the latest instructions from the kingdom hall trust here in the u.k are very revealing, and current j.w elders need to beware !
i will get to that in a minute.
maybe in the usa and other countries too ?.
Quite clear, all responsibility for Safeguarding falls upon the Elders, this means I am sure, that the KHT cannot be Sued in Court for any case of Abuse
You're wrong. The KHT and its corporate board aren't discharged from liability; delegation of power doesn't mean delegation of responsibility.
Actually, nothing has changed. Congregation trustees were responsible for child safeguarding and were bound by "directions and guidances" of the branch office long before the reorganization.
john roe 1 vs. defendant doe 1, congregation is a child sexual abuse case pending before the superior court of california, orange county (judge john c. gastelum).
jury trial is scheduled on june 15, 2020, but it may not occur: the judge is expected to decide on multiple pre-trial motions including motion for sanctions filed by plantiffs; next hearing on pre-trial motions is scheduled on may 14.. case docket is available here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dbqcronnkeax492pshgwpuoubt-xaabz/view?usp=sharing .
case documents are available for purchase here: https://ocapps.occourts.org/civilwebshoppingns/search.do (case number 30-2014-00741722-cu-po-cjc).. during the course of this litigation the court ordered watchtower to produce molestation complaints it received, redacting only names of victims and elders handling the matters.
Update: https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/hk08le/theocratic_lawfare_in_santa_ana_ca_big_case_and/
In short, after three sets of proceedings, the proxy lawsuit has been dismissed on procedural grounds. An appellate court also harshly criticized Crockett and Associates lawyers for apparent abuse of process, and ordered them to pay the plaintiffs $25k as sanctions. I believe the main lawsuit will be decided this year.
The recent court decision: https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/nonpub/G057684.PDF
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/jehovahs-witnesses-sue-faithleaks-owners-over-convention-videos .
https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2020/05/01/jehovahs-witnesses-sue-owners-of-faithleaks-for-posting-74-convention-movies/.
the watch tower bible and tract society of pennsylvania, which oversees the jehovah’s witnesses, is suing the truth and transparency foundation and its founders ryan c. mcknight and ethan g. dodge alleging copyright infringement..
In case you want to support Truth and Transparency Foundation (aka FaithLeaks) in this legal battle, here is their fundraiser: https://charity.gofundme.com/o/en/campaign/defend-press-freedom-from-religious-censorship
based on a daily telegraph article : jehovah's witnesses accused of selling off assets and moving cash to avoid sex abuse compensation
watchtower has 800 charities in australia and australian law says they don't have to report assets below 1 million .
doesn't this imply watchtower can have in excess of 700 million laundered funds?
this article seems to confirm what we already knew:.
https://thewest.com.au/news/australia/jehovahs-witnesses-accused-of-selling-off-assets-and-moving-cash-to-avoid-sex-abuse-compensation-ng-08ffe6d55e293182580d9e34b4400088?transactionid=72145.
Newly Enlightened, have you noticed that AIS's submitted by Watchtower Australia clearly indicate: between 2014 and 2019, it spent A$73.5 million in grants and donations made for use IN Australia, and only A$17.7 million (less than 20%) - in grants and donations made for use OUTSIDE Australia?
StephaneLaliberte, there is no need to speculate. Everyone can read the ECHR judgment and check the facts: the 60% tax was imposed on all donations (sections 12, 14) and the JW organization won that case - the Court unanimously found that there was no proper legal basis for the tax.
Anony Mous, your claim that "the tax was on money that was being off-shored to the US" isn't supported by court decisions I examined. Can you provide any proof?
this article seems to confirm what we already knew:.
https://thewest.com.au/news/australia/jehovahs-witnesses-accused-of-selling-off-assets-and-moving-cash-to-avoid-sex-abuse-compensation-ng-08ffe6d55e293182580d9e34b4400088?transactionid=72145.
I find this article sensationalist and poorly researched:
1. "since the announcement of the Royal Commission on November 12, 2012 JW has ... Grown from a handful of charities to 836 separate small basic religious charities." This statement is misleading. First, those "new" entities actually existed long before 2012 - as congregations and (legally) as unincorporated assotiations. Secondly, the suggested link between the announcement of the ARC and registration of congregation charities likely doesn't exist. As a reminder, in 2012 Australia adopted the ACNC Act which substantially changed its charity law and, among others, made registration a requirement for income tax exemptions and other benefits.
2. The article hardly shows any "sell-off" in Australia. Two dozens or so Kingdom Halls, out of 455 (the number reported by Watchtower two years ago), sold over nearly a decade - how does it amount to "selling off assets", taking into account that no branch property were reported to be sold of listed for sale, and the org is expanding its branch facilities in Sydney?
