Watchtower Attorneys Stumped

by jst2laws 45 Replies latest forum announcements

  • jst2laws
    jst2laws

    Hello Craig,

    The Simpson case is a good example of the difference In Criminal court and Civil court. He was found innocent of homicide which we have laws against, but found guilty of robbing the surviving family of the companionship of their daughter by the civil court.

    US judges perceive the Constitutional separation of church-and-state almost as if to even touch the issue will infect them with an incurable disease...I doubt, for example, that the practice of DFing, per se, would ever be adjudicated.

    Well, some have 'touched' that subject already. Remember the Native American use of Peyote for religious purposes? Or the use of real eagle feathers (at the time an endangered species) in religious headdresses? Or the Snake Handlers in the south east? These have all been in the past addressed by the court and if I remember right it was NOT Civil court.

    I think you are right about the "DFing" policy. But through a few tough lawsuits perhaps they would start requiring baptismal candidates to sign a WRITTEN CONTRACT with the Watchtower Corporation agreeing in advance to the extreme consequences of THINKING FOR ONESELF.

    After the Jimmy Swaggart trial, it took the WTS less than a month to get "new light" and switch to the "voluntary donation" basis. .....God doesn't talk to those jerks...money does.

    I love that one. I do not remember anyone before Hillarystep adamantly pointing to that reality. When money speaks, the Watchtower listens. Especially when the money is saying GOOD BYE.

    Steve

  • SYN
    SYN

    Just wanted to say that this is an excellent thread.

    I'll be watching with interest to see what happens!

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    This should be the easy part of the Anderson case as long as no one was using the bible and focusing on the Watchtower's policy books such as the Flock book. These Summary Judgement motions should hopefully go okay for Mr. Bell's team but who the hell knows after the Berry case.

    Depositions and disclosure segment of this case. Yep .... that will be the toughtest and everyone knows it too.

    As for the case in Canada (Motte-Trille v. WTS) compared to the case in the USA. I believe in Canada, Motte-Trille used the failure of the WTS to provide "due process" and won. But the Anderson case I believe is using the ... ummmm ... fraudualent actions and the tort of slander/libel (defamation of character) etc. This is something much different.

    At least there is no statute of limitations argument in this case.

    I wish to thank Ed, Barb, Joe and the others in the legal team for keeping their focus on this case and pressing ahead. This case will take many years but it does have a shot (albeit a very tough shot) at having a positive outcome for those who have been improperly treated, kicked out and shunned by their family and friends.

    hawk

  • starfish422
    starfish422

    Nothing to add but I am reading this thread with interest, and sending positive vibes to Barb & Joe Anderson.

  • waiting
    waiting

    Hopefully, Mr. Bell & legal team (and any other lawyers taking on the WTBTS Corporation/Religion) will get an intense education resulting in understanding of the WT mind.

    The WTBTS corporate mind is much different than the local jw WT mind.

    So, in essence, the lawyers must understand the Jehovah's Witness' religion locally, corporately, and the laws for religions and for corporations.

    Amongst other things.

    wow..........99% of US don't understand. wow.

  • czarofmischief
    czarofmischief

    Okay. The DubMasters were stumped. I bet Rutherford would have had something to say, even if it was irrelevant and perhaps intoxicated.

    Let them burn!

    I'm eager to hear what happened. What was the exact question? Make sure you post it when the judge comes back, kay?

    CZAR

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit