Outlaw. Again you're trying to over simplify things. First of all the ARC is a group of politicians and not a court of law. There is no due process as recognized by any government. What evidence was Watchtower able to present other than one expert witnesses that the Commission dismissed off hand because her testimony did not conform to their findings. No cross-examination of any witnesses, no rules of evidence, any response given by Watchtower was immediately dismissed by the commission again because it did not conform to what they wanted.
Second, you keep claiming that Watchtower prevents people from telling the police. Is there any actual evidence of that other than the testimony in the ARC or from other witnesses in other courts? Is there any objective evidence? The reason I say this is because even eyewitness testimony has proven to be so unreliable that even the Illinois Supreme Court has opened up the door that there has to be other evidence in a criminal trial than just an eyewitness testimony. Also, it is so hard to prove a negative especially to people on this forum that don't care what other evidence is given. There is an example that people use to prove how hard it is to prove a negative. Can you prove to me that you never read a book? No, you can't prove that ever because how can you. In similar fashion How do you want watchtower to prove that they never told people not to go to the police?