3. The worldwide property sales figures are misleading too. The WHQ relocation project was planned as early as 2005, if not earlier, so any attempt to draw a link between the Brooklyn sales (which make up almost 90% of the reported global sales amount) and recent events are based on flawed premises. Also, in the UK Watchtower (namely, WTB and IBSA) has substantially increased its assets, despite the announced inquiries and lawsuits.
4. There is no evidence that child abuse is more prevalent among JWs than in other communities or institutions, as the article suggests. It is incorrect to compare the ARC numbers because in case, of, say, Catholics they refer to abusers in position of trust (like priests, nuns etc.), while in case of Watchtower the Commission included all perpretators who ever were JWs, including lay members, in its statistics.
5. Finally, it's sad the journalists uncritically report speculative and unfounded claims made by people like Steven Unthank - who, for example, was once able to make four false statements in a single paragraph, not to mention other controversies. I'm sorry, but I cannot trust their judgment or expertise.
I would be glad to read an investigative report into the organization's finances, but this article has nothing to do with investigative journalism. It's a kind of don't-check-just-share journalism.
last thursday poyner spruill, a prominent north carolina law firm, announced a victory in a pro bono case involving religious freedom of incarcerated jehovah's witnesses.
the poyner team was appointed by the u.s. district court for the western district of north carolina to represent an inmate challenging the state’s policy governing how and when jehovah’s witnesses can worship in prison.
the state’s policy classified jehovah’s witnesses as a subset of christian protestants and, on that basis, prohibited separate jehovah’s witness meetings—an infringement on religious freedom under the first amendment.
"Exercise their faith" is exclusively a WTS/NWT term, eh?
Why? It seems to be widely used and synonymous to "exercise their religion", like in the First Amendment.
I can't help but wonder what else was up here, maybe some Protestant chaplain wanting to "convert" JWs? Or if the "single person" was Brown, maybe the chaplain was trying to convert him? Or maybe just keep visiting JWs out of the prison? Or maybe it was money? It "would be a tremendous burden on Alexander C.I."
He didn't claim that anyone tried to convert him. Maybe prison officials were just afraid that Mormons, Unitarian Universalists, Adventists, Pentecostals and others, lumped together as Protestants in their policy documents, will ask for separate services too?
last thursday poyner spruill, a prominent north carolina law firm, announced a victory in a pro bono case involving religious freedom of incarcerated jehovah's witnesses.
the poyner team was appointed by the u.s. district court for the western district of north carolina to represent an inmate challenging the state’s policy governing how and when jehovah’s witnesses can worship in prison.
the state’s policy classified jehovah’s witnesses as a subset of christian protestants and, on that basis, prohibited separate jehovah’s witness meetings—an infringement on religious freedom under the first amendment.
careful,
Yes, the state officials argued that JWs is "a restorationist, chiliastic Christian Protestant religion" "with nontraditional beliefs and practice", and listed the following theological similarities "that place the Jehovah Witness within the context of Christendom":
"1. They both believe in God.
2. They both believe is Jesus Christ.
3. They both believe that all will die and meet in the Judgment.
4. They both believe in the Holy Spirit.
5. They both believe that Jesus came from Heaven and when He died He returned to Heaven.
6. The both believe that Jesus gave His life as a ransom sacrifice and it was through His death and His resurrection that made it possible for those who exercise their faith in Him to gain eternal or everlasting life.
7. They both believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ and the kingdom of God."
Also, the State noted that "Charles Taze Russell, or Pastor Russell, was an American Christian restorationist minister from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and founder of what is now known as the Bible Student movement (later named Jehovah’s Witnesses) from his experiences as a member of Christian Protestant churches (Presbyterianism and Congregationalism)... The entire Protestant canon of scripture is considered the inspired, correct word of God."
There were also non-theological arguments: "Defendants note that Plaintiff may practice his religion by associating with other Jehovah’s Witness adherents in the general population, corresponding with those of similar belief, and receiving a Pastoral visit once per month. Defendants argue that there is only one Chapel at Alexander C.I. that is used for all faith groups’ services, that Alexander C.I. does not have the time or space to offer a service for every Protestant denomination, and that requiring a separate service for a single person would be a tremendous burden on Alexander C.I." The latter argument doesn't seem very persuasive, taking into account that groups like Asatru, Wicca, House of Yanweh, Assemblies of Yahweh, Messianic Judaism etc. were allowed to hold separate services.
