Update on the $4000 day fine - Padron v Watchtower

by berrygerry 23 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  John Davis

  I think that the appeals court will affirm in part but also reverse in part.

  I think that they will affirm portions of the daily sanctions fine probably the $2000 a day for not turning over the records. The court will probably see it as a contradiction from what was said in the Lopez appeal and what is being said now.

  I think that they will reverse the redaction sanction and will allow somewhere between what Zalkin wants and what Watchtower wants to be the amount of redaction. I think that the court will see that there are privacy concerns of the third parties. I think that the appeals court will use this opportunity to clarify what the court ruled in the Lopez appeals case when the court ruled that third-party identifiers can be redacted. Also because Zalkin argued at the trial court that the reason they are needing the files is to look at numbers, redacted reports will still give them the same information.

  The part about Watchtower being a separate corporation from CCJW that one is a toss-up. Other courts have viewed them as different corporations and cannot be responsible for the other's actions. This part will be the most interesting part.
• 

  truthseekeriam

  Wonderful!! I was about to email Zelkin to ask how it went.

  Thank you so much for attending and giving all of us a update.
• 

  Acluetofindtheuser

  Here's a link to the news article by the San Diego Reader.

  https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2017/oct/12/ticker-jehovahs-witnesses-look-another-direction/

  They are very informative but their version is not as juicy as our local member.
• 

  ScenicViewer

  The article linked by Acluetofindtheuser points to a huge double standard by Watchtower attorneys.

  In the case of victim Jose Lopez, Jude Joan Lewis imposed terminating sanctions against Watchtower attorneys for refusing to turn over court ordered documents. As a result she awarded a $13.5 million dollar judgement against the Watchtower parties involved.

  Naturally Watchtower appealed, arguing that lesser sanctions should have been tried first, before going to terminating sanctions. The appellate court agreed.

  The linked article explains...
  

  Attorneys for the Watchtower filed an appeal. They argued that Judge Lewis had acted too soon in issuing the $13.5 million in sanctions and instead the trial court should have imposed less severe sanctions. The appellate court agreed. In their ruling, the justices wrote, "We conclude the court erred in ordering terminating sanctions because there was no evidence that lesser sanctions would have failed to obtain Watchtower's compliance with the document production order and because there were other possible sanctions that could have effectively remedied the discovery violation.

  Next up, another case against Watchtower, brought by Osbaldo Padron, another victim of the same molester (Gonzalo Campos) as Jose Lopez. Judge Richard Strauss presides in this case.

  The article continues...

  Then, last year in the Padron case, a different superior court judge, Richard Strauss, followed the appellate court's advice and instead of issuing terminating sanctions imposed $4000 daily sanctions on the Watchtower for refusing to turn over the documents that Padron's attorneys had requested.

  Watchtower attorneys appealed again, saying that daily sanctions, which were an intermediate step compared to the terminating sanctions imposed in the Lopez case - something that they had previously argued for - were out of place.
  The appellate court justices noticed the double standard.

  More from the article...

  On October 11, those attorneys appeared before the Fourth District Appellate Court to argue that the trial court was wrong to issue daily sanctions — exactly what they had argued for in the appellate court Lopez case just months prior.

  
  Justice Richard Huffman did not hide his displeasure that Watchtower's attorneys were arguing against what they had previously supported to the same court.

  
  "You can't have it both ways," Huffman said during argument. "[The Lopez] ruling has come around to bite you and now you're saying, 'not fair, not fair.' You were headed in one direction before and now you’re headed another way. It's a breathtaking position to listen to."

  Yes, regarding Watchtower's argument Justice Huffman said "It's a breathtaking position to listen to."

  It's very pleasing to read that the Courts are catching on to Watchtower's double standards and duplicitous arguments, and are nearing exhaustion listening to them.