alanv, I am not so sure, they may very well Appeal, as the Judge said the WT of NY were vicariously liable. The powers that be in the U.S H.Q of the Jdubs will want that quashed, I would have thought.
Article: Jehovah's Witnesses leaders ordered to pay rape victim £62,000 damages
by AndersonsInfo 16 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
kramer
This will go to appeal and the WBTS will win. The concept of vicarious liability for a rape won’t be upheld. There remains no mandatory reporting requirement in the UK (apart from certain jobs), only legislation will change this, not the courts.
-
slimboyfat
It doesn’t seem enough.
-
Phizzy
I think they will Appeal kramer, but the House of Lords ruling that the owners of a Care Home, where a child was abused by a member of staff, were liable, may work in favour of the Appeal being dismissed.
We know how the Org has tried to wriggle out of responsibility in cases in the past, and have managed to do so, in some cases, if memory serves. I hope they do not manage it this time, and maybe a larger award may be given in damages. I can but dream.
-
Vidiot
The Watchtower Organization could be fined five measly bucks and they'd still appeal...
It's not about the money.
It's about...
a) ...wounded pride and a refusal to admit being in the wrong...
b) ...a subconscious passive-aggressive desire to be martyred at the hands of "Satan's World", and...
c) ...above all else, avoiding damning information about them (particularly internal documents) becoming a matter of Public Record.
-
kramer
@vidiot it’s also about the fact that the case against them is flawed, courts can’t establish a precedent for mandatory reporting , the WBTS LEGALLY have done nothing wrong here, until legislation changes then they are within the law , and not even child protection charities agree that mandatory reporting is a good idea as it creates so much ‘noise’ and false reporting that real cases get missed
-
Phizzy
kramer, I have only read the link in the O.P, and saw nothing about Mandatory Reporting ????? Have you got more on the actual Court case ?