A Legal Problem With DF'ing?

by metatron 12 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  HoChiMin

  Metatron,

  I agree with your idea and also agree with MadApostate. How so? I can see the connection from the top down within the WT and so can any one who has ever been associated with it. The question is can it be recognized in the courts with judges / juries to hold them accountable for any actions taken against them? Does the WT want numerous law suits with publicity hitting them constantly? No. So MadApostate do you discourage anyone from trying because of your concern for them or your concern for the WT?

  HCM
• 

  MadApostate

  HCM:

  Despite my numerous posts on this subject, you (and probably most others here) JUST DON'T GET IT.

  There ARE factual scenarios which can WIN against the WTS, but they are few and far between.

  I am not discouraging anyone or anything EXCEPT those XJW "leaders" who have been proven to have mislead the XJW community about the "likelihood of success" of past and ongoing lawsuits.

  What the XJW community should be doing is readily identifying and acknowledging the strengths and weaknesses of various legal scenarios. Educate XJWs which scenarios have NO chance of winning, which scenarios have Possibility of Winning, and which scenarios have Likelihood of Winning.

  DFing, child abuse, etc. are NOT "new phenomenon". If winning a lawsuit against the WTS for such were as easy as many here like to portray, then why aren't there previous Winning Cases which we can reference?

  The "Only Case" that I am aware of which can be seen as somewhat of a victory is the Texas abuse case which the WTS "settled" a couple years back. However, the Texas courts have since set precedent which indicates that the WTS would have likely won that case if they had not chickened out and settled.

  I am an advocate of "reality". That includes my realizing that some people here will continue to intentionally mislead those who are willing to believe anything negative relating to the WTS.
• 

  metatron

  I understand what you're saying but I feel a static analysis
  of the WTS' position in the world is unrealistic.

  Let's not minimize the efforts of the WTS to minimize their exposure
  to legal attack. They are taking this subject very seriously.
  The establishment of committee authority, division into separate
  corporations, and move of the GB towards 'figurehead' status
  are huge changes that the rank and file haven't grasped. Indeed,
  many of us haven't fully absorbed the meaning of this 'evolution'.

  The WTS will not capitulate into a decentralized structure over
  night, but "time makes more converts than reason". They can try
  a dozen different ways to hold on to their sick authority, they're
  not going to work. As to 'nuisance suits', jury nullification
  is a long established tradition - and they can move case law along.
  I don't think it's realistic to simply dismiss suits as whims
  of rich lawyers, either. It's a calculated business. In addition,
  there's been an amazing pile of surprizes all along the past few
  years hitting the organization - and they're not stopping! Don't
  rule out anything in a dying, senescent religion!

  Centrality of structure, doctrine and authority will give them
  headaches for years to come - legal and otherwise.

  metatron