by jwleaks 102 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
Anyone here able to explain to me (ignorant of legal procedures) why the WTBTS would stump up $86k per year to a third party, rather than just post the bond themselves?
Doesn't strike me as a very clever way to manage your finances, but I guess I must be missing something pretty obvious here!
They CAN'T settle with a gag order. That time has long gone. It went to trial. It's all out in the open. They either pay the judgment or they appeal. They've decided to appeal. The results of the appeal will likewise be out in the open.
Court cases are like warfare. In fact, that's why most attorneys read the Art of War. Until that final order from the court happens in a few years, the WT can and will start a psychological war to force her into a settlement. It's weak, but everyone's thrown a hail mary pass. Sometimes, rarely, it works. What the WT doesn't want is a book tour after all this is done. Can you imagine that kind of damage? I rememeber when La Toya threw in a fre remarks about dubs in her book and it came up at the door alot here in Los Angeles
Has the WTS ever made a settlement offer (specifically, any amount ? known)? I know Ms. Candice right from the beginning said she would not "settle."
Could the WTS try to make a settlement at any point in the future now, tho no "gag order" can be done now as Ann stated? They are in a 'lose-lose' situation for sure. Would the WTS come to accept this before "appeal court?" Or, will they in their arrogance and stubborness take it for the run and additional interests and fees, which is only passed down to the 'for real' employed working class?
I think the WTS could lie and convince their members that they had to settle, as the courts were "prejudiced" right from the start.
<<<< It feels like Candace would put her desire for transparency above her financial security - IMHO I don't think she will settle in any event.>>>>
While Candace likely does feel that way, there are other interests in her situation besides Ms. Conti's, including her lawyer, Rick Simons. I don't know what the terms of the agreement for his representation of her are, but I think it's pretty likely that he took this case on a contingency basis, because if he charged her hourly for his time, she would have had to have been quite wealthy to pay the fees, which I bet are well into the six figure range if charged.
Declining a generous settlement offer (if one is made), because of the principle of wanting to keep this transparent, would not be fair to Mr. Simons. While the principle involved is likely very important to Ms. Conti, the principle of getting paid for very difficult, stressful work will be important to Mr. Simons. I expect that if there is a settlement offer, it will most definitely include confidentiality provisions, and that the confidentiality provisions will not be a significant factor in deciding whether to accept the offer or not.
If Candace settles and agrees to keep the settlement confidential, none of us should think any less of her for doing so. Taking this case as far as she has took a lot of courage and sacrifice. The WTBTS probably hired investigators, etc. to try to find any crap they could on her. She has fought a long, hard, stressful, and emotionally draining battle, and her decision in this regard is something that everyone should respect. She has more than earned any compensation she receives.
<<<< Anyone here able to explain to me (ignorant of legal procedures) why the WTBTS would stump up $86k per year to a third party, rather than just post the bond themselves?>>>>
They can't put up the bond themselves, because the surety posting the bond must be an admitted carrier (usually an insurance company) to cover such risks, who meet certain financial requirements to be eligible to be a surety in a situation like this. Dave Perez put it best, earlier in this thread: " The bond is basically an IOU from Traveler's saying they will pay Conti IF and ONLY IF WTBTS fails to pay the judgment if the appeal fails." Aside from getting a bond, the WTBTS could post $17 milliion in cash or basically cash equivalents instead of the Travelers bond, but this would not be fiscally prudent, because the interest they would lose on not investing the $17 million would be far more than the bond premium. For example, if the WTBTS is earning even 3% simple interest on its money, then they would earn $510,000 per annum on $17 million. That is far more than the $86,000 annual premium they will pay Travelers.
Re Candace's accepting a settlement offer to compensate Rick Simons, I think 144,001 has layed out the facts pretty well. Of course all of this is speculation, but if Mr. Simons is the advocate he appears to be and his firm is in healthy financial shape, he might possibly stay the course and advise Candace not to settle. The risk is to, in effect, have represented Candace pro bono. The reward is to garner the reputation for himself and his firm of being vigorous advocates, fighting for what is right. Even if the case is overturned on appeal, whatever is learned in the appeal process can be applied in the representation of future clients that are in a similar situation to Candace. I really hope Candace, Mr. Simons and his firm are able to stay the course. However, whatever happens, as 144,001 has already stated, any decision they make deserves respect.
I don't get what you're all talking about. How can any settlement be lawfully proposed? The judgment has been entered. The court has ruled. The WTS can either pay up or contest the judgment through the appeals process.
The WTS is in no position to offer any 'settlement' other than the court ordered judgment of $11.5 million (plus interest).
Any other modification to the judgment (after going through the appeals process) will likewise be court ordered.
DNCall, excellent comment.
Cedars
Well, Ann, I got caught up in the speculation, hence my comments. I think you are right regarding settlement.
<<<< I don't get what you're all talking about. How can any settlement be lawfully proposed? The judgment has been entered. The court has ruled. The WTS can either pay up or contest the judgment through the appeals process.>>>>
This is not correct. The case can be settled at any time. The law encourages settlement as it is in the interests of the court system.
