Fisherman

Joined

• started 155 topics
• posted 5,295 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Fisherman

• 
  182

  The Danger of Settlements

  by Tech49 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.

  conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.

  i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Fisherman

  But the conflict is this. Wt cannot disclose child abuse communications as per US law. It violates US law. But by the same token any state can pass laws requiring wt and every other religion (or it would be unconstitutional) to report communications protected by US law under the First Amendment to local authorities in-spite of US law mandating such communications from being disclosed.

  And where do you draw the line? Should attorneys also be required to report child abuse under a protected setting? Suppose a child abuser went free and he molested again?
  
• 
  182

  The Danger of Settlements

  by Tech49 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.

  conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.

  i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Fisherman

  Courts have not dismissed cases filed against the wt alleging damages to Plaintiffs resulting from wt non-disclosing child abuse communications to the authorities in-spite of wt claims of confidentiality.

  Such cases have been accepted as valid by the Courts (at least in some states) regardless of wt confidentiality privilege which is a basis for the Courts to throw the cases out of Court prima facie -they haven't.

  The precedent that is being alluded to is, Courts not having dismissed cases filed against the wt based on wt claims of confidentiality has opened the door to other similar cases also to be heard by the Courts; and for those cases to have a similar outcome: wt pays money. That is what it seems .

  I am not saying that this is what the Courts will decide as a standard for all child abuse cases involving child abuse communications; "You knew about the child abuse and you kept it confidential, that is your privilege but you are legally liable for the damages resulting from non disclosure."
• 
  182

  The Danger of Settlements

  by Tech49 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.

  conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.

  i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Fisherman

  RO: What information does Zalkin want from wt? What precedent is careful alluding to?
  
• 
  182

  The Danger of Settlements

  by Tech49 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.

  conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.

  i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Fisherman

  A strong precedent has been set

  What precedent was that?
  
• 
  182

  The Danger of Settlements

  by Tech49 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.

  conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.

  i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Fisherman

  Fin, the Courts decide what is legal and what is not, regardless of the view of a case , Fin.
• 
  182

  The Danger of Settlements

  by Tech49 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.

  conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.

  i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Fisherman

  make their scandals known.....,

  What scandals?
  
  
• 
  182

  The Danger of Settlements

  by Tech49 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.

  conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.

  i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Fisherman

  It's a civil case - it's only about money.

  The statement is false.

  For example:

  Metropoiltan life vs Watchtower

  Roe vs Wade

  To name two. There must be millions of others, like wt vs village of Stratton. This case was decided by the US Supreme Court. Nobody prevents a plaintiff to appeal or at least to try to appeal to a higher court vs settling a case out of court for only money.

  A plaintiff could ask for injunctionary relief so civil cases are not only about money.

  In the Conti case, for the thousandth time, the appeals court found that watchtower did not have a duty to protect or to warn. The appeals Court also found enough evidence to find WT negligent in the supervision of Candance during a church sponsored activity, field service and that is all. This case was decided by the Courts, it was not settled out of Court but never did court rule that wt did not report child abuse to the police. In fact, US law finds abortions legal and protects the confidentiality of communications of a spiritual context in a spiritual setting as defined by the related law.

  
  

  
  
  
• 
  182

  The Danger of Settlements

  by Tech49 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.

  conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.

  i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Fisherman

  Though I find it hard to believe that any victim would settle for money.

  How true! And thank you for saying that.
  
  
• 
  182

  The Danger of Settlements

  by Tech49 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.

  conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.

  i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Fisherman

  at least attempt

  Defendant says to Plaintiff: My offer is zero. Take me to Court!
  

  Judge:Why did you not offer more money?.

  Defendant: " Because I didn't do anything."

  Judge: That's for me to decide!! Can't you see we don't have time to hear your case? Stop wasting the Court's time! Court orders mediation!

  Mediator: How about offering more money than zero!

  Plaintiff: I want billions

  Mediator: How about 500 millions? Sound fair?

  Plaintiff: Not a billion but I will take it.
  

  Defendant: No

  Mediator: Why not?

  Defendant: Why?

  Mediator: I told you why! because 500 millions sounds fair!

  Defendant: I don't think it is a fair amount.

  Mediator: Why are you telling me this now. 500 million is only half of what she is asking!

  Defendant: My offer is zero dollars Sue me.

  Mediator: You are not cooperating. I will write that in my report to the judge.

  Defendant: Sue Me.

  After ten years of this. the case goes to Courts after parties meeting the legal requirements to try out of Court.
• 
  182

  The Danger of Settlements

  by Tech49 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.

  conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.

  i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Fisherman

  How much money does a Plaintiff put in the bank after successfully suing someone? Lets say the Court awarded someone 1.9 million dollars; that sounds like a lot, but attorneys don't work for free and neither do expert witnesses and doctors and therapists and everybody else and and all the expenses, etc; they take a big chunk of the money. The Plaintiff goes home with a lot more than he came to court with -and tax free- but don't figure that out of 1.9 million a Plaintiff will take home a big lump sum, he has a lot of expenses to pay and what is left, he keeps for himself.