Bobjohnrob,
First, thanks for participating in what I believe to be a civil, rational discussion of these sensitive issues. All too often, when individuals come to the board to present a more pro-JW point of view, the mud tends to fly from both sides very quickly. So, I really appreciate your input.
A couple of points:
1 - I'm not an attorney so I can't really comment on whether there were appealable errors. When I first saw this story, my first thought was that they were clearly going to appeal. I think the punitive damages portion is going to be reviewed but the 3 to 1 ratio between the compensatory and punitive award seems in line with the limits the Surpreme Court has established. In cases where a huge award is granted, many times the corporations and plaintiffs will settle prior to appeal for an amount much less than the award. However, I don't see that happening because the WTS realizes that if this case stands, they will need to brace themselves for many more lawsuits. Also, it seems like this plaintiff doesn't appear inclined to settle. I believe they will take this one ultimately to at least the CA Supreme Court and perhaps to the US Supreme Court if they can make a constitutional argument.
2 - I think both sides viewed this as a landmark case because it's the largest verdict of its kind. If this verdict stands (which it may not, who knows), I do believe that the theory will be used in other cases against other institutions (religious and otherwise). It will be interesting to see if other religions file "friend of the court" briefs in support of the WTS. My guess is they will because they know that if this case stands, they'll be next in line.
3 - According to the San Francisco Chronicle report http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/06/15/BAUQ1P2PH2.DTL Kendrick was a MS at one point and was removed due to the incident involving his stepdaughter which the elders handled but was never reported to the police. While a MS is the lowest level of oversight a person can have, it does create a level of trust with some members of the congregation. It doesn't with me because I was a MS then an elder and I know firsthand that they are no better or worse than anyone else. I believe the argument was that if the congregation had been warned when Kendrick was removed in 1993 of the reason why he was removed, then the abuse committed against Conti would not have occurred because her parents would have never allowed her near this person.
4 - I don't believe the sex registery was place in 1994 because the Megan's Law legislation wasn't passed until 1996. But, he was convicted in 1994 for the abuse against his stepdaughter. While you mention it was a misdemeanor sexual battery, that still will put you on the sex offender registration list. I'm not sure it's fair to say the police viewed him as no danger, he was convicted of a crime. That's still serious.
5 - The fact that most predators groom their victims and that it's usually from a close circle is a potential argument as to why he could be trusted in field service with an responsible person going with him. But, religious connections are often used to gain trust with the potential victim just like charity connections (Boy Scouts and Sandusky for 2 examples). It's not a JW specific issue, it's just that within a religious congregation, there's a level of trust that is higher than it is within the general population. Trust is what these guys use to gain access.
6 - I would say that among born-in's (both my wife and I fit that), we watch our kids like hawks. Both of us have friends that have been abused by either JWs or non-JW family members and therefore trust very few people. But, my mother-in-law put my wife in several dangerous situations because she was a convert who thought that once you became a JW, you were in a spiritual paradise in which no one would do anything bad. Fortunately, my wife was never abused but came close a few times. I know that I often went in service with elders/ms/other publishers without my parents being around and for the most part, everyone trusted each other. It's a tough situation because your told that everyone is your brother and sister. But parents do need to exercise caution. As for the clergy thing, many churches have only one pastor and aren't necessarily set up the way JWs are so it's not likely they could grab a partner. I'm not familar with other religions policy on being alone with parishioners so can't really comment on how they handle that situation.
7 - I agree with you on your statement that the elders knew about Condi's abuse and condoned it. It seems unlikely that they would have done nothing since they had already removed Kendrick for sexual misconduct with his stepdaugher. I'm sure some may be saying that but I didn't get the sense from articles and documents that I've read so far that the individual elders were aware of the abuse. It's just that they knew Kendrick offended before and didn't tell parents about the potential for abuse. I would say that if those elders did know about it then they should be charged as accessories to the abuse. I don't believe that most JWs or most people in general would condone abuse.
Sorry for the length!
