by jw07 10 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
I don't know if this has any legal implications:
Since the identities of the individual members of the Governing Body have been publicly confirmed (not that we didn't know that before) can that open the way for direct lawsuits to be leveled against members?
For instance are there any laws in the USA that would open the way for Geoffrey Jackson to be targetted by the lawsuits from child abuse or no blood transfusion deaths?
How would you establish that Geoffrey Jackson is personally responsible for the death of Person X if Person X made a conscious, rational choice regarding his own health care?
I mean, I know what you mean, but how would you convince judge & jury of the same?
Haven't arrest warrants been issued for GB members in Australia?
Or were they court summons(s)?
It is typical practice in US lawsuits to name EVERYONE, including "John Does"...if nothing else, it forces those individuals to answer the lawsuit. Unfortunately, I suspect that any GB member would get represented by the Legal Department at the WTS. I am not sure who handles and pays for legal defense in cases like the Candace Conti suit...does anyone know?
The "Governing Body" are not the legal representatives of the WTBTS, there is a president, secretary, treasurer etc, and these are not the GB, the GB of witness land is totally different in meaning than a governing body or board of directors of a company.
The WTBTS GB are the spiritual leaders, not representing the legal entity of the corporation. Confused? Good, that's the way they like you.
Also...you must remember that now, they are ONLY the GB when they meet about the religious direction of the ORG. They're an entity. Individually, they are NOT the GB or Faithful Slave. Only when together.
Imagine if the mafia only had ONE BOSS of the 5 families (in NY), but that BOSS only existed when the 5 heads of the commission came together for sit-downs. That's what the GB is like.
Unless someone could show that specific wrongful actions of an individual GB member caused them harm, this kind of thing wouldn't even get off the ground. Even if it did, what would be the point? A judgment against Geoffrey Jackson or whoever is less valuable than a judgment against the Watchtower society. If it could be collected at all, it would be paid out of the WT's pockets anyway.
If an individual GB memeber could be brought to the stand and grilled by a good lawyer on why no decent protection is in place for children and the vulnerable, why they continue to be behind the rest of the world on this, it would at least get some of the crap out in the open, out from under the carpet where the GB has hidden it.
Haven't arrest warrants been issued for GB members in Australia?
Or were they court summons(s)?
Vidiot , what are you referring to ? Can you elaborate ? Please explain.
smiddy
IMHO, it is always a good idea to include in a lawsuit individuals by name as well as the corporate identities they hide behind.
Here in the UK, at least, individuals are liable in a wide range of legislation, and it certainly concentrates minds when you tell people that they, personally, will be named in a lawsuit (and for example, local government is legally barred from indemnifying against or paying for legal costs of a local government officer).
Whilst organisations may have 'vicarious liability' for the actions of their officers/employees, etc., (watch them run backwards as fast as they can) courts, IME, like to cut through organisational claptrap.
Stand the individual up in court and watch then crap themselves/spread the blame would be my suggestion.
