Posts by MadApostate

133

BERRY LAWSUIT EVALUATED

by MadApostate in

jw
friends

i would like to preface my discussion of the recently filed berry lawsuit with several remarks.

first, i am not an attorney, and my only connection with the legal profession is that which occasionally arises out of my personal or business affairs.

second, i have no access to court records, opinions, etc., other than what is available via internet search engines.

MadApostate

Here's the pertinent NHSC opinion:

http://www.edlaw.fplc.edu/Text/Library/case-marquay.html

133

BERRY LAWSUIT EVALUATED

by MadApostate in

jw
friends

i would like to preface my discussion of the recently filed berry lawsuit with several remarks.

first, i am not an attorney, and my only connection with the legal profession is that which occasionally arises out of my personal or business affairs.

second, i have no access to court records, opinions, etc., other than what is available via internet search engines.

HELP!!- JT asked to become a MASON!

by JT in

jw
friends

i have been searching the net for some excellent sites on the masons.

this past weekend we went down to nc for a wedding and my wife and i broke the news to our nonjw family that we were no longer involved with jw.

i could not believe the open arm welcome my uncle and aunt were almost in tears- they told us we have seen you come home each yr from the main office in ny and then you got married and you would come home and we wanted to say something about the jw but you seemed to be so well respected by the local jw - whenever we would tell folks that our newphew was up in ny- the jw would get all excited- they told us they thought it was so sad for i only made $90 a month.

MadApostate

THP:

The Masonic RuleBook may say they aren't supposed to use their membership for "business" purposes, but I know better. Over the years, I have done business in multiple states, in multiple industries. I have repeatedly ran across "business relationships" that are grounded in "masonic ties". As I indicated, I also know prominent politicians who rose to their high levels mainly due to "masonic ties".

Since my personal experience is naturely limited in scope, for me to have ran across so many "Masonic" based business/political relationships means that overall there must be a large percentage of the same in the general population.
Does this mean they are evil? Not necessarily. My business experiences also disclose the exact same scenarios with Catholics. All things being equal, Catholics prefer doing business with Catholics. Corporations with Cath management are more likely to promote Cath employees.

This "system" is probably true of other groups.

17

Berry Case on Great Crowd

by Kent in

jw
friends

topic closed great crowd discussion board .

read all about it!!!!

posts: 1122. from:.

MadApostate

Hawkaw:

It would be best for you to just read my BERRY CASE EVALUATED thread to keep from rehashing everything.

Marvin, Kent, and others have made some recent threads/posts which are making a much larger issue than really exists of the Principal-Agent relationship between the WTS and the Elder Bodies. As I have tried to explain, under the circumstances of how the Society and the Congregations work hand-in-hand, the Courts will deal with the "agency" issue rapidly, saying "yes" the Elder Bodies ARE "agents" of the WTS, thus making the WTS responsible for the Elder's mistakes and resulting harm, assuming that other Legal Issues would allow the case to be successful, which is highly doubtful. In the Berry Case, the named Defendents are the WTS and the Cong. As the attorneys know, the WTS owns 95% of the Cong's assets anyway. To prove that there is no issue regarding the Elders being considered the WTS's "agents", the BERRY lawuit does not even bother to name the Elders individually. Berry's attorney would have done so, just as a fallback measure, if there had been even a .00001% chance that the Court would NOT have considered the Elders agents.

Kent, MS, and others are trying to CREATE discord between the WTS and elders by saying the WTS will leave the elders hanging. Kent flat out doesn't know shit. Just his usual throwing 10 pounds of shit on the wall, and hoping that 2 ounces might stick. Marvin is one of these people that knows just enough about the law to sound credible to those who know nothing- another term is he knows just enough to be dangerous- but to anyone with legal knowledge, he discredits himself quickly.

You are correct that there is a reporting law in NH. However, as I have posted in the BERRY CASE EVALUATED thread, there is a 1995 NHSC case which says there is NO CIVIL ACTION for failure to report.
The other legal theories used in BERRY were all dismissed in the REES case. Thus, I don't understand how this BERRY lawsuit has any possiblity of succeeding.

As I have acknowledged many times over, I do NOT have access to a current legal database. I'm going strictly on what I can get off the NET. MAYBE there has been a change in the NH law, or a new NHSC decision???

I doubt it. Maximus, Seeker and maybe some others have said that the BERRY attorney would not have taken this case if he couldn't win.
I DISAGREE. His online resume discloses one "supposed" victory in a trial court which any first year constitutional law student would know would be reversed on appeal. I think that this case is a "let's take it out for a spin, and see if we can get a 'hick' trial court to rule in our favor, even if we are overturned at the appellate level."

I'll stop here until you read that thread.

17

Berry Case on Great Crowd

by Kent in

jw
friends

topic closed great crowd discussion board .

read all about it!!!!

posts: 1122. from:.

