Article: Reveal News-California court guts child abuse ruling against Jehovah's Witnesses (page 4)

DATA-DOG

Great points. I hadn't thought of it like that.

DD

DATA-DOG

Another possible comment to get a JW thinking could be:

So even though "Satan" grabbed some quick cash, "Jehovah" was also victorious, right?

Then, if they say ,"Yes!", you could add:

According to the court documents, the WTBTS "won" because they are not legally required to warn parents or protect children from known molestors. They cannot be held responsible if a known molestors harms a child. So Jehovah must agree with the courts. He must feel that the GB and Elders and Servants are not required to warn parents about child molestors. Does that sound right to you? ( Watch blank stare for several moments.)

If they disagree and feel that Chomos should be reported:

Oh, so you feel that the WTBTS should have lost and they should have to warn parents and they are responsible if a child is harmed on their watch?

( Head explodes...)

DD

millie210

Exactly DD

Without meaning to, the judge made this difficult to spin the way the Org always spins things.

They dont know what to do with this.

(spin wise)

LOL on the "head explodes..."

Vidiot

millie210 - "Without meaning to, the judge made this difficult to spin the way the Org always spins things."

What makes you think he didn't mean to?

Judges don't become judges because they're stupid, after all.

flipper

The judge was paid off pure and simple by the WT Society to minimize the judgment against the WT Society. It's certainly not a JUST settlement by any stretch of the word. My take is the judge got threatened by WT Society thugs- then paid off

Finkelstein

The real social injustice in this case in my opinion is the fact that Johnathan Kendricks exploited the hush policy by the WTS and the intervening congregations, to seek out another possible sexual victim, which happened to be Candace Conti.

To add more insult to this cruel and sick behavior, he never got charged with the crime, in spite of him having a prior conviction which he spent almost a year in jail.

Its the hush ploicy implemented by religious organizations is the problem which needs to be changed to protect innocent children and more importantly to not avail someone to exploit a hush up policy by members associated with established religious groups.

OrphanCrow

The judge was paid off pure and simple by the WT Society to minimize the judgment against the WT Society. It's certainly not a JUST settlement by any stretch of the word. My take is the judge got threatened by WT Society thugs- then paid off.

????

Flipper - I know that you're frustrated, but...statements like you just made are not productive at all. The charge of court bribery is pretty serious and should not be said lightly.

It is far too easy to point fingers at the WTS and the judge when it is more complicated than that. Lawyers need to arm themselves with the proper ammunition in order to fight these cases. Do not fault the judges who can only work with the material presented to them. Judges are not independent researchers - the lawyers are.

I read the judgement.

The judgement made sense.

If there was an error, it was made in the law to begin with, or in the way the case was filed and presented - the error was not made by the judge who was interpreting the law and evidence as it already exists.

This case is valuable in the long and lengthy fight ahead for the ones who are either in the legal process right now, or are considering entering into it. It makes an important contribution to the body of information available as to what works and what doesn't.

The judge has decided, based upon the existing law, that the WTS/elders are not required to alert parents of children that the rapist/abuser/molester may be in contact with.

At this point, what isn't going to work is to expect that the WTS and elders will announce to congregation members whether or not a child rapist/molester or sex offender is in their midst. The law has said that they don't have to. The law has said that it would be unreasonable and it may have unintended consequences if required to do so. If people would like to see this part of the law change, then it will take much work to make it a requirement as it would have effects in a much larger community.

But, they - the WTS and the elders - do have to monitor the activities of a child rapist/molester in certain environments.. That is the point that Rick Simmons was successful in making to the courts. The court has now decided that the WTS and the elders were negligent in providing that duty of care to Candace while Kendrick was engaged in church activities.

truthseekeriam

So in other words there will most likely be a new policy on making sure a known( to them only) child molester must be watched? That's a joke! There is no way they can watch them 24/7 nor will they want to.

Now, if you give parents that information they will make sure their children stay away. As a parent of a child that was molested by a ex elder I'm completely frustrated with the judges words! No duty to warn?? Really?

I truly hope this was just because maybe the lawyers made the wrong argument in this case. I mean it makes me sad for Candace because she deserved every penny of the lower courts judgement but it frightens me to think this is how the law will stand. I'm I completely wrong here? I hope so.

No duty to warn! I'm still shaking my head.

Does any of the lawyer type here on this forum know if this decision will at all effect the latest judgement against the WTS( Lopez case) ?

violias

As I think I have stated somewhere else, this put the onus on the parents. The parents are responsible as far as the WTS is concerned anyway. I think this will come down to anyone under 18 will not be allowed to work in FS or other activiess unless with a family member. The new shepherding book says that no one should prevent anyone nor sanction them if they report a child molester to police or other agencies. So as far as they are concerned, they have it covered. Parents should just assume their may be a perp while attending the KH and FS and will have to keep their children by their side OR they will be held responsible for whatever happens to them at kH or FS .

violias

Also the judgment in this case will help those future lawsuits non in on. . It may also be something that needs to go to the supreme court for a final ruling. I think that if someone has been convicted they should be on the sex register list so that is a warning. In some many cases molesters get away with a lot before they are caught ( if ever). I would think that if there had been complaints against someone the elders would have a duty to warn those with children under 18 but not sure how this could be accomplished. We can't just go vigilante on everyone, In the end, parents will be held responsible.

also, it needs to be pursued b/c registered sex offenders should not be allowed in field service and that is just obvious.

Article: Reveal News-California court guts child abuse ruling against Jehovah's Witnesses

Share this