i don't think the society can afford to drop this appeal.
1. if they loose their appeal it opens them up to huge amounts of liability.
they need the courts to come down on their side of the clergy-penitent confidentiality issue.
Reduction of awards happens frequently in the appeal process.
I appreciate this does happen, but when a jury (12 individuals with no interest, and unlikely to have heard of this case before serving - unlike other high profile cases - so not 'swayed' by prior press reports) awards a figure, on what grounds is it adjusted?
in light of this week's us trials for child molestations, the above question needs to be weighed for any jw elder.
they can follow the men of watchtower... or follow god by taking the moral high ground, protecting children, and following the law.. jerry sandusky will spend the rest of his life as a target for jailhouse rape.
he may soon be joined by others who simply decided to stay silent and not report his crimes.
It would be nice to see those accountable in a Criminal Court - with the Elders standing alongside the perp. They ought be tried on 'guilty knowledge'. A few token custodial sentences would certainly have an affect.
i don't think the society can afford to drop this appeal.
1. if they loose their appeal it opens them up to huge amounts of liability.
they need the courts to come down on their side of the clergy-penitent confidentiality issue.
I also believe they will quietlly settle this out of court (if possible) and try to obtain a gag order as they have in the past.
I'd have thought it's a tad late for that.
i've been giving some thought to the recent development in which the judge has ruled that the society is barred from completing any property transactions until the appeal is over, which could take up to two years or even more.. i've submitted an article to randy at freeminds in which i basically argue that it is no longer in the society's interests to appeal this case.
if i correctly understand the restrictions placed on the society by the judge, then the governing body has far more to lose by appealing than they could conceivably gain.. think about it.... by appealing, they buy themselves time in which to formulate a long-term strategy for dealing with the fallout of this case, but will be barred from liquidating $1 billion in property assets at a time of global economic uncertainty when their donations are dwindling.
there is also no guarantee that their appeal will be upheld.by dropping their appeal, they take a hit and pay $23.8 million but retain the freedom to see through their real estate projects; retain their financial flexibility to respond to dwindling donations, and get to pretend to their followers (as with the un scandal) that it never happened.of course, i am only saying that dropping the appeal would be the only intelligent option for the society, assuming they are aware of how legally precarious their child abuse policies are.
Just a thought - the way the official statement is headed and worded ;- 'Jehovah’s Witnesses to appeal jury verdict in California case' is quite crafty. It automatically draws the R&F onside (if you get what I mean).
i've been giving some thought to the recent development in which the judge has ruled that the society is barred from completing any property transactions until the appeal is over, which could take up to two years or even more.. i've submitted an article to randy at freeminds in which i basically argue that it is no longer in the society's interests to appeal this case.
if i correctly understand the restrictions placed on the society by the judge, then the governing body has far more to lose by appealing than they could conceivably gain.. think about it.... by appealing, they buy themselves time in which to formulate a long-term strategy for dealing with the fallout of this case, but will be barred from liquidating $1 billion in property assets at a time of global economic uncertainty when their donations are dwindling.
there is also no guarantee that their appeal will be upheld.by dropping their appeal, they take a hit and pay $23.8 million but retain the freedom to see through their real estate projects; retain their financial flexibility to respond to dwindling donations, and get to pretend to their followers (as with the un scandal) that it never happened.of course, i am only saying that dropping the appeal would be the only intelligent option for the society, assuming they are aware of how legally precarious their child abuse policies are.
It's my understanding that the WT has issued an official statement saying it WILL appeal - so, with this in mind, what reason can it give for changing its mind..?
i've been giving some thought to the recent development in which the judge has ruled that the society is barred from completing any property transactions until the appeal is over, which could take up to two years or even more.. i've submitted an article to randy at freeminds in which i basically argue that it is no longer in the society's interests to appeal this case.
if i correctly understand the restrictions placed on the society by the judge, then the governing body has far more to lose by appealing than they could conceivably gain.. think about it.... by appealing, they buy themselves time in which to formulate a long-term strategy for dealing with the fallout of this case, but will be barred from liquidating $1 billion in property assets at a time of global economic uncertainty when their donations are dwindling.
there is also no guarantee that their appeal will be upheld.by dropping their appeal, they take a hit and pay $23.8 million but retain the freedom to see through their real estate projects; retain their financial flexibility to respond to dwindling donations, and get to pretend to their followers (as with the un scandal) that it never happened.of course, i am only saying that dropping the appeal would be the only intelligent option for the society, assuming they are aware of how legally precarious their child abuse policies are.
I sort of think that by appealing they will attract more unwanted attention/press coverage/questions - and, as you say, if they cough up a quick payment the whole incident will soon be forgotten by the R&F. Short memories.
i am stunned by candace's huge court victory.
it is overdue.
i have been reading comments on jvn, huffington, san jose mercury, nbc, and other sources.
I've been a tad more crafty, 'you ought be prepared on the Ministry, as there's a MASSIVE story on child abuse within the Society just broken in USA...' then fill them in with details. My figuring is THIS way I'm conveying the information in a way they will need to listen. Psychology.
even when i was a devout witless, i always winced a bit when i heard or especially had to utter "jehovah".
it's just one of those uncomfortable words to say like "colostomy", "vagina", or "erectile dysfunction"..
Yes, I always found it uncomfortable (even as a JW) as it seemed just wrong, disrespectful. Frankly I'd cringe at the almost continual use of the 'name' by JWs, slipping it in, totally unnecessarily... JW Tourettes, lol.
Both myself, and Mr Midwich Cuckoo, have signed
now regarding the candace conti case, where the org will be put under pressure to change their policies, will they obey caeser in this case rather than god?, .
my point not being to do with the rights or wrongs of current jw policy, but in the view that they obviously belive their current policy is from god himself, will they therefore stick with "jehovahs" percieved will or will they disobey god (from thier point of view, not mine),and compromise and "commit fornication with the beast".. is it the same religion that wouldnt bow down to caeser even in the face of death back in the 1930s ?
time will tell?, or maybe money will be more of an incitement to "disobey god" than the lives of faithfull and stout brothers?
I find it all very odd really. This isn't the first time they've paid 'compensation' to a victim, and no one likes paying out time and time again, yet they've maintained the same policy. However, IF they change their policy in light of this case, it will appear that God has been wrong (As the policy is straight from the FDS - I know what I mean) and is now changing due to man's Laws. Difficult.
