Posts by truthseekeriam

49

Brave high school student exposes abuse and corruption within Jehovahs witnesses

by Watchtower-Free in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdvt_gyq-ls&feature=youtu.be.

truthseekeriam

Wow!! She really touched on everything that's wrong with their claim of JW's being a "loving" organization and did so in a very touching way.

I was wiping away tears as she spoke, very powerful!

13

new update on Conti case

by violias in

got an update email about the conti case.

maybe someone can tell us what it means.. http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/disposition.cfm?dist=1&doc_id=2025979&doc_no=a136641 .

truthseekeriam

Actually I think today was the date it was made final, so they have 10 days to appeal.

13

new update on Conti case

by violias in

got an update email about the conti case.

maybe someone can tell us what it means.. http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/disposition.cfm?dist=1&doc_id=2025979&doc_no=a136641 .

Petitioning for Review in the Supreme Court

For more information click on questions below.

What is a petition for review?

Who may file a petition for review, and what is the time limit for filing it?

Any party may file a petition for review of any Court of Appeal order or decision, as California Rules of Court, rule 8.500(a) provides. The petition for review must be served and filed within 10 days after the Court of Appeal decision becomes final, as explained in California Rules of Court, rules 8.500(e) and 8.264. Any party opposed to review may file an answer to the petition, or may ask the court to review additional issues in the case.

How does the Supreme Court decide whether to grant a petition for review?

What are the requirements for the form and contents of petitions for review?

What are the requirements for service?

What are the filing fees for a petition for review, and are they payable in all types of cases?

When will the petition for review be decided?

Can I be notified when the petition in a particular case is decided?

What happens if the petition for review is denied?

What happens if the petition for review is granted?

If a petition for review is granted, when must briefs on the merits be filed?

What is a brief on the merits?

What are the requirements for the form and contents of briefs?

When will oral argument be scheduled?

When will the Supreme Court opinion issue, and what happens then?

44

The JW religion has just cost me my marriage & my family life

by jambon1 in

jw
friends

after leaving the organisation 10 years ago i fought with everything i had to stay in my marriage and with my three children.

after a tumultuous number of years trying to maintain a happy family life while living in a divided home, it's finally over.

the religion is single handedly responsible for destroying my marriage and my family.

truthseekeriam

We all have in one way or another have been shafted by this religion and Trust me I know it hurts like hell!!

Just try to remember that through all the pain and distress you have a light at the end of it, while those that stay have a never ending life of never ever being good enough to deal with.

44

The JW religion has just cost me my marriage & my family life

by jambon1 in

jw
friends

after leaving the organisation 10 years ago i fought with everything i had to stay in my marriage and with my three children.

after a tumultuous number of years trying to maintain a happy family life while living in a divided home, it's finally over.

the religion is single handedly responsible for destroying my marriage and my family.

truthseekeriam

I'm very sorry.

I don't think my marriage would have lasted if we hadn't left together.

51

“We are not done yet!” – Candace Conti reacts to appeal court decision

by Watchtower-Free in

http://jwsurvey.org/cedars-blog/we-are-not-done-yet-candace-reacts-to-appeal-court-decision.

candace conti (pictured in her interview with abc) has spoken out for the first time about the appeal court decision.

as current and former jehovahs witnesses digest the news that watchtowers appeal against the candace conti verdict has faltered, albeit with the punitive element of the judgment reversed, candace has reacted for the first time by telling me: we are not done yet.. news spread on monday that the state appeals court in san francisco had upheld the $2.8 million compensatory damages in the original june 2012 verdict, but overturned the $8.6 million punitive award against watchtower.. the court decided that, though watchtower had neglected its responsibility to supervise known pedophile jonathan kendrick in field ministry, a church-sponsored activity, the organization had no duty to warn parents in the congregation that a pedophile was in their midst or report him to authorities.. an insightful report by investigative reporter trey bundy has suggested that the court reached its decision because the precedent set by the conti verdict might be too burdensome to enforce.. the burden would be considerable because the precedent could require a church to intervene whenever it has reason to believe that a congregation member is capable of doing harm, and the scope of that duty could not be limited with any precision, the judges wrote.. candaces attorney rick simons responded by pointedly telling bundy: they think in public policy terms that theres too much risk in broadening the churchs responsibility and liability so that it burdens what churches do.

truthseekeriam

I was curious also what this modification of opinion meant...but I guess it was denied.

Request for modification of opinion. Devin M. Storey, for Osbaldo Padron (non-party to this case)
05/13/2015Order filed. The request for modification filed May 7, 2015, is denied. There is no change in the judgment.

33

Richard Ashe Court Deposition - " Let elders handle child abuse- don't talk about it "

by flipper in

as some of you know i was given pdf files of much of the conti and lopez child abuse court cases and asked from a friend to peruse through it and post some excerpts on the board here that may have been missed or not addressed in the pbs newshour report or the abc news nightline report.

so after going through this richard ashe testimony i feel i found something quite interesting that exposes the real attitudes of the wt society leaders towards child abuse and the attitudes wt leaders put into it's appointed men's minds as well.

the viewpoint that richard ashe displays is repeated in elders throughout thousands of jw congregations on this planet.

truthseekeriam

This is the reason these child molesters feel comfortable attending meetings right along with some of their victims!! Most were elders themselves so they know darn well what happens to the victims in their families if they start talking about what has happened.

