My whole point is that just because the org or current jw's say someone isn't 'really' a jw, the public at large does not see it that way. If I go every week to one particular church but refuse to identify myself as xyz most people will still see me as an xyz adherent and my actions may very well bring 'reproach' upon xyz church simply by my associating with it. Some forget the the rest of the world does not know how the jw's decide who is a member or who isn't. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck it probably is a duck even if it hasn't been for swim yet.
The jw's want their cake and eat it too when deciding who are members, commit a crime? then you were never a 'real' jw, have lots of money but go around half dressed or use phallic symbols in public well, wink, wink ok you can claim to be one, are you an unbaptized minor child who needs blood? you are not a member but hey, we can use your death for the cover a magazine! win, win! (or nowadays maybe in a cartoon or video)
The gb could very well come out against the William sisters (include Prince at the time) or at the very least come down on their behavior and make no mistake of just who they are talking about like they do on a weekly basis when 'marking' or trying to embarrass a lowly rank & file member of the cong who eats, breathes and dies for the org.