Posts by OrphanCrow

51

Deposition of Richard Ashe

by truthseekeriam in

jw
friends

http://watchtowerdocuments.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/lopez-11exhibit-8-to-dec-of-copley-iso-opp-to-plnts-mfs.pdf.

did any of you guys sit down and read this??

it's long but i assure you it's a great read.. .

OrphanCrow

She/he wrote "one and five" instead of "one in five" as the context suggests. In other places he/she may have commited the same error.

I noticed that too. However, I recognized it as a speaker error and not a transcription error. If the court transcriber wrote down 'and', it is because 'and' was the word used by the speaker.

In some transcripts that I have read, the court transcriber will put in brackets the word 'phonetic'...meaning that the word is written as spoken. So a court transcript disregards even correct pronunciation - they use the word as it is said.

As I said before, a person makes many errors in spoken speech that are rarely picked up on if we are just listening - our brain makes the corrections for us when we are the listener, but when the spoken word is written down, the speech errors become evident.

I noticed that the whole thing is in video too. Is the stenographer allowed to see that video to correct obvious transcription errors before printing and distributing the final product?

I believe that with video taped proceedings, the video is used to supplement the transcript in order to increase accuracy. An accurate, word for word account is the objective of court transcripts.

51

Deposition of Richard Ashe

by truthseekeriam in

jw
friends

http://watchtowerdocuments.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/lopez-11exhibit-8-to-dec-of-copley-iso-opp-to-plnts-mfs.pdf.

did any of you guys sit down and read this??

it's long but i assure you it's a great read.. .

OrphanCrow

You are most welcome, neverajw. Thank you for your kind words...I am sure you are not the only one 'keeping n eye on me'. Lol!

As far as the court transcripts go - the reason that I like them so much is that a person gets word for word testimony and word for word what the court says. It isn't somebody else's opinion on what was said - it is exactly what was said - including all the little errors we make in ordinary speech. The way that a person giving testimony puts together their statements can be revealing all by itself. It becomes more than the words themselves - the way it is said has importance.

51

Deposition of Richard Ashe

by truthseekeriam in

jw
friends

http://watchtowerdocuments.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/lopez-11exhibit-8-to-dec-of-copley-iso-opp-to-plnts-mfs.pdf.

did any of you guys sit down and read this??

it's long but i assure you it's a great read.. .

OrphanCrow

http://www.justice.gov.yk.ca/pdf/Final_Transcript_Manual_2014.pdf

The chief concern when producing a transcript is to ensure that it is an accurate
verbatim record of proceedings. Transcribers must certify or attest on each
transcript that it is a true and faithful record of the proceedings transcribed. Since
any transcript may become the basis of a subsequent legal action (such as an
appeal), the necessity for truth and accuracy cannot be over-emphasized.
Because of the need for faithful reproduction, transcribers bear a heavy
responsibility. They must not guess as to the spoken word, but must in all cases
transcribe exactly what was said. A reporter/recorder who transcribes a record
has a duty to not only transcribe accurately, but also to ensure that the oral
comments and testimony of all parties can be heard properly at the time the
proceedings take place.

This is from a manual put out by the government of Yukon - I picked it because the wording is pretty clear. The rules for court transcribing are fairly consistent regardless of which court is being transcribed.

51

Deposition of Richard Ashe

by truthseekeriam in

jw
friends

http://watchtowerdocuments.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/lopez-11exhibit-8-to-dec-of-copley-iso-opp-to-plnts-mfs.pdf.

did any of you guys sit down and read this??

it's long but i assure you it's a great read.. .

OrphanCrow

Orphancrow, that's bollocks, have you read the document?

Yes, I have read the document.

Can you be more specific on what you mean by 'bollocks'? Please be more clear - I don't understand what part would be bollocks. I would like more detail about your accusation.

Unless, of course, you object on grounds that you are only stating your 'belief and practice', rather than your 'policy' of accusing people of something without being clear about your accusation.

22

Jehovah's Witnesses Ban upheld by Supreme Court.-TASS reports. Are Russian JWs suffering as a result of Watchtower Governing Body Hate Rants?

by Balaamsass2 in

tass news:.

russias supreme court rules jehovah's witnesses from samara extremist organizationrussia.

november 13, 20:58 utc+3 .

