by WTNightmare00 23 Replies latest jw friends
Excellent post, looking_glass!
WTNightmare, please don't leave us hanging here, let us know what "it tells" you. Your post "tells" me that despite your obvious ignorance of the realities of litigation, you've made conclusions about those who settled their cases with the WT. I hope they were positive conclusions, as those plaintiffs were victims, and since you don't know the facts, any negative statements about them, whether express or implied, are inappropriate and callous.
LookingGlass - Thank you for the clarification. I knew the word 'obligation' was a poor choice when I typed it but didnt know what else to use. What I was trying to refer to was the Vicki Boer case in Canada ( http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/59515/1.ashx ) where although Vicki 'won', she was apparently ordered to pay a huge sum for WTBTS legal costs, based in part becuase of her earlier refusal of WT offers to settle. My understanding was that something similar to this could have happened here in the U.S. also with regards to these 16 cases.
144001, as I stated in my post on the prior page, I told what it "indicated" to me. It was only my opinion,and I tried to express it without the intent to offend anyone! Thank you for your input!
I thought it was a non disclosure clause and not a gag order.
In any event a significant settlement was reached or Kim Norris et. al. would not have settled as these survivors needed to at least be financially settled for the rest of their lives as they continue to deal with the horriors of their past. The money should really help the survivors with any need of future therapy and should help with some of the pain and suffering.
Monetary settlements are the main remedy of civil court. It allows a plaintiff to get some justice by getting a monetary damage award for someone's negligence. That is what happened here and will happen with future cases.
There was a settlement in the cases because after significant disclosure and sigificant rulings in the favour of Kim Norris et.al., the WTS knew there was a good chance it would lose going forward to trial. Also the settlement allowed the plaintiffs a chance not to have to testify in open court. It is very painful to have to relive the trauma and then to be cross examinated about subjects like your sex life is just something else (BTW - To this day I really don't know how Vicki Boer managed to pull it off and to be so open to he press. She was a special person to do what she did. So I can just imagine how these plaintiffs would hold up - not well).
The non disclosure is the idea of the WTS as they do not want it to be known how much they settled the cases for. Believe me, if they settled for peanuts they would not have an non-disclosure clause.
One other point, in Ontario Canada if a settlement is offered, refused by the plaintiff and then the plaintiff wins a lower award than the original offer at trial, the Regulation prescribes the Court to award defendant's legal costs (usually in the hundreds of thousands of dollars) to be paid by the plaintiff. That is what almost happened to Vicki Boer in Victoria A. Boer v. the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Canada Inc. et. al. Fortunately public pressure resulted in a deal where she did not have to pay the 144,000 dollar WTS legal bill. Scarey stuff!
hawk
