4rationality

Joined

• started 2 topics
• posted 17 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by 4rationality

• 
  42

  Conti Respondent’s Brief - Can AnnOMaly’s theory Rescue Simons’ CRITICAL FACT ?

  by 4rationality in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  simons critcal fact = defendants assigned candace to perform field service with kendrick.

  martinez testified that she saw candace and kendrick in field service together.

  was candace ever assigned to anyone else?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  4rationality

  Mad Sweeney,

  An “evil and morally culpable” community, such as you and others have described, would have disintegrated long ago.
• 
  42

  Conti Respondent’s Brief - Can AnnOMaly’s theory Rescue Simons’ CRITICAL FACT ?

  by 4rationality in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  simons critcal fact = defendants assigned candace to perform field service with kendrick.

  martinez testified that she saw candace and kendrick in field service together.

  was candace ever assigned to anyone else?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  4rationality

  Vidiot,

  Ok maybe it wasn’t fearfulness. Simon burned the 3 “Conti Respondent’s Brief” TOPICs to protect his devotees from inconvenient facts.

  Evidently DATA-DOG’s “ban them” wish represents the prevailing mindset of this fact-void community.

  I PM because Simon also burned all comments referencing his ’ax of intolerance’.
• 
  42

  Conti Respondent’s Brief - Can AnnOMaly’s theory Rescue Simons’ CRITICAL FACT ?

  by 4rationality in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  simons critcal fact = defendants assigned candace to perform field service with kendrick.

  martinez testified that she saw candace and kendrick in field service together.

  was candace ever assigned to anyone else?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  4rationality

  karter,

  Of course not. Neither would Neil and Kathleen Conti, Candace’s parents. They both testified at trial that they did not permit their daughter to go off alone with Kendrick, nor would they.
• 
  42

  Conti Respondent’s Brief - Can AnnOMaly’s theory Rescue Simons’ CRITICAL FACT ?

  by 4rationality in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  simons critcal fact = defendants assigned candace to perform field service with kendrick.

  martinez testified that she saw candace and kendrick in field service together.

  was candace ever assigned to anyone else?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  4rationality

  flipper, Pistoff, Ding, et al,

  Don't worry, be happy. If your assumptions are correct Simons wins.
• 
  11

  Jehovah’s Witnesses sued over sex abuse claims—some 2000 cases to choose from.

  by 4rationality in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  divining liability.

  kimberlee norris began evaluating these cases in july 2002. with some 2000 cases to choose from, norris and partner gregory love came up with a rigid profile of what kind of case and where.

  love and norris decided only to take cases where they could prove the church knew its member was a perpetrator and placed him in a position of authority anyway.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  4rationality

  MissFit,

  Just a few facts, ma'am. Beyond that, whatever you want the point to be.
• 
  42

  Conti Respondent’s Brief - Can AnnOMaly’s theory Rescue Simons’ CRITICAL FACT ?

  by 4rationality in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  simons critcal fact = defendants assigned candace to perform field service with kendrick.

  martinez testified that she saw candace and kendrick in field service together.

  was candace ever assigned to anyone else?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  4rationality

  Conti Respondent’s Brief—Simons’ New CUSTODY and CONTROL Theory.

  Simons’ new primary theory—CUSTODY and CONTROL by “assigning Candace to Kendrick”— replaced Simons’ old primary theory—CUSTODY and CONTROL by the 1989 BOE letter.

  ABibleStudent reports the results: The oral arguments format “forces attorneys to focus on the two or three most important arguments.”

  • “Simons’ did not emphasize that the 1989 BOE letter that he introduced during the trail was a smoking gun about the special relationship between the Watchtower and [Candace].”

  Simons’ Respondent’s Brief introduced a new “smoking gun”, his new theory of choice.

  In fact, twenty-four times throughout the argument section we see Simons’ new theory— custody and control by “assigning Candace to Kendrick”— including …

  • “There was substantial evidence that defendants exerted custody and control over Candace by assigning her to perform field service with Kendrick.
  • “Here, substantial evidence supports the trial court’s determination that Watchtower and Congregation took custody and control of Candace by assigning her into field service, thereby creating a special relationship with her.
  • “First, … Watchtower’s liability was based not only on its failure to protect plaintiff but also on its affirmative negligence in assigning plaintiff and Kendrick to perform field service together. Second, Watchtower’s duty to protect Candace arose from its special relationships with her.
  • “[T]he fact that Candace was assigned to perform field service with Kendrick on multiple occasions supported an inference that defendants’ policy permitted a child to be assigned to field service with a known child molester.