MadApostate

KrAzYkEnT:

Principal=WTS

Agents=Elder Bodies/Comm

Third Parties=R&F harmed by Elders' actions.

I would respond to Grunt's post, but can't figure out what he is "grunting" about. If he is congratulating KK, who can't even get his facts straight, then he deserves no reply!!!

46

WTBTS Innocent in Swaggart Case?

by troubled in

jw
friends

awhile back, i saw information on another web site about the wtbts's involvement with the swaggart case.

the information was presented in a way that depicted the wtbts as involved with the swaggart case and, therefore, false religion.. at first, i was shocked.

however, i did some research on what an amicus curie is.

MadApostate

Room: What the hell did I say in the post at the top of this page?

AlanF: As Adrian Kronaur said in GMV, you in more need of a bj than any whiteman....

46

WTBTS Innocent in Swaggart Case?

by troubled in

jw
friends

awhile back, i saw information on another web site about the wtbts's involvement with the swaggart case.

the information was presented in a way that depicted the wtbts as involved with the swaggart case and, therefore, false religion.. at first, i was shocked.

however, i did some research on what an amicus curie is.

MadApostate

AlanF:

Do me a favor, and kiss my ass! I really getting tired of you "reaching" for any possible thing you can to paint me in a bad light.

I don't see the need to comment on every statement in every response.

To agree with the statement you quote, one would have to extend that conclusion to every court case the WTS has ever been involved in. To say that it was improper for the WTS to try to influence the USSC's opinion in this Tax case is to say they should not have fought the civil rights cases back in the 1930s/40s/50s, or any other case for that matter.

To agree with your conclusion, one would have to say that the WTS should accept whatever lame decision is forced on them by local government, be it tax depts, police, etc. If that is your position, "fine".

46

WTBTS Innocent in Swaggart Case?

by troubled in

jw
friends

awhile back, i saw information on another web site about the wtbts's involvement with the swaggart case.

the information was presented in a way that depicted the wtbts as involved with the swaggart case and, therefore, false religion.. at first, i was shocked.

however, i did some research on what an amicus curie is.

MadApostate

The WTS is simply just like any other PR/Marketing firm which maximizes positives and minimizes negatives.

The issue in this situation is that the WTS changed its distribution methods solely due to a change in tax law. However, it was presented to the R&F as another progression in the right direction at Jah's behest.

If the WTS was being directed by Jah, and He wanted them to change their distribution methods, then why were they actively trying to influence the USSC's decision in the other direction?

46

WTBTS Innocent in Swaggart Case?

by troubled in

jw
friends

awhile back, i saw information on another web site about the wtbts's involvement with the swaggart case.

the information was presented in a way that depicted the wtbts as involved with the swaggart case and, therefore, false religion.. at first, i was shocked.

however, i did some research on what an amicus curie is.

MadApostate

Room:

The only people who are "obscuring the issues" are those who TAINT the legitimate issues (some which you mention) with the horseshit about "the WTS jumped into bed with Jimmy Swaggart."

46

WTBTS Innocent in Swaggart Case?

by troubled in

jw
friends

awhile back, i saw information on another web site about the wtbts's involvement with the swaggart case.

the information was presented in a way that depicted the wtbts as involved with the swaggart case and, therefore, false religion.. at first, i was shocked.

however, i did some research on what an amicus curie is.

MadApostate

I have been busy, and have just now relooked at the Swaggart USSC opinion. I was wrong about a Catholic group filing a brief in support of Swaggart's side. However, there were 2 church orgs that did, as well as the Hare Krishnas and others.

Here is the exact exerpt: (Since the California Courts ruled against Swaggart, to urge reversal was favoring Swaggart.)

[ Footnote * ] Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed for the Association for Public Justice by Bradley P. Jacob; for the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability et al. by Samuel E. Ericsson, Michael J. Woodruff, and Forest D. Montgomery; for the International Society for Krishna Consciousness of California, Inc., by David M. Liberman, Robert C. Moest, and Barry A. Fisher; for the National Council of Churches of Christ in the U.S. A. by Douglas Laycock; and for the National Taxpayers Union by Gale A. Norton.

Steven R. Shapiro filed a brief for the American Civil Liberties Union as amicus curiae urging affirmance.

Briefs of amici curiae were filed for the National Conference of State Legislatures et al. by Benna Ruth Solomon and Charles Rothfeld; and for the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., by James M. McCabe and Donald T. Ridley. (End Quote.)

It should also be noted that the USSC also discussed several of the old WTS Constitutional cases in its opinion. Swaggart used such as part of his arguments, but the USSC said that the issues/decisions in those cases did not bar states from requiring religious orgs to collect sales tax on "sales" of religious materials.