Victoria, Australia: Report on Oct. 11th hearing involving Steven Unthank (page 3)

DT

Maybe someone should edit the Wikipedia article about the Faithful and Discreet Slave to reflect this "new light" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithful_and_discreet_slave

Mickey mouse

Hey, here's a question:

Why isn't this case on www.jw-media.org?

Isn't this "persecution directed at Jehovah's Witnesses"?

Shouldn't the world know about the cruel and unusual treatment the JWs are suffering from this court case?

They've got a map full of cases of "mistreatment and harassment of Jehovah's Witnesses" there - why isn't there a big ol' pin pointing at Australia?

Good questions!

Mary

Vincent Toole Solicitors then went on to present arguments that the "faithful and discreet slave" do not exist as a "person" nor do they exist as an "unincorporated body" and nor do they exist as a "body" of Christians.......The Watchtower Society and Vincent Toole Solicitors then presented rebuttal argument that the "faithful and discreet slave" did not exist but were nothing more than a: "theological arrangement"

After 9 years on this board, my jaw just dropped when I read this one. It's obvious that Toole (what an appropriate name for any asshole lawyer who would defend the Borg) is simply trying to play semantics, much like they do every time the WTS is dragged to court. Reminds me of the Olin Moyle case where one of the GB (was it FF?) who admitted under oath that Witnesses must believe a doctrine even if it's based "on error".

This failure on the part of the Governing Body to appear or to be represented was noticed by the Magistrate who took the unusual step of suggesting and recommending to Steven Unthank that criminal charges be brought against every single member of the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses as opposed to the unincorporated body known as the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses. The only thing that may actually prevent this from really happening is that Steven Unthank lacks the financial resources.

If I were in Australia, I'd kiss the Magistrate for this one! Barb, thanks so much for posting this......And a big 'high five' to Steven Unthank for taking the Borg on. Please keep us posted.

Dagney

"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain." Man do these words just keep on ringing in my head when I read this stuff.

Very interesting.

Never ever forget this is a corporation that will do whatever it takes to survive. It will say anything and do anything. It is not a "organization" interested in spiritually helping anyone. That tag line is just a way to a means. Maybe it once was, but now it is a machine.

This is a fascinating case Barb. Thanks so much for keeping us informed.

stuckinamovement

There has got to be a pending newspaper article on this? I am almost drooling on my keyboard at this news. Yup there is drool on my space bar.

This is a really big deal. Unthank defends the FDS and the Lawyers claim it does not exist but is rather a "theological arrangement". It's like saying that the college of the cardinals doesn't exist in real life it is just a "religous concept".

The society is quickly going to come up with new light on Matt. 24:45. If they can't defend their core foundational doctrine in a court of law, it shows that they know it is all a bunch of crap.

SIAM

wha happened?

I'm wondering what the take will be among the rank and file, if it ever makes it there. A few times I've mentioned a news article to a few of my JW friends and without exception, have no clue that something negative was on the news about JW's.

The lawyers will do or say anything to "win" this case. The arguments presented shouldn't surprise anyone who thinks outside the box. I remember in TX the lawyers there stated that they don't have a responsibility to protect one publisher from another. So there really isn't a limit to what they will say or do.

What about the JW's who were there in court? What are they being told? They heard it with their own ears. Is anyone in that area able to speak with them, or the elders in their hall. It would be interesting to hear frist hand, what the explanation is for all this

Shrugged

Sir82, they will NEVER put anything on jw-media.org that has something to do with a disfellowshipped/apostate. They know that would result in r&f starting to wonder and chew the cud. Instead the only news at jw-media is the ones that makes them look like victims. "Look at all this bad things the world is doing to us, beating us and putting us in jail, just like Jesus, the end is NEAR". But when dubious doctrines and odd procedures from the borg is getting the worlds attention, then they are quiet like a scared little mouse.

Joey Jo-Jo

Ok, I quite dont follow, while my expertise is accounting, I had to study corporation law.

The court wants to establish if the F&DS class is an incorporated entity (a registered company), if yes, only then can it be considered as a legal identity and bound by the Corporations Act rules and regulations.

The F&DS can exist but can not be judged as a company. From my understanding, Toole solicitors can tell the court that they don’t exist, saying otherwise would show a lack of understanding (from a laws point of view) or a deliberate lie.

Mr Unthank and Toole solicitors were arguing about two separate matters, while, from what was written on what occurred in court, Toole solicitors showed a lack of clarity and could have explained the F&DS class better.

jwfacts

The admissions in this trial look like it will rise to the notoriety of the 1954 Walsh trial.

sabastious

Simply jaw-dropping. This case has a viable chance to force the Governing Body to admit they purposefully setup their own "theological arrangement" to avoid being legally viable for the decisions they make on behalf of the Jehovah's Witnesses. No wonder they have been so brazen over the years, they have had a legal exoskeleton the whole time! Like going into a bar fight with a bullet proof vest.

-Sab

Victoria, Australia: Report on Oct. 11th hearing involving Steven Unthank

Share this