Just wanted to pull out the points the judge raised from the judgement. It's the judicial nature of the process which the judge argues place it outside of it being a confession in Delaware. JWs could have a confession in Delaware, they could have the whole body of elders sat there in clown suits and still be allowed to call it a confession, but the judicial process thing they do is being called out for being outside of the exemption to report.
The [exemption] applies only when the purpose of the conversation is for penitence. The affidavits supplied by Defendants leaves open certain questions of fact. What was the motivation of Juvenile Member and Mother in bringing the sexual relationship to the attention of the Elders? Was the intention to report misconduct to church officials, or to confess sinful behavior and thus to obtain absolution? The fact that Juvenile Member was excommunicated may indicate that Juvenile Member did not come voluntarily to the meeting, or that Juvenile Member did not reveal the information with the understanding that his repentance might result in the absolution that ordinarily is associated with sacramental confession.
The circumstances and motivation of Adult Member also are in question. Defendants' affidavits indicate that the conversation was demanded by the Elders as part of a disciplinary process. If the meeting with the Elders was not initiated by Adult Member, Adult Member may not be deemed to be a penitent. If the purpose of this meeting was for the Elders to investigate alleged child abuse, [the conversation] may not be a sacramental confession.