Could the New Light About the Faithful&Discrete Slave Open the Governing Body to more Lawsuits? (page 2)

King Solomon

Frankiespeaken said:

I think a good lawyer would set his sights on the head part of the organization because more money is there as oppossed to elders which they may use to leverage thier cooperation in going after the real money boys.

It doesn't matter how much $$$ is at the top of WTBTS (corporation): a lawyer would STILL need to connect the dots of the WTS being aware of the damage/harm caused by a child molester to them in order for the corporation to be liable, eg IF they didn't respond properly (at least following their own policy).

That's EXACTLY the point of the new policy: it gives WTS an excuse, a plausible legal deniability, IF the local elders don't notify them of a problem. If they didn't notify the WTS, the elders would more likely stand alone.

That's not to say a lawyer cannot TRY to use a novel legal strategy (equivalent to "piercing the corporate veil"), but it's likely harder with such a policy in place, as it's unreasonable to expect the WTS to be mind-readers.

And as JW and Outlaw said above, the courts don't care in the least about JW's theological constructs or it's doctrines, just the legal entity.

(disclaimer: IANAL, but I do have an unnaturally-high interest in the topic of legal matters)

PS I made a video about a few product liability lawyers who sued God as if he were a manufacturer of a defective product: mankind. The premise is based on ignoring that the law doesn't care about theological matters or would allow organized religion to serve as a co-defendent (with Earthly holdings paying for judgments, which IS somewhat true, as the RCC and JWs know):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGQvQv9o-Mg

Tylinbrando

KS said:

That's EXACTLY the point of the new policy: it gives WTS an excuse, a plausible legal deniability, IF the local elders don't notify them of a problem. If they didn't notify the WTS, the elders would more likely stand alone.

However the WBTS will never be able to avail themselves of that avenue of scapegoat because according to long standing policy, all bodies of elders are required to file a report for all matters of sex abuse- alleged, denied, confirmed or otherwise to the Watchtower. There are specific forms used currently by BOE to forward this information. How could the WBTS ever claim they were not alerted by localized BOEs?

sir82

That's EXACTLY the point of the new policy: it gives WTS an excuse, a plausible legal deniability, IF the local elders don't notify them of a problem. If they didn't notify the WTS, the elders would more likely stand alone.

It seems to me to be a 2-edged sword.

If it is a matter of publicly-known policy for the WTS to identify by name persons who are "predators" or "known child molesters", then if I were a lawyer I would argue that if a person does not have that label, he has a tacit "thumbs up" from the WTS.

If that person then goes on to molest someone, wouldn't the WTS be at least partially responsible? Their policy is to let people know who the bad guys are; this guy did something bad but I wasn't notified; so sue the WTS.

I.e. once you promise to name some of them, you'd better name them all.

IANAL as well - perhaps my thinking is skewed.

King Solomon

However the WBTS will never be able to avail themselves of that avenue of scapegoat because according to long standing policy, all bodies of elders are required to file a report for all matters of sex abuse- alleged, denied, confirmed or otherwise to the Watchtower. There are specific forms used currently by BOE to forward this information. How could the WBTS ever claim they were not alerted by localized BOEs?

I'm not aware of what forms they use, but "never" is a questionable claim to make. Updating policies and forms is trivial (unless the legal dept are compleat (sic) eediots (sic)).

I suspect some are under-estimating the legal challenge a plaintiff faces in order to prove gross negligence, where allegations do not constitute abuse, and even a confirmed case of abuse doesn't prove "predator" (eg the circumstances may have been more akin to statuatory rape, as defined in some states; hence the "abuser" is not likely to reoffend if the two parties were engaged, say 17 and 19).

So, the WTS' awareness of allegations or even abuse (as statuatory rape) doesn't mean they are dealing with predators. The Condi case involved gross negligence such that it was relatively easier to prove.

Much like everything else in life, the REAL implications of the situation is incredibly more complex and nuanced than it's given credit for being, such that it's foolish to try and reduce it to down to simplistic absolutes...

Sir 82 said:

If that person then goes on to molest someone, wouldn't the WTS be at least partially responsible? Their policy is to let people know who the bad guys are; this guy did something bad but I wasn't notified; so sue the WTS.

Flip-side is they ALSO face the concern of being sued for defamation of character by the accused (wrongly or rightly) if they DO proceed with warning others, so it's a catch-22. Hence why they require elders to call the Legal Dept before labelling someone as a "predator".

That's the price some men play for the ego-boost and prestige of being an "elder" , and is a good reason NOT to be an elder! The sword doesn't just have TWO edges, but at least FOUR!

Tylinbrando

I'm not aware of what forms they use, but "never" is a questionable claim to make. Updating policies and forms is trivial (unless the legal dept are compleat (sic) eediots (sic)).

True enough. Never say never. Yes there are report forms required to be sent to the WBTS. For this directive to be ignored would require the cooperation of 3 elders taking the stance that they refuse to communicate with orders from Mother. Granted there have been elders that simply refused to follow these orders and some have even gone directly to the Police with allegations confirmed or not. However that rogue conduct is met with swift judicial action and the elder is removed, reproved or simply cast out of the congregation.

Even in the event of 3 elders choosing to bybass headquarters directive, reports would be generated in congregation files openly reviewed by the traveling Circuit Overseer. In that case you would have 3 elders on the chopping blocks.

I suppose I should say it is highly unlikely that the BOE would not send a very specific report(as it is generated by the WBTS with Q&A) to the WBTS.

So, the WTS' awareness of allegations or even abuse (as statuatory rape) doesn't mean they are dealing with predators. The Condi case involved gross negligence such that it was relatively easier to prove.

That is exactly right. They have a database of tens of thousands alleged and convicted sex abusers in their possesion locked away and only a miniscule percentage as ever faced exposure or been offered up to authorities who will properly prosecute the individual predator.

The WBTS certainly DOES NOT DEAL with these predators as mandated by law.

Vidiot

Theocratic Sedition - "They might be pious and crazy enough to believe that by opening themselves up to legal attacks, if the secular authorities go after them it will be like touching Jehovah's eye. Maybe even viewing it as God's direction to entice Gog thinking he has an opening when all along it was a trap."

That smacks of desperation to me, and thusly kicks in my skeptic mode...

...but it wouldn't be the first time the WTS foolishly painted a big fat target on itself to drum up publicity, stoke the persecution complex of the R&F, and try to give the appearance of fulfilling prophecy (or even trying to give prophecy a for-real nudge, for that matter).

If that is the case, though, something tells me that this time around, it'll come back to bite 'em on the ass a lot more painfully.

frankiespeakin

Vid,

""If that is the case, though, something tells me that this time around, it'll come back to bite 'em on the ass a lot more painfully.""

I feel that way too. The evidence too public on the internet, easy access for lawyers to use in court with the right savy.

They have painted themselves in a hole too deep to get out of unless the tribal diety jehovah comes to the rescue with a burning bush, flood, the end of the world, or something.

Anyway I think we will see more loonacy as the Governing Body cling to thier delusion of being The Almight's spokeperson on earth.

frankiespeakin - "They have painted themselves in a hole too deep to get out of..."

Either that of they've dug themselves in a corner too deep to get out of...

Sorry, dude; couldn't resist.

Could the New Light About the Faithful&Discrete Slave Open the Governing Body to more Lawsuits?

Share this