Chaserious

Joined

• started 12 topics
• posted 790 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Chaserious

• 
  14

  Lewd act with a child under 14 years of age

  by gda in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  http://jehovahswitnessreport.com/.

  on january 6, 2015, the paso robles police department in california charged a jehovahs witness, steven martin lindhorst, 51, with the following offenses:.

  lewd act with a child under 14 years of age (felony), possession of child pornography (felony), possession of explicit child pornography (felony), posting intimate photos of another without consent (misdemeanor).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2015/01/22/3455063/steven-lindhorst-paso-robles-arrest.html

  "Investigators have identified and contacted 14 victims, Murphy said."

  Unfortunately, it seems there are quite a few victims.  
  
  
• 
  111

  Conti Appeal Preview - Oral Argument Jan 14

  by Chaserious in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  with hopefully a good deal of interest here in the conti appeal tomorrow (or later today, depending on where you are), i thought that on my ride home from work tonight i'd preview what to expect and what i think the key issues are for any who are interested.

  i have had a busy few weeks and haven't had time to read everything, but i had some time to look at the appeal briefs during my work commute the past couple days.

  it'll be interesting to see what develops out of the network news coverage of this case.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  WT legal no way in hale wants Wilson Elser and company looking over their shoulder or on their heels!

  Wilson Elser is a defense law firm (as almost all mega-firms are), so they won't be filing any lawsuits.  Their interest in the case probably relates to a similar case that they are defending or thinking about taking on.  They are a well-known firm, though. 
  

  I saw on Wiki the Catholic Church had at least 3,000 abuse lawsuits in U.S. alone.  JWs may be only 1% or less of Catholics, that would be about an equivalent 30 lawsuits against WT.

  Have there been 30? I thought Irwin Zalkin's firm has a dozen or so, there's Candace Conti, of course, and then any others I was under the impression you could count on one hand.  If comparing apples to apples, 3,000 lawsuits against the Catholic Church only means filed lawsuits, not settlements prior to the filing of suit. 
  
  
• 
  111

  Conti Appeal Preview - Oral Argument Jan 14

  by Chaserious in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  with hopefully a good deal of interest here in the conti appeal tomorrow (or later today, depending on where you are), i thought that on my ride home from work tonight i'd preview what to expect and what i think the key issues are for any who are interested.

  i have had a busy few weeks and haven't had time to read everything, but i had some time to look at the appeal briefs during my work commute the past couple days.

  it'll be interesting to see what develops out of the network news coverage of this case.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  NittyGritty,

  First off, I tend to agree with you about Vidiot's comments.  It seems rather speculative to connect the hierarchical nature of the organization with the prevalence of child molesters, and a bit far fetched to claim that child abuse will automatically become institutionalized in such an organization.  Aside from the lack of evidence, it doesn't even logically hold up in a situation like the Cont case, where the abuser was not even very high up in the chain of authority.

  As for the 1989 letter, as I said, it didnt have anything to do with avoiding liability for child abuse.  I'd have to go back to the trial transcript, but I don't think that Rick Simons even claimed that it did. I think that came from assumptions that people made on this forum.  You are right that they may not have been specifically contemplating suits by child molesters. But I dont think that matters. The point was that the overall policy of confidentiality had financial purposes; not that it specifically related to child molesters. Rather than consider in each case whether it made sense to maintain strict confidentiality, they just decided it was easier (and maybe cheaper) to just have a blanket policy.

  Additionally, I dont think you are looking at it correctly by saying that a child molester would never sue.  If someone was merely accused, but not convicted of any assault, and felt wrongly branded as a pedophile, there is a very good chance they might sue.  Have you followed the story in the news in the last month or so about Alan Dershowitz? He practically exploded and went on the warpath in the media and in the courts upon being accused of having sex with underage girls.
  
• 
  67

  Re: Experienced Attorneys and Paralegals Needed at Bethel

  by pixel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i thought we needed carpenters and plumbers in paradise...oh well... the hypocrisy.

  to all bodies of elders in the united states branch territoryre: experienced attorneys and paralegals needed at bethel.

  dear brothers:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  The attorney/client privilege card, huh?