OrphanCrow

Well...it is a good thing that OPK Biotech had the foresight to pull up stakes in Russia and head back to American soil to manufacture artifical blood for the JWs before the WTS lost their big court case in the Russian Supreme Court.

It just wouldn't be practical for the Hemopure biotech firm to be located in a country where they have lost their core group of clinical trial monkeys. ;)

51

Deposition of Richard Ashe

by truthseekeriam in

jw
friends

http://watchtowerdocuments.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/lopez-11exhibit-8-to-dec-of-copley-iso-opp-to-plnts-mfs.pdf.

did any of you guys sit down and read this??

it's long but i assure you it's a great read.. .

OrphanCrow

Whoever did the transcription made lots of errors, or is that normal for this type of document?

The errors come from the speakers themselves. The person doing the transcripting writes down exactly what was said.

As you go on though you'll see the transcriptor is using shorthand to document the discussion so i guess that's what's caused some of the obscure nonsensicle sentence structures.

The obscure nonsensicle sentence structures come from the speakers themselves, not the person doing the transcribing. A speaking voice rarely is grammatically or structurally correct. We think we speak correctly, but we don't. Our spoken speech has far more mistakes in it than a written statement does.

I was surprised that the judge in charge allowed the incessant objections from the other counsel.

It is how the legal system works. And why we have counsel - so that objections can be made for improper questioning. It isn't a matter of what the judge allows - it is a matter of what is allowed under the law. Even the judge has to abide by that.

This is a real court case - not one scripted for television or the big screen. This isn't Hollywood, it is not made for entertainment value.

Truthseekeriam - thanks for posting that - I like reading court documents. :)

22

Jehovah's Witnesses Ban upheld by Supreme Court.-TASS reports. Are Russian JWs suffering as a result of Watchtower Governing Body Hate Rants?

by Balaamsass2 in

tass news:.

russias supreme court rules jehovah's witnesses from samara extremist organizationrussia.

november 13, 20:58 utc+3 .

OrphanCrow

This is a fascinating document. I would love to read an accurate translation, the fractured English just gives the flavor.

I agree. that is why I posted it in its entirety. And I couldn't link to it because it just doesn't exist anywhere in cyberspace that I know of.

I wish now that I had saved a copy of the original Russian so it could be translated accurately. Que sera...at least I managed to grab what you see.

It was posted by an exJW Russian. The forum still exists but I am not sure if there are any exJWs on it anymore - this file had disappeared.

It looks to me that the text has been subjected to rigorous examination. The advances in thinking has made this branch of learning scientific with a computer program (named BAAL) analysing the vocabulary used and measuring the results being one of the tools. The people who have examined the material have used recognised methods of evaluation before reaching conclusions.

That is what really interested me about this document - the examination of the text in such detail and with scientific analysis to back up the conclusions. And then the analysis of how the organization is actually structured - in such a way that individual freedom and choice is absent within the confines of the organization.

This judgement is not going to be easy to overturn. There is every reason to view the material as being at least anti-social. Having said all that, banning a religion is a big step. Voltaire said “Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too”. That is the freedom we need.

No, it won't be. And that is because Russia is not taking away the freedom of a religion - they are not banning a religion - they are not recognizing the Watchtower as being a religion - they are labelling them a 'political organization', a sect. The Russian experts conclude that the organization of the Watchtower Society is a harmful organization that doesn't qualify for religious status.

As far as thinking for yourselves - that is exactly why Russia won't give WTS religious status - The Watchtower Society doesn't allow its members to think for themsleves.

13

Jehovahs Witness new mother dies after she refuses to be given blood

by Laika in

just spotted this on the tube ride home.

sorry if it's been posted already, didn't see anything.

i've noticed the standard prints a few articles about jw scandals, i wonder if they have an exjw in their midst?.

OrphanCrow

If the Borg was sued by family members who lost someone over the blood issue, that would be 50 times bigger than the child abuse scandal they're going thru now. I guess it has happened, but with all the silly, frivolous lawsuits going on now, the husband has definite reason to sue in my opinion

I have no idea how many people have tried to launch legal action against the Watchtower protesting the death doctrine. However, the number of people who have died since the beginning of the blood ban is staggering. David Reed, in his book Blood on the Altar, repeatedly makes the point that, overall, the Watchtower is responsible for far more deaths than Jonesville or Waco.

