by gingerbread 29 Replies latest jw friends
Vidiot: The motivation of the WTS to be heard by the Supreme Court is not a factor in its being granted a hearing. The US Supreme Court would have to find that Watchtower's case is worthy of their time. Likewise, with the California State Supreme Court. Unlike the appellate courts, the Watchtower can't simply file an appeal and be heard in the higher courts.
With Rick Simons requesting oral argument it's highly unlikely Watchtower would waive being heard.
The chances are essentially zero that this case ever gets to SCOTUS. State Supreme Courts decide thousands and thousands of cases every year, almost all of which are important in some way and costly to litigate. Out of the thousands of losing parties, most of whom would want SCOTUS to hear their cases if possible, the number that SCOTUS takes is in the neighborhood of 15 per year. Most of the cases SCOTUS takes come up through the federal courts, not the state courts. The state cases that do get accepted tend to be important constitutional issues that state supreme courts have disagreed on.
I would argue that the WTS would therefore be far hungrier for a SCOTUS victory than the RCC (which has way more assets and staying power, and can far more easily weather whatever storm comes its way).
That might be enough motivation (or, dare I say, desperation) to stay the course.
Except it's not their call: the CA Supreme Court (and the SCOTUS) decides which cases they'll hear, not the parties involved in the case; they hear very few cases, and cherry-pick which cases they'll hear where they feel an issue of public policy needs clarification.
Adam
Thank you DNCall & Chaserious for your intellegent input!
ginger
Here's my question for DN CALL or any others of you with more knowledge of these court proceedings- How LONG before we finally get a stamped, official verdict in this case as it's already dragged out about how long ? A year or more already ? Should this thing be wrapped up by next spring of 2014 for instance ? Just curious. If anybody can give me a ballpark time estimate and what else happens after the oral appellate arguments , or whatever- it would be helpful . Thanks for any information
flipper - Just curious. If anybody can give me a ballpark time estimate and what else happens after the oral appellate arguments , or whatever- it would be helpful . Thanks for any information. Peace out, Mr. Flipper
Hi Flipper, Have you watched the interview with Simons and Conti videos that Cedars produced:
Part 2 of the 2013 Conti and Simons interview now on YouTube (questions posed by JWN members)? Rick Simons provides many answers to quesitons that were posed in this thread as well as his worst case estimate of 2 years for the appeal judgement to become final.
Peace be with you and everyone, who you love,
Robert
For those interested I've uploaded a new article featuring links to Watchtower's recently-filed reply brief...
http://jwsurvey.org/cedars-blog/watchtower-files-reply-brief-as-conti-appeal-continues
Cedars
Thanks Cedars.
Great summation.
If the Governing Body were truly humble men, they would have accepted the jury’s decision and done everything possible to protect children from the obvious flaws in their child abuse policies. Instead, they are being dragged kicking and screaming towards a likely appeal defeat, with no dignity or humility whatsoever. And the louder they scream, the more pathetic they look.
Pm for CEDARS
DNCall - "The US Supreme Court would have to find that Watchtower's case is worthy of their time. Likewise, with the California State Supreme Court. Unlike the appellate courts, the Watchtower can't simply file an appeal and be heard in the higher courts."
Adamah - "...it's not their call: the CA Supreme Court (and the SCOTUS) decide which cases they'll hear, not the parties involved in the case; they hear very few cases, and cherry-pick which cases they'll hear where they feel an issue of public policy needs clarification."
Ah. I didn't know that; thanks.
That does reinforce my opinion that the WTS realizes there's a potential precedent being set (at least in California) that they will not find favorable, and wants to delay things as long as they can there, at least (even if they can't do that on a federal level).
And I've read things that suggest California is often viewed as taking the lead in changing things USA-wide).
(BTW, Adamah, are you a BSG fan?)
DNCall - "With Rick Simons requesting oral argument it's highly unlikely Watchtower would waive being heard."
Well, as far as I'm concerned, that should lay the matter to rest right then and there; any verbal argument they use to try to justify themselves will just hammer the last nail home, from what I can tell.
