Jeffro: Agreed - it is absolute misdirection. I suspect that things may get more difficult for WTBTS in the future.
As society becomes more litigious and it becomes more profitable to establish 'vicarious liability' so that defendants with assets can be included in lawsuits, WTBTS may have to start distancing themselves from the PBI aka R&F.
In the UK, at least, there is quite a drive to identify and prosecute 'corporate liabilty' for both criminal and civil offences (cf. Health and Safety and 'corporate manslaughter' offences). The case law (judicial precedents) follows through from those cases.
I believe that this will cause problems for WTBTS as a 'high control' organisation - whether or not they have the intelligence and knowledge to realise it.
1. They issue written and verbal instructions as to how members will behave and conduct the 'publishing' work.
2. The 'work' is directed and specified ('territories', 'car groups' etc.)
3. 'Workers' are directed and briefed before being sent to do their tasks (FS meetings)
4. The 'work' undertaken is supervised and reported back on (FS reports)
5. Sanctions and discipline provisions are prescribed and can be applied in relation to the 'work'
6. The stated policy is that 'there are no clergy but all are clergy'
A good investigator/lawyer/prosecutor would not have much problem (IME) establishing a corporate liability for things that went wrong, especially using the Data Protection Act and other provisions to obtain documentation. I have no doubt that wherever possible WTBTS would leave local elders 'hanging out to dry'.
Finally, I am reminded of the apocryphal court story where having been found guilty by the jury of an offence the defendant made an impassioned plea - 'As God is my judge, I didn't do this!' The judge gave a dramatic pause and said: 'He isn't. I am. Five years.'