I was not stupid.. I was just a kid who trusted his parents... I had no choice. As an adult I feel abused for being raised in the tyrany of that cult. and as an adult I feel ostracized by the WT policy on shunning. it doesnt give them the choice of shunning. they have no other option, JWs are threaten with the same if they dont shun.
Just Throwing Out The Idea Of A Class Action Suit Against The Watch Tower Corporations
by frankiespeakin 27 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
diamondiiz
There are 3 main ways that lawyers calculate their fees.
1. Fixed fee for the work required.
2. Hourly rate.
3. Lawyer may receive percentage of the amount the client collects, either through settlement or a court judgment. If the client doesn't collect anything then neither does the lawyer.
For a class action lawsuit, most likely it would be the third payment option. Most lawyers wouldn't touch a class action. There would have to be a large firm with deep pockets to take on a large corporation like wts and a firm that would be able to survive without getting paid for several years. Before that would take place the legal team would look over all the evidence and damages and assess what is a reasonable outcome if they pursue it. Pursuing an individual or few individuals wouldn't be worth it as the money wouldn't be there and the risk would outweigh the benefit. Large class action would make more sense.
I don't know how large the damages could be, and what the law would allow without over burdening wts - if that would ever be an issue I don't know. US judgments are different from other jurisdictions so you could possibly collect more in US than let say in Canada. Just because common law is based on past practice, it doesn't mean that new precedent couldn't be set - they happen all the time. Maybe there has already been a case that could be used as precedent for this, we just don't know it. We're not lawyers and no one here has gone through the cases researching this.
Maybe there is no case today but to dismiss it simply because it wouldn't be easy to find legal firm willing to take on wts and all implication with the case doesn't help either. There were many cases that had uphill battles and yet few made it, and few won. Maybe there is no case today because no one is willing to take them on, but one can't simply dismiss the idea since we don't know what tomorrow will bring, whether a precedent will be set by suit against wts or another religious sect or cult. Or how the evolving secular society will look upon religious bodies in the future.
Also to say the lawyers will get rich I think is wrong, because it's not about victims getting rich from the suit but about justice, and if lawyers get 60% of the judgment they are also the ones that would be putting in the time, and legal costs up front with much of risk to themselves. I don't think it's about money for anyone of us as much as about justice and stopping wts and other cults from conning people and then holding them "hostage."Case like this would definitely be more than just about morals or ethics but would be on legal issues. Corporations are often held to higher standards than the public when it comes to ethics, how much more would the practice of public deception play in a religious case where the organization misrepresents quoted authors and historians to persuade recruits. I don't know how those who grew up in the cult would fare and what valid issues they could successfully present but for those who were recruited by means of deception I still hold hope for a future case.
-
frankiespeakin
Diamond,
I think this is true the way we are evolving may offer hope that this will be a real issue in the near future and we can use the baptismal contract with the merciless power it gives the Governing Body over the inferior Rank and File it has a fudiciary responcibility towards.
Maybe it is a good thing to keep on the look out for any legal precedent that might apply in the future too or now and were not aware of.
As side note the Governing Body more merciless stand on the need to disfellowship it members and not be a merciful softy will increase the number of litigants in a class action making it more and more worth the efforts of a legal team. There may come from this merciless approach to df members some real horror stories preformed by agents of the Governing Body that make them even more of a target for law suits do to lack of fudiciary responcibilty.
-
skeeter1
"I was not stupid.. I was just a kid who trusted his parents... I had no choice."
Me too. But, the law says that parents have the right to raise their kids in their crazy religion. It's a parental right.
-
diamondiiz
frankiespeakin
My take on this is from the misrepresentation/fraud angle (pre-jw, pre-baptism), how they misquote sources, misrepresent their past and the like to sucker a recruit. The reasonable person test could apply. Pre-internet, it was harder to find old documents on wts or even quotes they used to reaffirm what was written and told to us. We trusted the wts agents and their publications to be correct. We were basically intentionally and fraudulently misrepresented prior to the "contract" - baptism. By misrep the contract is voidable, but that applies to business dealing and wts is a religious corporation. WTS continues with the same fraud today, but there is a ton of material on the net which wasn't available to many of us at the time when we were recruited, how courts would measure today's responsibility to research to pre-internet era is hard to say.
Baptismal angle falls more under religious acts, I don't know how one could argue contractual obligation on the basis of that. One would have to tie damages/injury to shunning and economic condition or means of making a living or maybe some other legal grounds that aren't viewed as strictly religious in nature. This is same with born in angle, at present I don't know how it's possible but then again there was a case a while back where a child successfully sued the parents for divorce or something like that - however crazy that sounded, the precedent was set.
I am taking a basic business law class at present and it gives me better understanding of law than before. I'm sure wts legal team is very active in wts' daily activities but thus far it seem they leave wts' religious misrep alone as if that cannot be touched. But who knows what could bring on a lawsuit against them, but legal venue would be the best one to get any justice for what we went through, and for lost opportunities.
