Plaintiff awarded in punitive damages -21M & 1 dollar. Total award, 28M & 1 dollar. Here's more info
by AndersonsInfo 106 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
-
wha happened?
That's what I'm trying to chase down mid. When I did a search on the board, the links are no longer working
-
ScenicViewer
blindnomore,
ScenicViewer, don't forget $1 along with $21 million!
Oops! My bad.
-
minimus
Let's see how they'll spin this thing.
-
AndersonsInfo
wa happened?, Yes, MagwichCuckoo is correct. I asked the same question and found out that the statement that the WT had a written policy which instructed elders in its congregations to keep reports of child sex abusers within the religious group secret to avoid lawsuits has reference to that July 1, 1989 BOE letter. That letter was recently replaced by a new "legal" letter that Atlantis introduced us to here on JWN a few months ago. It does not have a sub-topic on child abuse as the 1989 letter does. On page one, the April 9, 2012 letter states next to number 4. "Direction on handling child abuse matters can be found in separate correspondence."
I just looked at the 1989 letter and I'll leave attorneys in the future to discuss where that policy is stated.
-
life is to short
It happened to me sir82. I was told to shut up or be df'rd. Also it took the elders well over three months to get any kind of letter from the pedophile's former hall and from what I got bsck from my elders his crime was really watered down.
The elders made me out to be crazy, mentally ill and just out to get this poor brother.
LITS
-
AnnOMaly
The specifics had to be very damning for such general damages and punitive award. Something hapened that was unconscinable to the jury, The Witness lawyers could have evoked some sympathy for the plight of the plaintiff. It is not clear to me what was different in this case compare to the previous cases. Perhaps one brave plaintiff.
I only have little pieces but what I found notable was that in one document, the Defendants' Statement of Facts, it was argued that the incident with the step-daughter in '93 was unintentional or accidental (touching) yet the perp was removed as a MS. If it was an innocent mistake, why did the elders remove him?
There were also several motions to force the other defendants (the two congo. elders) to answer the questions put to them, namely, why Kendrick was removed as a MS. Whenever the question was asked, the defendants' counsel objected and instructed that no response should be given on the basis of clergy-penitent confidentiality. The motions to get them to answer were approved (cited precedents in cases with the Catholic church and also if others know of the crime, confidentiality has been broken anyway) but I haven't found out what their responses were in the end.
But if I'd have been a juror, and based on those pieces of info., I would have concluded that the elders (and by extension the WTS) DID know there was a history of molestation by this 'brother,' that he had church privileges removed because of it, and that further victims could have been spared had they not brushed it all under the rug.
-
sir82
LITS,
Sorry to hear that.
Have you ever considered suing? Seems like there is a precedent now.
-
JW GoneBad
Barbara says: 'This amazing result could not have come to a more deserving young woman, Candace'
Yknot says: 'Thank you Barbara for the update!! Thank you Mr. Simons for taking her case!! Thank you Candace for your bravery, tenacity, dedication and strength!!!! Prayers for you to continue in your recovery from such a horrific experience.'
-