What do Jehovah's witnesses think of the Montana case reversal?
I heard that there was a court case in Montana in which at first they awarded a former Jehovah's Witness named Lexi Nunez money, but then yesterday, they reversed that decision. I'm just wondering what Jehovah's Witnesses think of this?
- Hannah J PaulLv 75 months agoFavorite Answer
Thank you for your question. I was wondering if someone would reference this case.
It was Justice Beth Baker of the Montana Supreme Court who delivered the opinion of the Court (all of this is obviously a matter of public record). The Justices reversed the District Court’s decision and remanded for entry of summary judgment for Jehovah’s Witnesses. There were no dissenting opinions; all seven Supreme Court Justices, including the Hon. Beth Baker, concurred. Jehovah’s Witnesses had appealed the District Court’s ruling which found that the Witnesses had violated Montana’s mandatory child abuse reporting statute; the Witnesses also appealed the Court’s award of punitive damages. The Court seems to have confined its consideration to whether a violation of the mandatory reporting statute had in fact taken place. They did not "reach" the other legal arguments of the Jehovah's Witnesses.
The Supreme Court held that Witnesses are excepted from the mandatory reporting statute under Section 41-3-201(6)(c) Montana Code Annotated. According to the opinion “because this issue is dispositive, we do not reach the punitive damages award.”
What do I think? Doubtless, opinions of Jehovah’s Witnesses will run the gamut. In point of fact, there was another recent decision – by the California Court of Appeals - where a judge drastically reduced an initial $28 million in damages down to about $2 million. One of the first things I thought when I read the Montana Supreme Court’s opinion (I printed it out and took it home to read) is this: Splashed across the front pages of newspapers you will find reports of alleged victims suing Jehovah’s Witnesses all over the place. Everyone becomes familiar with these glaring suits and vile details. But you never hear of all the suits that are “summarily dismissed” by the court, charges that are dropped by the plaintiff, “dismissed with prejudice” by the court. I am looking at my updates – sixteen cases dismissed with prejudice and my list is by no means an exhaustive one. “Summarily dismissed” and “dismissed with prejudice” - look up those terms to see what they mean for the plaintiff and for the defendant. You never hear of these dismissals. You can find them if you hunt them down since they are all a matter of public record. But they are not splashed across the front pages like the initial allegations.
Reminds me of all the scientific frauds – so-called fossil evidence for evolution splashed across the front pages that were/are later found to be outright frauds, fake fossils. My point here is that while the “find” is on the front page, the exposure of the fossil as being fake and manufactured is buried somewhere on page 97 of the paper – in small print.
My thought is that when all the facts come out, the ending is very often quite different than one might have expected considering the accusations in the beginning. Understand me, please, I am not saying that there are not victims of sexual abuse. Of course there are - sexual abuse is vile, gross, and abhorrent and it touches every arena of life - religion, sports, entertainment, family, neighborhoods, schools. But as to all the trials, the cases, the allegations: it ain’t over till the fat lady sings, as the saying goes.
Hannah J Paul
- JuliLv 44 months ago
STOP reporting my truthful answers, JWs.
We all know what lengths you and your cult will go to protect your filthy pedophiles.
The JW pedos are still found guilty.
That's what really matters.
The JWs who have always slammed the Catholic church for confession and answering to men, do the exact same thing.
What a bunch of filthy hypocrites the JW cult leaders are. Any cult that uses the clergy client privilege to hide pedophiles from the authorities is disgusting.
The JW cult is a known pedophiles paradise.
Hannah is a fine example of the JWs protecting their baby rapers.
That's the norm in this cult.
I'll leave a link to the many other cases against the cult for concealing rape and pedophilia from the authorities.
These criminals were found guilty.
It just so happens that in the state of Montana, it's legal to protect pedophiles in religion.
This cult is so filthy.
- 4 months ago
Although it was proven that we hid that pedophile from the authorities, it just so happens that Montana gave us the right to do so.I
Those girls were abused terribly but our cult makes sure we always protect our pedophiles.
Glad we can use Satan's system to our advantage.
We tried using the clergy client privilege in many cases before, but to no avail.
In all honesty, we have no clergy, except in cases like this.
Jehovah's people are the only true Christians.
Child sexual abuse victims are losers!
Why did JWs mass report Juli's answer?
- PeterLv 75 months ago
Doesn't the same law protect all religiou institutions? If a murderer confesses his crime to a priest, the priest cannot report him to the police, the principal is the same.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- BrianLv 55 months ago
It is sad that Lexi was abused. No child should go through that.
If there is a positive in a case like this, Jehovah's witnesses are more aware of what to do in case like this. Reform is what came out of this.
- Bill BLv 65 months ago
I read the case and it is a sad one.
It's not that the Watchtower Society didn't do anything morally wrong.
They were not legally construed to be Mandatory Reporters so even though they knew about sexual abuse corroborated by other witnesses and failed to report the abuse to authorities, they cannot be legally held responsible, even if (and it did) that failure to report allowed the abuser to find new victims.
That is messed up.
- FireballLv 75 months ago
they wont be wild about it...try news area.
- ANDRE LLv 75 months ago
Who cares what those morons and rapists feel ?
The point here is that the hick Montana SC is staffed by theocratic morons who feel that the rape of a child is less important that churches USING loopholes in the law to HIDE such heinous crimes.
IOW, the Montana SC just upheld the crazy christer version of Sharia law.
- Anonymous5 months ago
I'm sure they'll take it as further proof that Jehovah's Witnesses are the one true religion.