was codified, the justice noted, the California Law Revision Commission commented that the decision to reveal or keep confidential such communications was “better left to the discretion of the individual clergyman involved and the discipline of the religious body of which he is a member” than become the subject of legislation.
“Courts should likewise be wary to intrude in this realm,” Siggins wrote.
With regard to failure to supervise Kendrick’s field service, however, the jury verdict must be sustained because there was substantial evidence that the elders failed to carry out the society’s stated policy of barring molesters from being with children.
“Conti described how Kendrick would separate her from field service groups, take her to his home, molest her, and then take her back to Kingdom Hall or the service group,” Siggins explained. “The jury could find from this evidence that the elders were negligent in failing to supervise Kendrick’s field service.”
Imposing a duty to supervise under circumstances like those of this case, he went on to write, is appropriate given the foreseeability of the molester reoffending, the heightened risk when the molester is alone with a child, the reasonableness of the burden imposed, and the policy in favor of imposing liability as a way of preventing future harm.
The case is Conti v Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York, Inc., 15 S.O.S. 1869.
Copyright 2015, Metropolitan News Company