Public Defamation = DF'd ??? (page 2)

Lillith26

Keyser soze... not every country is governed by the USA Constitution...

jonathan dough

One of the few defences for libel is making a statement that is actually true.

Truth is not always a defense.

wobble

I think in this country, the U.K the laws are similar, often identical to those in the USA etc. plus we come under the influence of the European union laws.

We do not have freedom of religion ring-fenced quite like in the USA.

I think here what would work simply to stop a DF'ing would be to threaten each Elder who sits on the J.C and the one prepared to do the announcement, with legal action individually. Those Elders will 'phone legal at Bethel, after changing their under-wear, and be told they are on their own., the WT ain't pikkin' up no legal tab.

The problem is the old rumour-mill gets agoin' and the effect is much the same as being DF'd

"Oh we wanted to DF him, but he threatened legal action,and so we didn't want to waste the societie's money ......" after which the Dubs shun you anyway.

Their is a letter on Doc bobs website, WWW.docbob.org which should do the job with just a little tweak here and there.It really is a VERY good letter, and I believe it did the job for him. It will not of course engender any publicity,but it may get you where you want to be.

Good luck to any who try it, I know I will if they try and DF me.

Love

Wobble

jonathan dough

so if no written contract is legally signed, then it can not be broken... (still following here? )....

Don't need a contract to be in writing for it to be binding. But I think you're fishing here. You get an A for effort, and an A+ for anger and frustration with those people.

Lillith26

Wobble- if they do 'spread the rumour' that they wanted to DF you and you are 'marked', then this is IIED Intentional infliction of emotional distress (see link provided in my second post on this thread)... which is still a valid claim in it's own right- if it can be proven that this is what was said.......

I think even text messages are admissable in some courts these days (not that I am trying to give anyone any ideas).

blondie

Of course, to legally handle any of this you would have to have a witness to these statements who would testify in court, and what witness would do that. Something in writing could be better. Too much energy.

WTWizard

They can say you are no longer a witless. If all this implies is that you forfeit the benefits of membership, so be it--this is similar to any club one might join. However, if they make the person out to be something they are not (a slut, or any other derogatory term), that could be defamation since many have been getting disfellowshipped simply for questioning the Filthful and Disgraceful Slavebugger in one minor doctrine. And, if they bust up your family (which is not one of the benefits of being in this "club"), they certainly should get in trouble for that.

dssynergy

I'm new here, so this may have been discussed already: but what happened after Doc Bob's letter? I read it. What was the response from the elders??

jonathan dough

The 'legal' perspective is that they can boot anyone out that they want, and they don't need a reason.

Yes.

undercover

I understand your angst, Lillith but if the WTS could be held legally liable for its DFing practices someone would have done it by now.

And for one little DFd dub to try to go against the mega-corp and it's corral of lawyers...well...you better have deep pockets...and still expect to lose.

I think the defamation of character lawsuit could be applied in certain circumstances, however...just not against the WT Society. If elders on the judicial committee meeting had loose lips (and many of them do) and they spread lies and the spread of these lies caused harm in your reputation, then you could go after the individual elders who spread the lies about you. Even then, it's a crap shoot, as these kind of lawsuits are hard to prove.

First, they have to spread lies. If you admitted wrongdoing in the JC meeting, even though they're not supposed to talk about it oustide of the meeting, they're not spreading lies. But if you never admitted anything, there were no witnesses or even better...if you never showed up for the JC meeting, then it might be easier to show that they were spreading malicious lies.

Second, it has to be spread amongst third parties to the point that your reputation was harmed and people were continuing to spread the lies. If the elders just talked among themselves, that's probably not enough. It would have to get passed on to wives who pass it on to other wives and pretty soon the entire congregation has heard the malicious lies. This reinforces their shunning and their hatred for you which in turn obviously hurts your reputation in the "community".

The odds of winning still are probably small, but what I like about the scenerio of suing individual elders is that the Society will not come in to support them. They're on their own. Once word gets out among their fellow elders that the Society left him to swing on his own, they're going to be extra careful about how they go about DFing processes in the future.

If enough people pursued legal action against elders, in time it could cause them to be very, very reluctant to DF anyone, thus loosening some of the control that the Society and their lackeys have through the chain of command.

Then again, it could all be wishful thinking...

Public Defamation = DF'd ???

Share this