From the facts in the judgment it appears Otou was judicially charged with the sin of fraud based upon a letter from a third party...I thought the scriptural requirement to factually establish a matter is the evidence of two eyewitnesses or confession? If the charge was not scripturally established (by two eyewitnesses or confession) surely the judicial committee was unscriptural and the decision could/should be rescinded? I might have missed something obvious though.
wildernessyears
JoinedPosts by wildernessyears
-
12
Judgement in Watch Tower Appeal in Otuo v Morley and Watch Tower by Sir David Eady
by akromo in[home] [databases] [world law] [multidatabase search] [help] [feedback].
england and wales high court (queen's bench division) decisions.
you are here: bailii >> databases >> england and wales high court (queen's bench division) decisions >> otuo v morley & anor [2015] ewhc 1839 (qb) (26 june 2015) url: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/ewhc/qb/2015/1839.html cite as: [2015] ewhc 1839 (qb).
-
-