Timeline of Berry girls' case

by loveis 21 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • loveis
    loveis

    As we (still) await the decision of the New Hampshire Supreme Court on the Berry girls' appeal, a timeline of the events up until now is appropriate.

    TIMELINE OF BERRY GIRLS CASE

    1997 -- Holly Brewer (incorrectly called "Holly Berry" in NH Supreme Court filings) returns to New Hampshire after running away from home, and for the first time discloses the brutal sexual assualts suffered during her childhood by then-stepfather Paul Berry (by this time divorced from her mother Sarah, now Sarah Poisson, for a number of years). She finally finds the courage to report the assualts to police. Paul Berry is eventually arrested and charged with 17 counts of aggravated felonious sexual assault and 4 additional counts of felonious sexual assault. It takes nearly 4 years for the case to come to trial.

    June 2000--Paul Berry finally goes on trial on the 21 counts. He and his JW friends are confident he will be cleared. But, when the verdict comes down, he is convicted by a jury on all 21 counts, and jailed immediately pending sentence. Sarah Poisson (also the victim of physical abuse by Berry) and Holly Brewer cry as they relate "how powerful it was to finally be believed."

    October 2000--At Paul Berry's sentencing hearing, Holly, her half sister Heather Berry, and Sarah Poisson all relate the horrors they suffered again. 30 members of Paul Berry's JW congregation testify as character witnesses for him, hoping to persaude the judge that he deserves leniency. But the judge is not impressed and throws the book at Berry, handing down consecutive prison sentences totalling a minimum of 56 years and a maximum of 112--one of the stiffest sentences even given for any sexual assault case in New Hampshire. His attorney, Mark Sisti, insists Berry is innocent and vows to appeal.

    Read the transcript of the sentencing hearing: http://www.silentlambs.org/education/pberry.cfm

    August 2001--With the help of Jeffrey Anderson, arguably the most successful litigator in the United States in the specialty of suing churches for sexual abuse, the Berry girls file suit against the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., and the local congregation, charging that gross negligence was committed when the congregation elders learned of the abuse from Sarah at the time it was happening and failed to comply with a state law requiring that child abuse be reported, or otherwise take reasonable steps to help stop the abuse.

    http://www.silentlambs.org/education/witnesses_accused.cfm

    May 8, 2002--Paul Berry's appeal is argued before the New Hampshire Supreme Court. His attorneys allege that he should be granted a new trial because evidence of prior bad acts was admitted that wrongly prejudiced the jury, and because the judge barred the testimony of two witnesses who would have testified that Holly had a reputation for untruthfulness.

    May 28, 2002--In the United States, the Berry girls are featured briefly on a Dateline NBC program that examines the issue of sexual abuse within Jehovah's Witnesses.

    July 14, 2002--In the U.K., BBC Panorama presents the program "Suffer the Little Children", also examining in depth the sexual abuse issue within Jehovah's Witnesses, and featuing an extensive and poignant review of the Berry girls' saga and then-ongoing civil case.

    July 23, 2002--The NH Supreme Court denies Paul Berry's appeal, fully upholding his conviction and sentence. The justices find that neither of the claimed trial errors are grounds for a new trial.

    http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/opinions/2002/0207/berry076.htm

    January 2003--In Canada, the Fifth Estate program examines the sexual abuse issue again, and like Panorama also features an in-depth review of the Berry girls' saga. Vicki Boer is also mentioned.

    February 2003--In a major victory for the Berry girls and the other Silent Lambs, the trial judge for the civil suit, William Groff, denies Watchtower's motion to dismiss the case, making a landmark ruling that the elders did owe a duty to report the abuse or otherwise take reasonable steps. Watchtower promises further motions to dismiss by means of summary judgment, on grounds that the elders were exempt from reporting because they received knowledge of the abuse during confidential pastoral communications (a.k.a., "clergy privilege").

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/8/47474/1.ashx

    May 2003--Further pre-trial hearings are held on the Watchtower motions to dismiss.

    Early June 2003--Bill Bowen of Silentlambs is summoned by Watchtower's attorneys to give his deposition for the case (since he wants to testify for Holly and Heather as an expert witness), and is none too pleased with what he experiences.

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/11/53368/1.ashx

    June 2003--In a severe blow to the Silent Lambs, Judge Groff grants Watchtower's motion for summary judgment (dismissal of the lawsuit on grounds that there is no genuine issue of material fact for a jury to decide). He does so on grounds that the elders' conversatons with Sarah Poisson were, indeed, privileged and confidential under the law applying to clergy/ministers, also partially on grounds that no duty was owed under the particular circumstances (as further revealed in the hearings since the February 2003 decision). Attorneys for the Berry girls promise to appeal.

