It appears that Watchtower has developed a new strategy in handling these cases.
When sued...
- Make a low offer to pay off the victim.
- If the offer is rejected proceed with trial. Test the waters for a few days to see how it is going.
- If the trial is going in Watchtower's favor, proceed to the end. If they get a win they have bragging rights.
- If the trial is going badly, simply throw in the towel and write a big, fat check to the victim.
This method saves the public humiliation of losing as in the Candace Conti case and the ongoing Jose Lopez (and others) vs Gonzalo Campos cases that have resulted in massive public exposure of Watchtower's pathetic child protection policies.
It addition to the embarrassing public exposure there are the multi-million dollar judgements which are hitting Watchtower hard. Add to that the sometimes massive punitive damages, followed by appeal after appeal, and in the end Watchtower looses money, reputation, and credibility, even among many of it's own followers who inevitably become aware of the proceedings.
With a payoff, after testing the waters of the trial, Watchtower can claim it didn't lose and the negative publicity is kept to a minimum. We can't know how large the payoffs are, but when the plaintiff has a strong case the payoffs must be hefty in order for Watchtower to close out the matter and walk away.
I strongly believe that Watchtower cares much more about the negative exposure than the money.