As to his elligibility for parole at age 63, I think this applies to his second sentence (240-293 months); the first 80-year prison term will continue until 2060. He also sues the North Carolina government claiming that "on or about July 16, 2017, he had accumulated enough [good time] credits to fully satisfy his sentence" and that he must be unconditionally released. A district court has already dismissed that suit but it still isn't closed.
Some additional observations:
- Marshall Lee Brown Jr. was the first son of his mother, born when she was 16½ years old;
- in the course of its representation, the litigation team (three attorneys) once attended a weekend JW meeting and discussed it; they also communicated with WT legal department for at least five times. Wasn't it a great witness?
last thursday poyner spruill, a prominent north carolina law firm, announced a victory in a pro bono case involving religious freedom of incarcerated jehovah's witnesses.
the poyner team was appointed by the u.s. district court for the western district of north carolina to represent an inmate challenging the state’s policy governing how and when jehovah’s witnesses can worship in prison.
the state’s policy classified jehovah’s witnesses as a subset of christian protestants and, on that basis, prohibited separate jehovah’s witness meetings—an infringement on religious freedom under the first amendment.
Last Thursday Poyner Spruill, a prominent North Carolina law firm, announced a victory in a pro bono case involving religious freedom of incarcerated Jehovah's Witnesses.
The Poyner team was appointed by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina to represent an inmate challenging the State’s policy governing how and when Jehovah’s Witnesses can worship in prison. The State’s policy classified Jehovah’s Witnesses as a subset of Christian Protestants and, on that basis, prohibited separate Jehovah’s Witness meetings—an infringement on religious freedom under the First Amendment. After the Court denied the State’s motion for summary judgment, the State ultimately agreed to a consent decree that required changing its policy to allow for separate meetings for Jehovah’s Witnesses.
“We’re proud to have helped change an unconstitutional policy restricting religious freedom,” said Durnovich, who served as lead counsel on the case. “With this result, our client and Jehovah’s Witness inmates across the state will have the same right to practice their religion as other faith groups already enjoy.”
The consent decree in the case provides permanent injunctive relief requiring the State to recognize the Jehovah’s Witness faith as a distinct faith group, and to allow Jehovah’s Witness inmates the opportunity to schedule religious services like other recognized faith groups.
It took some time to find more information about that case, Brown v. Solomon; this order provides a summary of facts and arguments. Filed pro se five years ago, the case was settled this March, and the NC Department of Public Safety agreed "to revise its Religious Practices Manual and related policies and procedures to recognize the Jehovah’s Witness religion as a distinct non-Trinitarian faith group [and] to adopt the following description of the Jehovah’s Witness faith:"
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that God is one person, Jehovah. Jesus was Jehovah’s first creation. Jesus is not God, nor part of the Godhead. He is higher than the angels but inferior to God. Jehovah used Jesus to create the rest of the universe. Before Jesus came to earth, he was known as the Word and the archangel Michael. The Holy Spirit is an impersonal force from Jehovah, but not God.
The plaintiff, Marshall Lee Brown, is relatively well-known, and his story was covered in two TV shows - Unsolved Mysteries and I (Almost) Got Away With It (the plot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_(Almost)_Got_Away_With_It (season 1, episode 1-9)). In 1977, he, then 19, was sentenced to life imprisonment (effectively 80-year prison term) for a second-degree murder that, according to this article, was a contract killing for $50. He escaped from prison in April 1996, killed Steven Calhoun, a prosecution witness in the 1977 trial, and remained on the run until July 1999, when he was arrested in Washington, DC. In 2002, he was sentenced to a concurrent 20-23 years term. His release is scheduled for 2060.
It is unclear when Marshall Brown became a Witness. His mother (deceased in 2013) and sister (deceased in 2006) were members of the organization, but it’s still difficult to say if he was “raised in the truth.”
i still like the commentary on the jw.org monthly’s, i can skip through some parts.
but it seems like he is pushing too hard to put out videos and the quality is getting very low on the content..
According to his attorney, Lloyd Evans is "the only full-time ex-Jehovah's Witness advocate in the world. His day job solely involves keeping abreast of the latest developments within the Jehovah's Witnesses across the board, across the whole spectrum of the religion... [N]obody is spending as much time as he is on analysing what's going on in the Jehovah's Witnesses now and nobody has written and researched it as extensively as he has... [T]here is nobody who is following this organisation, this religious group, as closely as Mr Evans is, so his knowledge and his huge expertise is crucial if this inquiry [the IICSA] is to be a meaningful inquiry."
"Moses was a very humble man, more humble than anyone else on the face of the earth."
