"F56 This report is referred to the Law Society of New South Wales in relation to the conduct of
Mr Toole in having failed to advise congregational elders of their obligations to report their
knowledge of the commission of certain criminal offences to the police."
Whatever, Toole's performance was shambolic and pathetic. One can imagine that he is likely to be struck-off/disbarred by LSNSW (rightly so, IMO).
That brings me to the recent WT Oz letter looking for qualified lawyers and accountants. My guess is that there won't be that many. I would also guess that qualified and licenced professionals may be more likely than most to be inquisitive and that lawyers in particular are following ARC proceedings.
Members of the hierarchy of WT have only to obey to be blessed, but JWs who are professionals (e.g. lawyers) must comply with the standards of their professional regulators to maintain their standing (and their licence). I wonder whether a lawyer who is doing quite nicely thank you and who happens to be a JW would be happy to compromise everything if he was called on to do something by WT that goes against his professional judgement.
I shouldn't make personal judgements, but I will. I spent my professional life around lawyers and I have some experience of them. On the basis of his appearance before ARC I would say that Toole was an ideal WT lawyer. He presented as evasive, weak, lacking in knowledge and a weasel who could be easily influenced. But he had the all-important Practising Certificate and thus was useful for signing stuff. Sorry if that's harsh, Mr Toole, but you knew or should have known what you were doing. You can't be a respected independent professional and a WT drone at the same time.
On another point - there were some comments posted here from posters who were disappointed at the lack of showy courtroom fireworks during the ARC hearings. I think that the ARC findings show that the best way to do these things is politely, calmly, professionally, clinically, forensically. Still working through the documents but I am very impressed so far. (Note that unlike WT publications everything is properly referenced and checkable). The bits of WT rebuttal I've read so far seem to be fairly poor. I wonder whether Toole was invited to assist with the rebuttal, or if WT is already trying to distance themselves from him.
The ARC is only valid within Oz, of course, but with other enquiries going on elsewhere (CC in UK and the wide-ranging enquiry just started) I have little doubt that the evidence arising from ARC won't go unnoticed, especially because the Oz and UK legal systems and procedures are compatible and - usefully - ARC has demonstrated that WT policies and rules are dictated world-wide by the GB.