AMELIA ASHTON - not even close to complete. Just a few of the smaller buildings have been sold.
I think the Society might drop its appeal over the Conti case
by cedars 97 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
-
nugget
There are several issues at play here. By not fighting the case they risk giving hope to others who were abused and opening themselves up to multiple suits. This could be extremely costly not to mention the constant stream of negative press articles. They base everything on how the look to the outside world and if they do not need the money straight away they will be prepared to wait it out.
They still retain the assets and there are multiple corportations making up the organisation that own other assets. The society as a whole is much richer than the court papers indicate.
-
cedars
Thanks for the input guys. I guess there are many variables to consider. I just think if the Society forges ahead with the appeal, it will all end in tears (for them). Simons has proved himself to be an extremely capable attorney, and is always one step ahead of the game. Also, I think the Watchtower's legal chiefs must realize that, ultimately, their child abuse policies are indefensible - which is why they have always resorted to settlements in the past.
Ultimately it all boils down to how broke the Society is, and how badly they need that 1 billion in assets. I have a feeling they need the cash. Why else would they be so desperate to pull out of Brooklyn?
Cedars
-
OnTheWayOut
Sometimes, an entity (like WTS) has something to hide that has little or nothing to do with the problem in front of them.
WTS is working on an appeal, but is probably also negotiating a settlement to make it all go away for the plaintiff if they accept a smaller amount.
The plaintiff has lawyers who don't work for the destruction of WTS, but work for money.Also, if the plaintiff manages to reject a settlement offer, then things can get pretty tough for WTS and they might consider paying up the entire amount. That's where "something to hide" comes into play. The more they go to court in appeals, the more they risk revealing things about their policies. The more a judge might want to know. Maybe they will be ordered to disclose how many more of these cases have been filed, settled, fought. Maybe an appeals court will want to know more about their assets beyond NY state.
Despite the negatives of dropping the appeal, I expect them to file it and try to use it as leverage on Conti's lawyers to tell their client to accept a settlement. Then I expect them to drop the appeal somewhere in the process if that doesn't happen. But they cannot act like they will drop, or else why would anyone accept a smaller settlement?
-
Amelia Ashton
I think they have to play the "we are right and they are wrong card" initially for the benefit of the dubs who are watching. Also, if they don't appeal abused ones watching would see they too might have a chance to persue justice and compensation for themselves.
I think the Watchtower are rich enough they can wait 2 years to sell. This was never about the money for Candace and I think now it is really all about the money for the WTBTS. They don't want a mass exodus of potential monetary benefactors and as some-one pointed out, New Chapter I think, compensation works out to just a small donation of $4 per publisher.
They won't want to lose even one.
-
Quendi
Dropping the appeal won't end the WTS siege although it will reduce the pressure for a while. But I'm sure the WTS is hearing from other high-control groups who are begging it to move forward with the case. They will probably file amicus curiae briefs in support just as I think the plaintiff will also have amicus briefs filed in her behalf. I believe the WTS is thinking long term and has decided to bite the bullet and take this case all the way to SCOTUS.
This isn't simply a matter of money. The Society has the money to pay the judgment in its cookie jar. The issue here is the control the Society has over all of Jehovah's Witnesses and their congregations. It does not want to relax that control one bit and so must move forward. A victory at SCOTUS will reaffirm the status quo. A loss there might create a cascade failure that will severely impact the organization, but to concede defeat at this early stage might well do the same thing. No, the WTS will hope that it will win the legal fight and then be free to move on. Personally, I think they should accept the verdict, pay the damages, and then take their chances with the rank-and-file.
Quendi
-
Marvin Shilmer
-
I have no doubt the Watchtower will vigorously pursue appeal of the Jane Doe (Conti) v. Watchtower case. If this thing stands as is – and my prayer is that it does stand as is – the Watchtower organization will have exposure far, far beyond what it ever expected.
From a purely financial perspective, all Watchtower need do to have the court release its real estate is to purchase a bond equal to the damages awarded by the jury. The Watchtower’s bond rating is probably stellar so they should get a good rate. As we speak the Watchtower is probably already in the process of doing this very thing.
Marvin Shilmer
-
wannabefree
Is settling still a possibility or is this no longer an option?
Since the court has decided, and if an appeal is granted, can Watch Tower again offer a settlement? If this is possible ... does the attorney recommend they take the settlement with the idea ... 'look, you got your victory, the word is out there that Watch Tower lost, you may not win the appeal, it will be costly, I suggest you take the settlement'
-
Finkelstein
I think they will wait out at least one appeal for the sake of their self image and possibly further cases coming up that could also get media
attention and cost them, the money is not the real issue here. If you think about how many more legal cases could be created because
of this one judgment, into the future. Theoretically their established public image has much more value to them than any amount of money.
-
Marvin Shilmer
Wannabefree,
Before, during and after trial a defendant can always offer a settlement and a plaintiff can always accept it, and vice versa.
But I don’t think the Watchtower is going to leave this thing stand as is without some sort of court intervention that lessens its precedent setting value.
Marvin Shilmer