by cedars 97 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
Their chance of winning is looking less likely too.
This just in ....
A monsignor who oversaw hundreds of priests in the Philadelphia Archdiocese was found guilty on Friday of one count of endangering the welfare of a child, making him the first senior U.S. Roman Catholic Church official to be convicted for covering up child sex abuse.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/22/us-usa-crime-church-idUSBRE85L13820120622
Just a thought - the way the official statement is headed and worded ;- 'Jehovah’s Witnesses to appeal jury verdict in California case' is quite crafty. It automatically draws the R&F onside (if you get what I mean).
That brings up a related question: why didn't they settle this thing quietly long ago? Offer $5M or $10M and shhhhhh. So, miscalculation?
That brings up a related question: why didn't they settle this thing quietly long ago? Offer $5M or $10M and shhhhhh. So, miscalculation?
I am getting the impression that this lady wanted to nail them to the outhouse wall more than she wanted the 28 million dollars.
http://www.californiaappeals.com/should-you-appeal.html
sorry don't know how to post the links still . . .
But I found this articles about the pros and cons of appealing interesting. "Food For Thought" Gag! LOL
A question I haven't seen asked yet: I understand that the court system in CA is rapidly degrading because of forced budget cuts.
I wonder if that will delay the appeal.
metatron
Here is that link made clickable.
Here is a quote from that link.
"Some litigants - particularly businesses - should consider whether or not they want to create a binding precedent in the disputed area of the law. Trial court decisions are not binding on other courts. Once a case goes to appeal, however, a legal precedent may be set that will be binding on trial courts faced with the same issue in the future."
I thought they were appealing to avoid setting a precedent. I didn't realize that they were at risk of setting a precedent by appealing. It makes me wonder why they are appealing. Maybe they are just trying to force a smaller settlement.
Amelia,
You commented, " New Chapter I think, compensation works out to just a small donation of $4 per publisher."
This is interesting, I just got off the phone from a close friend that said that his RBC indicated that all Kingdom Halls were supposed to be finished by the end of the year, and that new assembly halls were to be pushed hard. So, once they get more assembly halls built they can be sure of a steady stream of money. Perhaps, what they have learned is that they can make more money off of the assembly hall rental than the fixed assets in Brooklyn used to print.
We know that most of the AHalls are paid for by the publishers donations before completion and WT continues to charge the same rent that they would previously have had. From what I have heard is that some assembly halls are sitting on 1 M or more and eventually donate it to wt.
Not in a 100 yrs.They will wait until hell freezes over.
Could it be way they put a hold on the new HQ.