  • The opening briefs of both Watchtower and the Congregation … omit critical facts, including the fact that the elders assigned Jonathan Kendrick and Candace Conti together in field service …

    __

    Simons’ new custody and control theory, as feeble as it is, must be greatly preferable to his old theory. It cost Simons dearly to switch horses midstream. Simons’ new theory violated “a firmly entrenched principle of appellate practice that litigants must adhere to the theory on which a case was tried.”

  
  

  
  

  
  
• 
  42

  Conti Respondent’s Brief - Can AnnOMaly’s theory Rescue Simons’ CRITICAL FACT ?

  by 4rationality in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  simons critcal fact = defendants assigned candace to perform field service with kendrick.

  martinez testified that she saw candace and kendrick in field service together.

  was candace ever assigned to anyone else?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  4rationality

  Conti Respondent’s Brief v. “a firmly entrenched principle of appellate practice”

  • "It is a firmly entrenched principle of appellate practice that litigants must adhere to the theory on which a case was tried. Stated otherwise, a litigant may not change his or her position on appeal and assert a new theory. To permit this change in strategy would be unfair to the trial court and the opposing litigant." (Hines v. California Coastal Com 'n, Bd. of Supervisors of Sonoma (20 1 0) 186 Cal.App.4th 830, 846-847.)

  A nonfeasance theory was the thrust of Simons’ entire case at trial. Indeed, from Simons‘ opening statement through post-trial motions—including his punitive damages argument— Simons repeatedly and consistently pressed a nonfeasance theory of liability.

  Post-trial, however, clear and overwhelming legal precedent established that there was never a “custody-and-control” relationship between Candace and defendants. SO, in his Respondent’s Brief Simons simply asserts a new and wholly different theory of liability—misfeasance. OOPS.
• 
  11

  Jehovah’s Witnesses sued over sex abuse claims—some 2000 cases to choose from.

  by 4rationality in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  divining liability.

  kimberlee norris began evaluating these cases in july 2002. with some 2000 cases to choose from, norris and partner gregory love came up with a rigid profile of what kind of case and where.

  love and norris decided only to take cases where they could prove the church knew its member was a perpetrator and placed him in a position of authority anyway.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  4rationality

  Village Idiot,

  If best plaintiff's outcome of 57 suits filed is 9 cases settled-dismissed with prejudice, Love & Norris would probably look elsewhere for business.
• 
  11

  Jehovah’s Witnesses sued over sex abuse claims—some 2000 cases to choose from.

  by 4rationality in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  divining liability.

  kimberlee norris began evaluating these cases in july 2002. with some 2000 cases to choose from, norris and partner gregory love came up with a rigid profile of what kind of case and where.

  love and norris decided only to take cases where they could prove the church knew its member was a perpetrator and placed him in a position of authority anyway.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  4rationality

  smiddy,

  RE: "all [ie 100%] related to JWs". Not likely. At the time Love & Norris was Silentlambs' go-to firm, so near 100% is reasonable.
• 
  11

  Jehovah’s Witnesses sued over sex abuse claims—some 2000 cases to choose from.

  by 4rationality in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  divining liability.

  kimberlee norris began evaluating these cases in july 2002. with some 2000 cases to choose from, norris and partner gregory love came up with a rigid profile of what kind of case and where.

  love and norris decided only to take cases where they could prove the church knew its member was a perpetrator and placed him in a position of authority anyway.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  4rationality

  Divining Liability

  Kimberlee Norris began evaluating these cases in July 2002. With some 2000 cases to choose from, Norris and partner Gregory Love came up with a rigid profile of what kind of case and where. Love and Norris decided only to take cases where they could prove the church knew its member was a perpetrator and placed him in a position of authority anyway. Norris said, ”We only take extreme cases where molestation has been reported to the congregation and the organization gives him its blessing by giving him authority.”

  As of May 2004, the firm had filed 57 suits across the country.

  Best plaintiff’s outcome, it appears-- 9 cases in California, Texas, Oregon, settled/dismissed with prejudice, 2007.

  The ‘Firm Overview’ at Love & Norris indicates a different kind of practice, a more profitable direction.