WT Lawyers response in Hines v. Watchtower CSA case 2/11/22

by iloowy.goowy 4 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  iloowy.goowy

  This is the link to the Memorandum of Law in the Hines v. Watchtower CSA case filed last Friday 2/11/22.
  https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=vZUJFhGK0eTye/azC/kCBg==
  
  

  It is the WT lawyers reply in the trial where Deborah Hines accuses WT hierarchy even Governing Body members of continuing to employ a known child abuser, her own dad, at Bethel because he was indispensable to them in video-production.

  The slimy WT excuses start on page 7 of 28 where, as far as my non-legally mind can understand, the WT lawyers say the Governing Body can't get sued because they're not a corporation, nor are they mandated reporters of abuse, meaning they don't have to say anything by law even if they know a crime has occurred.

  The slimy WT lawyers are also pretty good at playing with words to hide the fact that the Governing Body does run the business of the Watchtower but from behind the scenes. In effect they're exposing the operation of the WT "business" to resemble a Mafia type operation, where the top head wiseguys run things and hide behind their incorporated entities although they themselves aren't incorporated, well that is not since they stepped away back in 2001 from being the "Directors" of the corporations they continue to have total say over. The Governing Body aren't incorporated, no, because they're very slimy and disgusting mob bosses.
  

  You can find all the PDF documents in the case at:
  

  Document List (state.ny.us)
  
• 

  truth_b_known

  I did a little research. Only 28 states seem to have mandatory reporting laws for clergy. New York is not one of them.

  Keep in mind if the child abuse took place in one of those 28 states the local elders would still be required to report the child abuse to authorities. The fact that the Watchtower ordered the local elders not to report would not be a defense to prosecution.
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  I did a little research. Only 28 states seem to have mandatory reporting laws for clergy. New York is not one of them.

  I think this did, in fact, occur in New York, did it not? I can see where that would let WT off the hook legally, but they still could be sued in civil court for damages, and especially if it was ongoing after being reported. Let the Court or the Jury decide.
  
• 

  iloowy.goowy

  It seems that the latest in the Hines v. WT case is that the stipulation for the case is discontinued by agreement among the defendants and plaintiff lawyers.

  https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=dW3e8BXSZBnhJHLT8RY8sw==

  In the above court document from January 23 it says:
  

  IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the undersigned, the attorneys of record for Plaintiff DEBORAH HINES and Defendants WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY OF NEW YORK; THE GOVERNING BODY OF JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES; and JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-20, that whereas no party hereto is an infant or incompetent person for whom a committee has been appointed and no person not a party has an interest in the subject matter of the action, the above entitled action be, and the same hereby is, discontinued with prejudice, and without costs to any party. This stipulation may be filed without further notice with the Clerk of the Court.
  

  I've bolded the words which mentioned that the action be "discontinued with prejudice and without costs to any party".

  Does that mean a settlement out of court?
• 

  Chevelle

  That just means that Deborah walked away with nothing more than a case of Macallan Classic Cut left behind in Tony's closet.