I could only imagine the added joy they (molesters) get knowing they have all the power! What this organization does to further the pain and trauma victims suffer is criminal!! They have so much to answer for.

14

Tennessee-JW Angela Montgomery sentenced today to 40 years in prison for raping her own children

by AndersonsInfo in

http://wkrn.com/2015/05/06/murfreesboro-mom-sentenced-to-40-years-for-raping-own-children/.

murfreesboro mom sentenced to 40 years for raping own children.

by larry flowers published: may 6, 2015, 4:59 pm updated: may 6, 2015, 6:53 pm .

truthseekeriam

Well 12 jurors who heard the testimony convicted her.

14

Tennessee-JW Angela Montgomery sentenced today to 40 years in prison for raping her own children

by AndersonsInfo in

http://wkrn.com/2015/05/06/murfreesboro-mom-sentenced-to-40-years-for-raping-own-children/.

murfreesboro mom sentenced to 40 years for raping own children.

by larry flowers published: may 6, 2015, 4:59 pm updated: may 6, 2015, 6:53 pm .

truthseekeriam

So glad this young man got the justice he so deserved and this horrible woman will spend most likely the rest of her life in prison where she belongs.

11

A prospective juror(JW) really ticks of Judge!

by truthseekeriam in

jw
friends

an appellate court has reversed the conviction of a bacliff woman who recorded her boyfriend raping his 14-month-old granddaughter on her cell phone, saying the trial judge tainted the jury by arresting a prospective juror during jury selection.

alisha marie drake had been sentenced in 2013 to 15 years in prison for using her cell phone to record the act.

her boyfriend, jason grant, was charged with aggravated sexual assault of a child and possession of child pornography and is awaiting trial.

truthseekeriam

An appellate court has reversed the conviction of a Bacliff woman who recorded her boyfriend raping his 14-month-old granddaughter on her cell phone, saying the trial judge tainted the jury by arresting a prospective juror during jury selection.

Alisha Marie Drake had been sentenced in 2013 to 15 years in prison for using her cell phone to record the act. Her boyfriend, Jason Grant, was charged with aggravated sexual assault of a child and possession of child pornography and is awaiting trial.

During the questioning of prospective jurors, one man, identified only as Juror No. 48, told Galveston County District Court Judge Susan Criss that his religious tenets prohibited from watching the cell phone recording. The man stated he was a Jehova's Witness.

"As far as my belief in God, as far as watching any kind of child pornography for a judicial or whatever kind of court, I mean, I cannot do that," the man said, according to the Fourteenth Court of Appeals' decision. He added later, "I will close my eyes, I will not allow my eyes to look at anything like that, period. So whatever you have to do, you just have to do it."

That's when, according to the Fourteenth Court, Criss laid down the law: "Here is the thing you have got to understand. Assuming — sometimes an accusation is made and the person didn't commit a crime at all. They are wrong. The crime wasn't committed. Sometimes an accusation was made and a crime was committed, but it was a different person that committed it. There are different things that happen. But if you believe that a crime was committed and a child was hurt as a consequence, that child needs 12 people who have got it in them to come in here and look at the evidence....If you believe in God, God wants you to protect the children."

Criss is also quoted as saying, "So if it grosses you out, then you can take it out on the person in punishment because it can't possibly gross you out more than it grosses out that child. So that's what my God tells me."

And just in case she didn't get her point across, Criss really dropped the gavel on the dude: "So you want to find out what I will do?....So you want to find out what my God will tell me to do? Let's test it, buddy. Let's test it." (The court record does not indicate if Criss then removed the cigarillo from the corner of her mouth, squinted, and spat a wad of tobacco on the desert sand.)

That's when Juror No. 48 reiterated that "I'm one of Jehova's Witnesses, and I believe that Jehovah God is a supreme judge and it is not in my place to judge anyone else or to have, for that matter, to be — "

Criss interjected with, "....We have Jehovah's Witnesses all the time. But you know what? If you get picked on this jury, you get picked on this jury, and Jehovah can visit you in the jail."

When Juror No. 48 didn't budge, Criss ordered his arrest.

The opinion, written by Justice Ken Wise, states that "Punishing a juror for speaking truthfully and expressing his bias has a chilling effect on the jury's ability to respond affirmatively to questions asked during [jury selection]....A trial judge that holds a juror in contempt for expressing his religious beliefs defeats the purpose of [jury selection] and prevents the honest exchange of information between the court and the jury."

Wise wrote that Criss's actions "failed to protect the trial process and deprived Drake of a fair and impartial trial."

Prosecutors had argued in the appeal that Criss was merely trying to maintain order in the courtroom and that Juror No. 48 was "disrespectful [and] disorderly."

However, Wise stated in the opinion that the record did not reflect such behavior, and added that Criss "engaged Juror No. 48 personally, thereby at least continuing, if not escalating, the angry tone of the exchange."

Criss told the Houston Press that, "This guy was not arrested for expressing his opinion. He was arrested for disrupting the process." She explained that "This is a person who was refusing to participate in the process and expressing his refusal very, very defiantly." (Criss retired from the bench in 2013 and is now in private practice).

She said she didn't believe the arrest had any chilling effect on the prospective jurors, adding, "I think to allow him to disrupt the process and say 'I'm not going to participate' would have led a rush out of the room. Everyone would raise their hand and [say] 'I'm not going to participate,' and then they're gone and then you don't have a jury panel."

We'll keep you posted on Round Two.