It is difficult to estimate the total number of causalties, but, according to the Australian 'Blue Book', there is likely over 100,000 JWs who have sacrificed their lives since the ban's beginning in 1945:

http://www.anzca.edu.au/resources/college-publications/pdfs/ANZCA%20Blue%20Book%202011%20P9.pdf

It is estimated that approximately 1000 Jehovah’s Witnesses die annually worldwide and as many as 100,000 may
have died by abstaining from blood transfusions since the blood ban was introduced in 1945.

!000 JWs die annually from refusing blood.

It is surprising that so few make into the headlines.

The Watchtower Society is reluctant to release their 'pedo-list'. I wonder how tightly guarded their 'death book' is.

13

Jehovahs Witness new mother dies after she refuses to be given blood

by Laika in

just spotted this on the tube ride home.

sorry if it's been posted already, didn't see anything.

i've noticed the standard prints a few articles about jw scandals, i wonder if they have an exjw in their midst?.

OrphanCrow

The good news, however, is that some JW mothers will accept blood.

http://www.manitobaphotos.com/theolib/downloads/Responses_by%20Pregnant_Jehovah 's_Witnesses_on_Health_Care_Proxies.pdf

*sorry...this link will probably have to be copied and pasted into your address bar...it doesn't seem to want to link the full title

OBJECTIVE: To review the treatment options presented on the New York State Health Care Proxy for Jehovah's Witnesses, which is signed by pregnant women when they present for care.

METHODS: Chart reviews were performed for all women who presented to labor and delivery at our institution from 1997 to 2002 and identified themselves as Jehovah's Witnesses. A patient was included in the study if a completed health care proxy was available in her chart. Data were derived from the health care proxy and from the Mount Sinai School of Medicine's Blood Product Checklist for Jehovah's Witness Patients. Variables of interest included age, race, parity, and antenatal and perinatal complications.

RESULTS: A total of 61 patients were identified. Of these, 39.3% agreed to accept a variety of donated blood products, 9.8% would accept donated packed red blood cells, and 50.1% would accept neither from a homologous donor. With respect to nonstored autologous blood, 55% of respondents would accept either intraoperative normovolemic hemodilution or transfusion of their own blood obtained by a cell salvage system. No significant differences in responses were noted for any of the above-mentioned variables.

CONCLUSION: This review refutes the commonly held belief that all Jehovah's Witnesses refuse to accept blood or any of its products. In this population of pregnant women, the majority were willing to accept some form of blood or blood products. This information can be used to help health care providers counsel a patient when she is initially faced with considering these issues and may help to remove the stigma of accepting one of the options.

from the pdf -

When a physician counsels a Jehovah’s Witness, there are several ethical and medicolegal considerations that should be explored. This review demonstrates that this is the very first query of its kind to look at what the actual responses of pregnant Jehovah’s Witnesses have been when faced with the realization they will have with a 2% risk of receiving transfusion. The knowledge that about 50% of patients in this series agreed to accept blood or some blood products may be of value to physicians in counseling other women who will soon undergo labor and delivery and may assist those patients in making their decisions. This review is not meant to coerce any patient’s decision, but it may help put some women at ease when they fell that they are deviating from their belief system. Such a patient is not alone in this circumstance, and that knowledge may make the difference between life and death when an unexpected hemorrhage occurs.

13

Jehovahs Witness new mother dies after she refuses to be given blood

by Laika in

just spotted this on the tube ride home.

sorry if it's been posted already, didn't see anything.

i've noticed the standard prints a few articles about jw scandals, i wonder if they have an exjw in their midst?.

OrphanCrow

Women who are Jehovah’s witnesses are at a six times
increased risk for maternal death, at a 130 times increased risk for
maternal death because of major obstetric haemorrhage and at a 3.1
times increased risk for serious maternal morbidity because of
obstetric haemorrhage, compared to the general Dutch population.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2009.02191.x/pdf

Being a woman and birthing babies is hard enough. And then throw in the death doctrine of the Watchtower Society on top of that - and you get a "six times increased risk of maternal death".

The JW cult should come with a black box warning.