Watchtower vs JW A Minor - the opinions of the Supreme Court
I originally posted this in reply to ‘you can’t handle the truth’s post about the new CSA case that has been filed. Quite a few repliers thought the courts were unaware of Watchtower’s tactics and would continue to treat the borg as a typical religion.
Pour yourself a drink and take a look at this. It’s from 2019. These judges were livid with Watchtower’s behaviour. They do not regard JWs as a regular religion. When the government gives them the legal teeth to chew up WT, they won’t even spit out the pips!
In The Supreme Court of the United States
WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY OF NEW YORK, INC., Petitioner,
v.
J.W., A MINOR, Respondent.
On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The Court Of Appeal Of The State Of California, Fourth Appellate District.
Here are some of the most damning quotes:
Given its consistent history of disrespect for the legal system and disregard of adverse rulings, Watchtower is the wrong litigant to champion any issue before this Court (page iii)
….this Court need not delve into them before declining review because of the myriad infirmities with the petition itself, which is permeated with blatant misrepresentations and intentionally-deceptive omissions. (page 2)
Given Watchtower’s disrespect for the legal system, penchant for violating court orders and habitual disregard for the rules of the court from which it is begging for mercy, it is not the litigant to champion any allegedly important issue before this Court. (page 3)
The trial court struck Watchtower’s Answer to the Complaint and entered its default after Watchtower refused to comply with its discovery order requiring it to produce documents that would have shown Watchtower’s awareness of, and indifference to, a rampant organizational epidemic of child molestation. (page 8)
It is difficult to envision a party less deserving than Watchtower to be trusted to litigate any allegedly important issue before this Court. In case-after-case, Watchtower has shown a remarkable disregard for the authority of the courts and flouted the rules that all other litigants are required to follow. (page 9)
….the court voiced its dismay at Watchtower’s litigation tactics, characterizing it as “gamesmanship.” (page 10)
When a party opportunistically seeks aid from a reviewing court while secretly harboring the intention that any unfavorable ruling will be ignored—as Watchtower has repeatedly done in this case and others—the integrity of the judicial system is compromised. (page 12)
Watchtower is the last party that should be permitted to carry the torch on behalf of proponents of its side of the allegedly-important issues for which it has sought review. This Court’s valuable time, limited resources, and the interests of fairness and fair play demand better. (page 13)
No dirty trick is too dirty for WT
Watchtower also failed to precure a physically adequate record. Many pages are so lightly printed as to be wholly or partially illegible or, at a minimum, very difficult to read. (See, e.g., Record 4711-4726, 4728, 4632, 4735-4737, 4739-4748, 4786, 4792-4827, 4939, 4972, 4975-4976, 5204-5208.) It is manifestly unjust for Watchtower to make representations about the lack of evidence on certain issues, and then supply a record with nearly 80 pages of illegible documents… (page 16)
The end result of this case
The High Court had concluded that since the Watchtower refused to supply legible documents, it proved the respondent’s case that these docs would hang the Watchtower if produced. The High Court had decided in favour of JW A MINOR and dished up a total of 13.5 million in fines and compensation. Watchtower appealed to the Supreme Court, of course.
The Supreme Court sent the case back to the High Court. The Supreme Court's reasoning was that there were additional steps the High Court could have taken to compel Watchtower to comply and hand over the documents before going to Def Con 5.
In round two, the High Court instituted a fine of $4000 for each day that Watchtower refused to comply. With a guesstimated net worth of 54 billion, Watchtower ignored it. I forget how many thousands they racked up. The High Court then threatened Def Con 5 again but gave Watchtower a grace period of 4 days to produce the documents. Watchtower said they weren’t going to do it. The Judge pressed the little red button on Def Con 5 and the Supreme Court nodded along. Bye-bye 13.5 million of the faithful’s donations.
Either they have illegally destroyed those docs or they are so dangerous to Watchtower that 13.5 million is pocket change compared to the cost of releasing them.
When those judges get a clear run at this organisation, there will be no mercy.