KNOW ANY?
COURT CASES THE WT HAS LOST!
by badboy 32 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
defd
no.
-
Scully
There was a case in Canada where someone sued the WTS for "wrongful" disfellowshipment. The Elders failed to follow procedure, they apparently just wanted to be rid of this guy, and DFd him. They were required to retract the disfellowshipment, not just reinstate the individual.
-
badboy
SOUNDS INTERESTIND,SCULLY!
-
Scully
There was another case in Quebec, where the local congregation wanted to build a new KH, but they did not want to buy the land that was available in the zone that was allocated for places of worship and community centres. They bought a piece of land and the city refused to re-zone the land because it was not in the proper zoning area for the intended purpose. They sued the city, but the city was only required to give the application a fair hearing - not cave to the demands of the WTS to rezone the plot of land - since they did not follow the proper procedure when the initial application and appeal process was done. 2004 Supreme court of Canada case with JW's and zoning issues for KH
-
ithinkisee
Wasn't there one in Boston where now the elders can be directly sued for damages involving pedophiles and stuff?
-ithinkisee
-
metatron
You mean recent cases? There's always the famous Olin Moyle case - in which the Society got slapped down for slander.
metatron
-
integ
What's going on with the quotes case?
-Integ.
-
garybuss
Look up their record in the United States Supreme Court. They didn't win every case there. One Jehovah's Witness wanted to call a cop a Goddamn fascist and he was arrested. The Society took nickles and dimes sent in by street corner kids selling Watch Towers to defend the Witness's right to call a cop a Goddamn fascist and lost.
They only talk about their wins of course, but there are losses. Just look for them. -
garybuss
Appellant, a member of the sect known as Jehovah's Witnesses, was convicted in the municipal court of Rochester, New Hampshire, for violation of Chapter 378, ยง 2, of the Public Laws of New Hampshire:
"No person shall address any offensive, derisive or annoying word to any other person who is lawfully in any street or other public place, nor call him by any offensive or derisive name, nor make any noise or exclamation in his presence and hearing with intent to deride, offend or annoy him, or to prevent him from pursuing his lawful business or occupation."
The complaint charged that appellant, "with force and arms, in a certain public place in said city of Rochester, to wit, on the public sidewalk on the easterly side of Wakefield Street, near unto the entrance of the City Hall, did unlawfully repeat, the words following, addressed to the complainant, that is to say, 'You are a God damned racketeer' and 'a damned Fascist and the whole government of Rochester are Fascists or agents of Fascists,' the same being offensive, derisive and annoying words and names."http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/chaplinsky.html