Of course Watchtower lawyer says it's not over yet, we are going to appeal. Thats what they are suppose to say. But Wat is going to want to put this nightmare behind them as fast as they can. Writing a check is probably the least painful way for them to deal with this, besides, they got the $$$$. They already have paid off victims to avoid trial, only difference here is they fought it and lost. What do you all think?
pay or appeal, what will they do?
by pontoon 15 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
-
bobld
Maybe I am wrong but the wbts admits it done wrong but they are appealling the amount they have to pay.
-
Paralipomenon
They have to appeal, even if it costs more money and expenses in the long run.
1) to try to get out of paying the money
2) this sets a precedent that can be referenced in future cases.
It is very much in their interest to fight this tooth and nail because they know this isn't an isolated incident. There are tens of thousands of people that could bring claim against them and they can't afford $21 million per case.
-
sunerom
Oh they have no choice but to appeal.They certainly have more than enough $$$ to write a check but there's no way they're going to admit guilt unless they absolutely are forced to.I can even see them winning an appeal after many years of litigation(although i pray they don't) but even if they don't they can put off having to accept responsibility for a long time.This is now all about damage control but let's hope this event makes enough waves to affect some real change or at least awaken some who have been living in the grey.
-
pontoon
If they appeal and lose it makes it worse. And precident has already been set with victims they've already paid off. Time will tell.
-
BlindersOff1
More they drag it out the more they look like the bad guys , more headlines will be generated . What politicians would do is
they would try to demonize the victim in some way Watchtower also has a loooong history of this its their MO . Their smartest move would be to pay
take the high road . Change policy .The downside for them is it establishes precedent. My opinion is they will not take the council of their attorneys
and cut their losses. These are arrogant , self appointed, authoritarians . They are deluded by their own grandeur , some of the Governing body
may actually be true beleivers (I doubt it) . There are dynamics here that are not fully understood by anyone YET. Make no doubt about it the JWs and the Governing body and their attorneys are now getting the full attention and critical scrutiny they so rightly deserve . I hope more victims come forward
somemight even violate their confidential aggreements with the Watchtower.I thinks its so cool Candace was never baptised so they can't slander by
calling her apostate . What a brave young lady.
All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing
Edmund Burke
-
jamiebowers
They will appeal and then probably offer a smaller settlement. But the damage is already done. The Watch Tower was found responsible for the molestation of a child by a court.
-
Band on the Run
They will definitely appeal. Also, other religious groups will hope they appeal. The WT will be so exposed to liability in CA if this case has precedence. I expect it could go to the U.S. Supreme Court. It is a very important public concern.
-
Paralipomenon
@Band on the Run - I figure you would be the best to answer this. Who would hear the appeal to this case? Since California is unified under the Superior Court title, would the appeal have to be heard by the Supreme Court, or could they hear the appeal themselves?
I'm a curious Canadian, not too familiar with the process of the American court system.
-
notjustyet
I heard the attorney for the Candace say that if they appeal the Wtbts will be charged 10% (assuming per year) interest on the money.
He also outlined what reasong the WTBTS might use to appeal.
That the information from the original victim should not have been allowed as evidence. Arrgh! Can't remember the other reasons at this moment, but said it could make it to the Supreme Court of the US, IF I did not misunderstand his comments.