Conti Appeal Preview - Oral Argument Jan 14

by Chaserious 111 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  Chaserious

  Cofty - that's a good observation. The recognition of a duty based on a child's relationship with the organization has the greatest value for precedntial effect.

  In fact, if the court were to decide in Conti's favor on the malfeasance issue, it would probably not even reach the duty to warn issue.  While I'm sure Candace, her lawyers and observers here would be pleased with the result, it would have limited precedntial value, as that situation, e.g. elders assigning a child to work with a known pedophile in field service, is probably unlikely to exist in other cases. It's also not a significant change in existing law as malfeasance in these circumstances is already widely recognized as a basis for liability.
• 

  sir82

  The malfeasance issue seems to be the strongest point the WT has - who remembers who assigned who to work with who in field service last week, let alone 15 years ago?
  

  It's good to know that it is, as Chaserious brings out, the least relevant as far as setting a precedent.
  
• 

  Chaserious

  Doubting Bro - I agree that it's easy for you, me, and anyone who has been around the WT to know that they should have such a duty.  I think the trial judge had the same feeling, having been exposed to enough documents and testimony to know that something stinks.

  The more difficult thing is setting out a general rule that is widely applicable, which is the job of the higher courts.  Would the same duty apply to a Catholic parish with 1000 members, if it involved a victim and pedophile whose role in the church is merely attending services a few times a year?

  What would larger churches that are not as hands on with members have to do to discharge the duty? Make an announcement from the pulpit upon even an allegation of abuse? That seems a little severe. Would contacting authorities be enough or do they have to do more?  Should it depend on the level of control a religion has over its members? That could result in putting the church doctrines on trial in each case.  These are tough questions - much harder than the obvious, which is to recognize that they have been dishonest, secretive, and acted in self-interest over the years with respect to prevention of child abuse.
• 

  OneEyedJoe

   elders assigning a child to work with a known pedophile in field service, is probably unlikely to exist in other cases. 
  

  I thought that, but apparently that's exactly what happened in the other case that the WTS just lost to Zalkin.  They assigned the pedophile to study (so even worse than going in FS) with the victim since his father wasn't in the cult.

  The malfeasance issue seems to be the strongest point the WT has - who remembers who assigned who to work with who in field service last week, let alone 15 years ago?
  

  I'd guess the kid that got raped as a result might remember.  The point is sound though, there's not likely to be any clear testimony on this topic and even if there was it would be easy to dismiss due to the time that's passed.  I can't think how there'd ever be any hard evidence of such an assignment, either.

  Hopefully a precedent will be set and the sharks will begin to circle.

  
  
• 

  DATA-DOG

  I would have to agree with Cofty, 100%.  HI, Cofty!!!

  Anyway, here's why. Although I am not a lawyer, I did read the transcripts and I do understand the difference between malfeasance and a failure to warn. That being said, as a layperson reading the transcripts, the WTBTS came across as HUGE D-Bags!! 

  The jury, most likely common folk like me, also recognized this, I am sure of that! Anyone reading the transcripts would notice the cold, calculating, legalistic manner of the WTBTS. Blaming the victim, blaming the parents, blaming the law enforcement officials?!?!?!? REALLLY?!?!? If I had been a juror, I would have been shocked at the lack of human feeling from the WTBTS. 

  For me, the real question is, why did this happen? Why aren't these issues discussed openly and honestly among all JWs?! Why do JWs fear coming forward? Why do Elder's fear or hesitate to report crimes? It all comes down to the "special relationship" that exists between the WTBTS/leaders and the R&F. When you insist that you speak for God, and judge for God, and have very real power over peoples lives, that is a special relationship.

  Kudos to the Judge and jury. I hope the WTBTS does not wriggle out of this one.

  
  

  DD
• 

  Nitty-Gritty

  The thing is it is not up to elders (or at least it isn't the law everywhere) to report a crime such as child molestation to the authorities unless they have personally been a witness to it, or have been specifically asked to do so by the victim and/or parents who will then have to accompany them.  It is up to the victim or victim and/or parents. They are the ones who have to do the reporting.
  
• 

  StarTrekAngel

  Was ABC news ever granted permission to record or broadcast the arguments?
• 

  Ding

  I believe NBC was there. Not sure.
  
• 

  Dagney

  Can't wait to hear how this goes....
• 

  cha ching

  Yes,  ABC news was granted permission, along with NBC & CIR (Center for Investigative Reporting).