JC323

Joined

• started 0 topics
• posted 111 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by JC323

• 
  56

  Montana Supreme Court will hear the $35M case tomorrow

  by Corney in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  the montana case enters the home stretch.

  the state supreme court will hear oral arguments tomorrow, 13 september, at the northern hotel in billings during the state bar of montana’s annual meeting (announcement 1, announcement 2).

  an introduction to the argument will begin at 9:30 a.m., with the argument starting at 10 a.m. (4 p.m. utc, 9 a.m. sf time, 12 a.m. ny time, 5 p.m. london time, 2 a.m. saturday sydney time).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JC323

  See people here think that a person can be held liable for not protecting or reporting a crime committed against a third party. If I am walking down the street and see someone being rapped and in fact have the ability to stop it but I dont guess what, I have not committed a crime and cannot be held liable to that victim. The only time I would be is if I was legally required too.

  There is no where in Montana law that says a normal person must report child abuse.

  Look at this montana case. Why didnt alexis sue her mother who knew her stepfather abused her sister and still delivered her to him repeatedly. Or even in the supreme court case it was brought up that the sherrieffs department didnt investigate because under montana law they weren't required to nor required to report to child services at the state level.
• 
  56

  Montana Supreme Court will hear the $35M case tomorrow

  by Corney in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  the montana case enters the home stretch.

  the state supreme court will hear oral arguments tomorrow, 13 september, at the northern hotel in billings during the state bar of montana’s annual meeting (announcement 1, announcement 2).

  an introduction to the argument will begin at 9:30 a.m., with the argument starting at 10 a.m. (4 p.m. utc, 9 a.m. sf time, 12 a.m. ny time, 5 p.m. london time, 2 a.m. saturday sydney time).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JC323

  Ok so no clergy then there is no lawsuit. No person can be held liable to protect a third party.
• 
  16

  Can We Sue The Watchtower For Mental and Emotional Harm Do To Its Mind Control Techniques

  by Humphry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i think there is enough information available for a case to be made of the type of emotional and mental harm one is exposed to.

  get some good expert witnesses could work??

  ?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JC323

  For a legislature to put this into place would be impossible. That would mean if someone is mean to someone else they can sue, if someone doesnt say a kind word to someone else they can sue. What you are suggesting is impossible.
• 
  16

  Can We Sue The Watchtower For Mental and Emotional Harm Do To Its Mind Control Techniques

  by Humphry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i think there is enough information available for a case to be made of the type of emotional and mental harm one is exposed to.

  get some good expert witnesses could work??

  ?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JC323

  No judge in any western world would ever allow something like that. And showing unconcern to anyone is not a tort. Even common decency is not abrort.
• 
  16

  Can We Sue The Watchtower For Mental and Emotional Harm Do To Its Mind Control Techniques

  by Humphry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i think there is enough information available for a case to be made of the type of emotional and mental harm one is exposed to.

  get some good expert witnesses could work??

  ?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JC323

  I am not sure what that video is supposed to show. You have to sue over a recognizable tort.
• 
  16

  Can We Sue The Watchtower For Mental and Emotional Harm Do To Its Mind Control Techniques

  by Humphry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i think there is enough information available for a case to be made of the type of emotional and mental harm one is exposed to.

  get some good expert witnesses could work??

  ?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JC323

  No you cannot. People have to take responsibility for their actions and their life. That is how the law sees things. You cannot sue people or random things.
• 
  11

  Legal Fundraiser to 'sue' individuals JW's (ie. elders) for defamation

  by Nathan R. Koppe in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  removed.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JC323

  It must be really nice to think that you are never the problem with any of your life issues. That all good things that have happened to you are because of how wonderful you are and everything bad that happens to you is because of Watchtower.
• 
  18

  Watchtower appeals the lawsuit in Quebec (Canada)

  by yalbmert99 in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  watchtower appeals the lawsuit in quebec (canada) french:.

  https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1173405/temoins-jehovah-crimes-sexuels-appel.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JC323

  Violet. The number is actually not that high. The reporting from Mr Zalkin is 775 blue envelopes in 1997. In the Padron Case it was reported that between 2001 and 2016 the total names would be about 1600.
• 
  2

  Wanna buy some Watchtower stock???

  by BereanThinker7 in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  has anyody ever wondered what couldve happened if ray, and the other long timers that left, never gave up their shares??.

  they obviously don't sell stock anymore either, but how do those who have possession of watchtower stock even come to have it?

  and are they just told who to vote in for the corparate positions at this point?.

  1. 
  2. 
• 

  JC323

  The other members vote in a member for a defined term. It also requires in the bylaws that the member be a member of the special fulltime order of Jehovah's Witnesses.
• 
  18

  Watchtower appeals the lawsuit in Quebec (Canada)

  by yalbmert99 in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  watchtower appeals the lawsuit in quebec (canada) french:.

  https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1173405/temoins-jehovah-crimes-sexuels-appel.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  JC323

  DesirousofChange

  Yes, the representative plaintiff was abused by a family member, and regardless of their religious belief, the abuse would have happened. The mother at any time could have asked her adult son to leave, as he was well over 18 when the mother was informed of the abuse.

  Also, the Canadian Supreme Court ruled that a civil court cannot rule if a person can or cannot be a part of a religion. The plaintiff is asking for the court to interpret if religion provided enough support to someone who was abused. What standard are they going to use, what words does someone have to say in order for them not be held liable in a lawsuit? A large part of the lawsuit is that the plaintiff says that because the person wasn't removed from the religion then the mental abuse continued. Again their Supreme Court ruled that is not a thing that a court can decide.