  Technically, its the attorney's duty of confidentiality, which is even broader than attorney-client privilege.  It prohibits attorneys from ever using confidential information and secrets learned in the course of  representation against a former client.  If an attorney tries, the former client can go into court and get the lawyer booted from the case.
• 
  67

  Re: Experienced Attorneys and Paralegals Needed at Bethel

  by pixel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i thought we needed carpenters and plumbers in paradise...oh well... the hypocrisy.

  to all bodies of elders in the united states branch territoryre: experienced attorneys and paralegals needed at bethel.

  dear brothers:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  This call for help could also have the potential benefit to WTS of preventing any JW attorneys who even take up a week-long temporary assignment, as they suggest, from ever acting in a legal capacity in a lawsuit against the WTS, should any of them later leave the organization.  I dont know if this is an intended or unintended consequence, but it may have some value to the org.
• 
  67

  Re: Experienced Attorneys and Paralegals Needed at Bethel

  by pixel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i thought we needed carpenters and plumbers in paradise...oh well... the hypocrisy.

  to all bodies of elders in the united states branch territoryre: experienced attorneys and paralegals needed at bethel.

  dear brothers:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  We are hoping to locate several experienced attorneys and paralegals who have exceptional analytical, research, and writing abilities.

  This is awfully picky considering the compensation they are offering, isn't it?  Given the higher-education ban (reaffirmed in this letter, no less) they impose, I'm guessing that any JW with a law license and the ability to fog a mirror qualifies, analytical abilities be damned. 
• 
  19

  Interesting statement made by CO. Is this new?

  by stillin in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in his first talk of the week the co mentioned that people don't get df'd for joining the military or registering to vote because they are already gone, as compared with smoking secretly, which would merit df'ing.. i have been toying around with registering to vote in the next election (us) so this intrigues me..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  I thought voting was a "conscience matter" now, no?
• 
  67

  Re: Experienced Attorneys and Paralegals Needed at Bethel

  by pixel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i thought we needed carpenters and plumbers in paradise...oh well... the hypocrisy.

  to all bodies of elders in the united states branch territoryre: experienced attorneys and paralegals needed at bethel.

  dear brothers:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  Wonder if they have them sign a confidentiality agreement so they can't talk about what they defend..

  Lawyers don't make for very good whistleblowers, whether they have signed any agreement or not.

  If a lawyer wants to break his or her duties of loyalty and confidentiality to the client and blow the whistle on something, it sure better be some kind of ongoing, serious criminal conduct, unless he or she wants to risk being disbarred.
• 
  5

  Letter to BOE

  by Gayle in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  christian congregation of jehovahs witnesses.

  2821 route 22, patterson, ny 12563-2237 phone: (845) 306-1100.

  january 13, 2015. to all bodies of elders in the united states branch territory.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  So do they have to be licensed in NY?  Around here you have to be licensed in every state you work in, not just the one you are currently employed.

  
  To be a corporate in-house counsel in NY you do not need to be admitted to the bar in NY unless you regularly appear in court on behalf of your employer.  You just have to register, which is basically a formaility.  The same or similar rule goes most everywhere.  It doesn't matter where the office is that the attorney works out of.  To appear in court, you have to be licensed in the jurisdiction in which the court sits, either permanently or for that case only (pro hac vice).  
  
• 
  111

  Conti Appeal Preview - Oral Argument Jan 14

  by Chaserious in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  with hopefully a good deal of interest here in the conti appeal tomorrow (or later today, depending on where you are), i thought that on my ride home from work tonight i'd preview what to expect and what i think the key issues are for any who are interested.

  i have had a busy few weeks and haven't had time to read everything, but i had some time to look at the appeal briefs during my work commute the past couple days.

  it'll be interesting to see what develops out of the network news coverage of this case.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  NG: I neglected to respond to this

  
  

  That’s what I don’t get. How does one “minimize liability" by not reporting cases of child molestation? Please explain that to me in legal terms, as a lawyer.

  If you look at the 1989 letter introduced at trial, it is obviously about protecting the organization from legal liability. It goes on and on about how litigious our society is and how opposers will want to enforce what they perceive as their "rights" - with "rights" always in scare quotes, to dismiss the idea that they actually exist.  And then it went on to say that this is why elders have to keep judicial proceedings and related matters confidential. They were concerned about being sued for defamation and the like by people who were disgrunted over judicial matters.

  In retrospect, that was not the best strategy in terms of shielding the organization and congregations from liability, but there was certainly enough there for Simons to argue that minimizing liability was a motive in forming their policy. He used the letter -effectively, I think - to rebut the argument that the confidentiality policy served a doctrinal purpose, and instead to argue that it served a financial one.