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/11/54228/1.ashx

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/54434/1.ashx

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/8/54485/1.ashx

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/8/55064/1.ashx

    (June 2003 was also the month the Silent Lambs received another severe blow to their efforts when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4, in the case of Stogner v. California, that states could not retroactively extend a criminal statute of limitations that had already expired, no, not even for such crimes as child sexual abuse where the victim usually takes years and years to even fully realize what happened, let alone become emotionally strong enough to pursue a criminal case. It was also the month of the disappointing verdict in the Vicky Boer case. In other words, June 2003 was not a good month for the Silent Lambs all the way round.)

    December 2003--The appeal of Judge Groff's dismissal of the case is filed with the New Hampshire Supreme Court.

    February 2004--The NH Supreme Court officially accepts the case, with oral arguments to be scheduled.

    March 2004--In a related case, the Silent Lambs receive another blow when the Minnesota Court of Appeals upholds the dismissal (summary judgment) in a very similar JW sex abuse case, that of Heidi Meyer. The JW attorneys, of course, scramble to use this new precedent in their fight against the Silent Lambs (along with that of the Maine Supreme Court in its 1999 decision in Rees v. Watchtower).

    October 20, 2004--The NH Supreme Court hears oral arguments in the Berry girls' appeal. The girls are represented by Marci Hamilton, also a columnist on sexual abuse issues; her presentation is knowledgeable and articulate as she powerfully argues for reinstatement of the case, insisting that there was nothing unreasonable about requiring the elders to make a simple phone call to report the abuse and that the judge was mistaken in applying clergy privilege. Watchtower's attorney, Donald Gardner, does not comes across quite as articulate.

    Listen to the entire oral argument session here:

    http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/recordings/2004/2003-0779.mp3

    (Sometime in 2005 yet to be determined)--The NH Supreme Court hands down its decision on the Berry girls' appeal, and that decision is:

    ????????????????????????????????

  • rebel8
    rebel8

    TY for that informative timeline. Let's hope justice will come.

  • loveis
    loveis

    bttt

  • blondie
    blondie

    I went to the Silentlambs conference last year and met most of this family face to face. What courage they show to have continued to put forth the extreme effort to follow this case to its legal end, to set a precedent.

    Some might have liked to just walk away.

    As an abuse survivor myself, I can understand that part of it, but to willing put yourself out there as a target of the WTS, that is something else.

    Thanks to the Berry girls, to mom and stepdad, and all their supporters, I salute you.

    Blondie

  • EvilForce
    EvilForce

    Anyone who has gone through the grinding, crushing crap of a lawsuit, know's just how painful it can be.

  • kls
    kls

    You go Berry girl's ,we are proud of you,

    Thanks Lovelis for for all you do.

  • frankiespeakin
    frankiespeakin

    Lovis,

    I have one question, it may just be a typing error:

    1997 -- Holly Brewer (incorrectly called "Holly Berry" in NH Supreme Court filings) returns to New Hampshire after running away from home, and for the first time discloses the brutal sexual assualts suffered during her childhood by then-stepfather Paul Berry (by this time divorced from her mother Sarah, now Sarah Poisson, for a number of years). She finally finds the courage to report the assualts to police. Paul Berry is eventually arrested and charged with 17 counts of aggravated felonious sexual assault and 4 additional counts of felonious sexual assault. It takes nearly 4 years for the case to come to trial.

    And this:

    August 2001--With the help of Jeffrey Anderson, arguably the most successful litigator in the United States in the specialty of suing churches for sexual abuse, the Berry girls file suit against the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., and the local congregation, charging that gross negligence was committed when the congregation elders learned of the abuse from Sarah at the time it was happening and failed to comply with a state law requiring that child abuse be reported, or otherwise take reasonable steps to help stop the abuse.
    Since in the first part it is claimed that the "first time" Holly told her mother about the abuse she was already divorced from PB. Did the mother (Sarah) know about the abuse before Holly told her directly or is there some other explaination?
  • blondie
    blondie

    I don't think there is enough information here to come to that conclusion. Are you suggesting the mother knew and did not tell the elders? If that is so, I can tell you that is not true. Without delving into the details to assign blame here, rest assured if the mother knew and had done, nothing, this case would no longer be active. The WTS would have pointed a finger at her. Instead, the elders discouraged her from seeking any help outside the congregation and did not report it themselves although NH is a state that requires it.

    These are real-life people who have put their lives on the line, financially and emotionally. They have had to sit and watch 30 people from their congregation take the stand and tell what a great person Paul Berry is and how they would let him babysit their children any time.

    Blondie

  • frankiespeakin
    frankiespeakin

    Blondie,

    I don't think there is enough information here to come to that conclusion. Are you suggesting the mother knew and did not tell the elders?

    No I'm not suggesting that. I'm just puzzled at these two statements and how they can be harmonized, If the mother didn't hear form Holly about the abuse until after the divorce? Did she suspect something years before and went to the elders? That to me seems like the only explaination.

  • blondie
    blondie

    Like I said, all the information is not posted here. It is possible to access the court proceedings which are listed in the original post. Perhaps your question is answered there.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit