Actually, there are two issues. Findings of facts that the jury made. Findings of law that the trial judge decided during the course of the trial and his instructions to the jury as to the law they would apply in their deliberations. News reports said this was a noval case. Appellate courts generally don't like novelty from a trial judge. If the law is to be changed, the legislature or the highest appellate court does so.
My sympathies are with Candance Conti. I have no sympathy for the WT. There are several issues that the WT may prevail at an appellate level. It would take extraordinary facts of WT involvement to impose liability on them. I have not studied the pleadings in depth. The clearest problem I see is the clergy/pentinent relationship. Unlike First Amendment Establishment Clause law, it is not my area of expertise. It is hard to apply concepts that emerged from when the Roman Catholic Church was totally enmeshed in the lives of every European citizen and states. The WT did not have confessions when I attended KH. Still, the concept used to be termed priest/penitent an was changed to clergy/penitent to show that all religions had the privilege.
Counseling lay people does not apply. Does it apply to lay ministers? I may be wrong but I recall much was made that two clergy were involved. Hey, we have no clergy! I think that negating the priviolege b/c two ministers are present is troubling on First Amendment grounds. Who is the government to decide that all religions must follow the Roman Catholic model?
I have not read extensively in this area. If the verdict is overturned, and sometimes liability is reduced by appellate courts, the clearest route to protect children is for CA to carve out an exemption and require mandatory reporting. I strongly feel that the WT has power to protect criminals from the authorites. There authority is not judicial. I do see where they have very clear authority in spiritual matters. Imploring and pressuring members to not report abuse is dabbling in secular matters. Once upon a time, people went to ministers to cleanse their consciences and do penance. The jurors had to be affected that Kendricks remains an active JW in a congregation that may not know his history.
There were so many interesting questions to ask Conti's lawyer. I was very disappinted by most of the questions at Rick Ferons's whatever he does.
As I write this, a jury is seemingly deadlocked in the trial of a very high ranking Roman Catholic official who actively moved pedophile priests from one unsuspecting parish to another to hide the activity. Press reports find that one of the possible reasons for the deadlock is tha the cardinal of Philadelphia was also guilty. Evidently, they feel it is unfair to convict a priest with considerable power while letting the cardinal with absolute power walk,.
The times they are a changin'. Liability for the WT actions will prob. come soon whether in the guise of the Conti case. Other Roman Catholic criminal cases are in the wings. Imagine a GB member or Legal Dept member sitting in prison doing hard time. Society is fed up with protecting religion at all costs. The trend I see is reluctance to throw the rank and file minions under the bus to liability while the real actor, the top officials, sit and twiddle ltheir thumbs with impunity.