Frank Otuo is he a con man or are we to support him.

by joe134cd 17 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  joe134cd

  A couple of things first:

  -Nothing would bring me more pleasure than seeing Wt getting stung in a costly law suite.

  - Please forgive me but I have only briefly read the court documents

  So this brings me to my question. Is Mr Otuo a crusader for truth in bringing injustices of Wt to the publics attention.

  Or

  A conniving manipulating man who has found a technicality to make a buck. I believe he took someone's money and then refused to give it back. If that isn't in itself a little bit dishounarable then what is.If he did win the case wouldn't it be the honourable thing to repay the money back to this person with a full apology. We are all quick to highlight Wt use of technicalities in the court room. So what's the difference here.
• 

  konceptual99

  I think we yet have to see the evidence that Mr. Otuo has been falsely accused and genuinely wronged beyond the tiresome he said/she tennis match and the usual procedural nonsense that surrounds many JW DF cases.
• 

  defender of truth

  You must be kidding me...

  Please forgive me but I have only briefly read the court documents
  

  I believe he took someone's money and then refused to give it back. If that isn't in itself a little bit dishounarable then what is.If he did win the case wouldn't it be the honourable thing to repay the money back to this person with a full apology.
  

  We are all quick to highlight Wt use of technicalities in the court room. So what's the difference here.
  

  How the hell do you know that Otuo is using technicalities, to win unfairly, as you imply? We have all seen what the Watchtower can do in court, the half-truths etc.
  

  You haven't even taken time to read the available evidence fully, then you post a thread to suggest that Mr Otuo took the money, and he should give it back!!.
  

  @joe134cd - What has led you to the conclusion that he took the money?

  Name one thing, besides just a feeling, that leads you to this conclusion.

  The only piece of evidence that there was ever so much as an accusation of fraud by another party, has been allegedly 'destroyed', as stated in the judgement.

  We don't know either way at this point what needs to be done about the allegation of fraud and the pain that has caused Otuo, that is for the ongoing court case to decide.

  I believe him.

  Others who actually know Otuo personally, and the people involved, believe Otuo as well.

  I kindly ask you to just follow the case, and see what happens.

  I think we yet have to see the evidence that Mr. Otuo has been falsely accused and genuinely wronged

  I think that you have this the wrong way around, konceptual99.

  We have yet to see any evidence that he was correctly accused.

  Innocent until proven guilty.

  You are aware that is how our court system works in the UK?
• 

  konceptual99

  Yes of course I am aware of the court system and how it operates. I am also more than aware of how the elders and the organisation operate kangaroo courts.

  I am not calling Mr. Otuo a liar however why would you expect me to support a guy and even spend time to attend court when the circumstances are not clear.

  Help me out here and post something that succinctly refreshes the story and presents the facts.
• 

  Witness My Fury

  How has the allegation of fraud "been destroyed"?

  If you have the evidence that that is the case then lets see it please. Otherwise you are asking for leaps of faith.
• 

  konceptual99

  To be fair WMF, from my reading of the transcripts Mr. Otuo was accused of fraud by the Witness and this accusation was put in writing to the JC committee. Mr. Otuo never was allowed to see this and now the congregation are saying it was destroyed and have testified to that fact. This is an example of the typical procedural nonsense surrounding JW judicial committees.

  The other side of that coin is that I don't recall seeing anything that formally documents the situation between Mr. Otuo and the Witness. AFAIK there is nothing that says there was never a business relationship. Neither is there anything like some kind of contract or agreement. As observers we have no way of knowing what was agreed.

  It's fair to say that Mr. Otuo has not faced criminal charges. It's also fair to say the accusation of fraud seem very loose and typical of how the WT likes to create their own definitions. Regardless, I've not seen anything concrete that takes this out the realm of a business agreement gone wrong. I would be more than happy to support Mr. Otuo if there was some proof that the Witness stood to lose money, Mr Otuo had acted in good faith 100% of the time and that to take the side of the Witness would be a gross injustice.

  I think there is merit in the argument that the DFing does imply Mr. Otuo was in the wrong and does lead to chatter and gossip. For it to be slander the accusation has to be false and I'm not sure that we are seeing enough of both sides of the story to make that judgement call right now.

  I really hope Mr. Otuo is free of any accusation and, if so, can win this battle. All I am asking for is some more clarity on how I can be sure this is the case.
• 

  defender of truth

  I am not calling Mr. Otuo a liar however why would you expect me to support a guy and even spend time to attend court when the circumstances are not clear.
  

  To hear what they have to say?

  To follow the case, rather than rely on others?

  Good reasons to attend, if you want to.

  I don't expect you to support him. I hope someone will, he lost his family and friends. Maybe I should have left that wording out. Whether Otuo is guilty of fraud or not, and I think he is not, he is still a victim of the Disfellowshipping policy.

  Help me out here and post something that succinctly refreshes the story and presents the facts.
  

  www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5696754448072704/judgement-watch-tower-appeal-otuo-v-morley-watch-tower-sir-david-eady

  www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5710398485430272/particulars-claim-otuo-v-morley-watch-tower
  

  You now have the same info that I do, except for the other people who know otuo and the elder, who I shall not be naming.

  How has the allegation of fraud "been destroyed"?

  If you have the evidence that that is the case then lets see it please. Otherwise you are asking for leaps of faith.

  Hi Witnessmyfury:)

  I understand your concerns.

  This is my last post on the subject, the rest is just speculation.

  It was Joe's thread title that wound me up. Especially seeing as it is an ongoing court case.

  I am sorry I bothered to post any of this now. I'm done after this.

  It emerged at the resumed hearing before me on 18 June that the third party's letter has been destroyed, according to Mr Daniel on instructions, on data protection grounds and that, accordingly, the Claimant will never now be able to make an assessment of it or rely upon it in formulating his particulars of malice. It is fair to say, however, that this latest piece of news has done nothing to allay his suspicions as to their good faith.
  

  www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5696754448072704/judgement-watch-tower-appeal-otuo-v-morley-watch-tower-sir-david-eady
  
• 

  Witness My Fury

  Thanks Konceptual, I have not been following this story so any comments i have made are based only on what i have seen today.
• 

  konceptual99

  Thanks for the links DOT. I have already read these and they do paint a picture of typically underhand JW machinations however there are still some details that are not clear to me, specifically the context of the fraud allegation.

  Either the whole episode was a complete fabrication or there were a set of circumstances between Mr. Otuo and the elder that led to the accusation. I don't think there is anything available to allow one to understand this context and why the dispute would have arisen in the first place.

  I completely see why Mr. Otuo would feel he has been treated unfairly, unjustly and even subjected to slander. There is strong circumstantial evidence that he has been the victim of a less than honourable JC process. One cannot assume, however, that that entitles one to the unconditional support of others. People round here would look pretty stupid if they were to actively support Mr. Otuo and then it become apparent that his actions were not honest and above board.
• 

  Witness My Fury

  Just to add, by the phrase "been destroyed", I was under the impression you meant that the fraud accusation was proven unfounded, not that the actual letter of accusation had been destroyed.

  There is a rather large difference between those two scenarios.