-
Chaserious
I'm mostly a lurker, but this thread caught my attention since I'm in law school. So don't take what I'm saying as authority. I have seen this discussed before here, and I'm sure there are other threads where this is adequately explained. But I would agree with much of what diamondliz said in the first post. Of the payment methods she mentioned, class actions attorney fees are basically always paid on a contingency. When they get settled, the defendants put in money for the plaintiffs' atttorney fees in addition to settlement funds and it all gets approved by the court. So no firm or lawyer is going to take a case unless they think there is going to be a settlement. And the problem with class actions is that the class has to be certified by a judge before it can even be a class action - until then it's just an individual lawsuit, or a group of individual lawsuits. And the type of class action that is being suggested has little to no chance of being certified. First of all, the people in the class have to be similarly situated in terms of damages. As an example, think of people who are exposed to asbestos, or get overcharged on their cell phone bills, or take a medicine that harms them - common types of class action suits. Most of the people in those classes will have similar types of damages, or at least can be classified into two or three classes. (For example, those who die, those who get really sick, and those who get a little bit sick). But when you think of the WTS class some are suggesting, you couldn't throw into one class people who are claiming all the different kinds of harm that the WTS causes. Maybe if you had a bunch of sex abuse victims, but not people who were harmed by blood policy, DFing, education doctrines, etc. Not to minimize all of the horrible things they have caused, but think of a giant corporation like Walmart that lots of people hate for various reasons. You couldn't just have one huge lawsuit against them by all of the people who hate them. In fact, recently the Supreme Court wouldn't even let a gender discrimination class action proceed against Walmart, despite a lot of evidence that there was a pattern of harm in that particular area. Bottom line is that it's not easy to get a class action certified.
This also doesn't take into account the free exercise clause implications that a lot of people have already mentioned. WTS would be treated as a religion, and not as a regular corporation. At least in the U.S., courts don't like to decide what is a religion and what is not (if they did, they could potentially be in violation of the establishment clause of the first amendment). If it looks even remotely like a religion, that's how they will treat it. (In other words, in response to what diamondliz said immediately above, they are not going to treat WTS like a regular corporation, or treat baptism like a business contract). Unfortunately, a lot of religions do things that are potentially harmful to their members. The Amish don't educate their children past 8th grade (a practice the Supreme Court has said is okay, even if a state requires higher education of its children), the Mormons and others shun, and Native Americans take drugs that are potentially harmful as part of their worship. None of this is going to be subject to liability by American courts in the present time. As was mentioned, as society gets more secular, standards may change. Free Exercise only protects as much as the Supreme Court says it protects, so perhaps we will change the state of affairs in the future.
-
Band on the Run
There are a host of reasons that would make it impossible. Besides the First Amendment, I believe there might be standing issues. Also, in the United States, corps have succeeded in making it harder to bring class actions. I don't know about Canada.
I am glad that the First Amendment protects cults. Rather than seek legal redress, I think a public relations campaign would be more fruitful in the long run. It could even be neutral. If more critical thinking skills were taught in public school, fewer people would convert. Born-ins would apply whatever skills they learning in English or history to JW doctrine. This is why I believe Conti has won the war, even if she loses the battle.
The problem is not just with JWs but following power just b/c it is there. Questioning authority is a healthy trait. It is essential in a democracy. The people I have admired don't like syncophants. They admire people who question them. It is possible to be civil while doing so.
The media attention the large Conti damage award brought was priceless. I try in my personal life to check my rage, for a while, and explain to normal people how overreaching the org is. People may not be interested in doctrine but the degree of control is chilling. The overreaching is amazing. I always state that I am not in a postion to judge their teachings validity. I explain that is a strange variant, distinct from almost all so-called Christian religions. Rather than rant about Bethel and a cult, I give them examples from my personal life. The oral sex thing is always met with surprise. People think they are nice, amusing people who are annoying at times. If everyone testified to their own experience, the public would be more wary.
This will never happen. Perhaps it will if Obama does not appoint any Supreme Court justices. I think it would be very good to study the Bible in public school as a document of a particular culture. Bible knowledge is essential to understand art, literature, etc. Colleges teach it in a neutral manner. If people were more comfortable with their Bible knowledge, they would fall so readily for someone claiming to know it. I never knew a Witness with good basic Bible knowledge b/c we so rarely read it. Reading WT lit is not reading the Bible.
The blood doctrine needs to be highlighted. People just don't understand sacrificing your children for such a bizarre interpretation. Many people work on these issues here. They seem to do a great service.
Many European countries have a concept the French cal laicete. When the French revolution occurred, the Catholic Church supported the propertied classes. It was a key player in repression. People hated the church so much that it became illegal. America was settled by relgious dissidents, the outside groups in England. We view religion as a good thing. Europeans did not. The United States led the way in 1789 but a lot of time has passed since 1789. Most European countries have separation of church and state. There is freedom of religion and freedom from religion.
My prof'l writing sample deals with the Establishment Clause. The present Court has shifted far to the right. Religion is accomodated now. It was once separate. We are paying for students at Notre Dame to teach in Catholic schools. The conservatives, a majority of whom are now Catholic, justified their move towards encouraging religion byt holding that private choice can negate govt. action. If the govt. gives you a voucher, and there are secular alternatives availale, tax payer dollars can be used to promote faith. Individual choice was involved. Tne end result is that religion gets funding it would have received earlier.
I don't know about Canadians but Americans are choosing less main-stream, wackier religions. Fundamentalism is growing. You saw our presidential campaign.
I believe I did my part by volunteering and voting for Obama so this trend will stop. This entire area of law is very complex. I chose it for my sample to show I could do complex thinking. Also, it keeps evolving. If it seems confusing, it is very confusing.
-
dhlpcjw
Wouldn't now be a good time, while watchtower has their legal teams and money tied up in smaller cases and Warwick to hit them with this? If nothing else it could at least help shine a light on the current and pending child abuse court cases.
A captive organization run by "guardians of doctrine", that openly encourage child baptism, has a history of covering up child abuse, and then infringes on those same children's religious freedoms. The cost for not shunning? You get shunned too.
It could be a knockout punch while they're on the ropes. Legal fees wouldn't be an issue with all the ex-jws out there who would be happy to get behind it.
I for one would love to see GB members getting grilled on the stand as to why they dont explain the shunning policy in their study aid that leads to dedication and baptism.