Originally posted by robbie carrobiePeople should not just take my word for it; they should read the whole letter for themselves and see what message - both implicit and explicit - it is sending to "elders".
and were exactly in the [1989] letter does it demonstrate that the congregation were negligent and complicit in the abuse? where in fact in the entire testimony is there evidence that the congregation was negligent and thus complicit in abuse, you have not said.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOn the contrary, the verdict seems entirely correct. I understand why you are claiming what you are claiming. But I don't need you to agree with me.
No, its as far as i can discern, a miscarriage of justice, there is not the slightest evidence of negligence on the part of congregation.
Originally posted by FMFand yet you are unable despite being asked repeatedly to do so, to provide a shred of evidence that the congregation was negligent and thus complicit in the abuse. Thank you for demonstrating the fact.
On the contrary, the verdict seems entirely correct. I understand why you are claiming what you are claiming. But I don't need you to agree with me.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI've had a look at the transcripts and I can say that if I had been on the jury i would have voted 'guilty'. You are entitled to your own opinion, of course. I don't need you to agree with me, as you know.
and yet you are unable despite being asked repeatedly to do so, to provide a shred of evidence that the congregation was negligent and thus complicit in the abuse. Thank you for demonstrating the fact.
JURY TRIAL TRANSCRIPTS
Candace Conti v. Watchtower – Jury Trial Day 1 May 29, 2012 – pdf
Candace Conti v. Watchtower – Jury Trial Day 2 May 30, 2012 – pdf
Candace Conti v. Watchtower – Jury Trial Day 3 May 31, 2012 – pdf
Candace Conti v. Watchtower – Jury Trial Day 4 June 4, 2012 – pdf
Candace Conti v. Watchtower – Jury Trial Day 5 June 5, 2012 – pdf
Candace Conti v. Watchtower – Jury Trial Day 6 June 6, 2012 – pdf
Candace Conti v. Watchtower – Jury Trial Day 7 June 11, 2012 – pdf
Candace Conti v. Watchtower – Jury Trial Day 8 June 12, 2012 – pdf
Candace Conti v. Watchtower – Jury Trial Day 9 June 13, 2012 – pdf
http://jwleaks.wordpress.com/candace-conti/
-Removed-based on my observations and general research, how long were you in the Jehovahs witness organization? and yes you need to provide evidence, your opinions are both irrelevant to anyone but you and entirely meaningless in the context. Why you think they carry any weight is a form of self delusion. On top of that you were asked to read the court transcripts and you evidently have not done so and yet you seem to deem yourself adequately qualified to comment on the case. While not being conclusive, it is certainly a position of ignorance and may be indicative of a deep seated prejudice or at very least an intellectual laziness contradicting any clams of personal research that you claim, here here or anywhere else. People who make serious comments without having considered the evidence are simply not to be trusted for they have deluded themselves into thinking that they know the details of a matter, when in fact, they are entirely ignorant. I thank you for demonstratng the fact.
Originally posted by FMFI am perfectly aware of where they are to be found, and was only reading them from the same source yesterday, again, you have provided not a shred of evidence that the congregation was negligent and thus complicit with the abuse.
I've had a look at the transcripts and I can say that if I had been on the jury i would have voted 'guilty'. You are entitled to your own opinion, of course. I don't need you to agree with me, as you know.
JURY TRIAL TRANSCRIPTS
Candace Conti v. Watchtower – Jury Trial Day 1 May 29, 2012 – pdf
Candace Conti v. Watchtower – Jury Trial Day 2 May 30, 2012 – pd ...[text shortened]... htower – Jury Trial Day 9 June 13, 2012 – pdf
http://jwleaks.wordpress.com/candace-conti/
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI don't need to provide you with "evidence", robbie. You can read the transcripts just like me. I agree with the decision of the court. I also note that you don't.
I am perfectly aware of where they are to be found, and was only reading them from the same source yesterday, again, you have provided not a shred of evidence that the congregation was negligent and thus complicit with the abuse.
Originally posted by robbie carrobiebased on my observations and general research, how long were you in the Jehovahs witness organization? and yes you need to provide evidence, your opinions are both irrelevant to anyone but you and entirely meaningless in the context. Why you think they carry any weight is a form of self delusion. On top of that you were asked to read the court transcripts and you evidently have not done so and yet you seem to deem yourself adequately qualified to comment on the case. While not being conclusive, it is certainly a position of ignorance and may be indicative of a deep seated prejudice or at very least an intellectual laziness contradicting any clams of personal research that you claim, here here or anywhere else. People who make serious comments without having considered the evidence are simply not to be trusted for they have deluded themselves into thinking that they know the details of a matter, when in fact, they are entirely ignorant. I thank you for demonstratng the fact.
This is nothing but an ad hominem, robbie. Disagree with divegeester, by all means. This is a public forum for the airing of opinions, after all. But this is nothing but an ad hominem. If you disagree with his opinion just say so.
1 edit
-Removed-a verdict is not proof in itself is it. Again you have not provided a shred of evidence that the congregation was negligent and thus complicit with the abuse and perhaps this last statement of yours is the most telling of all, no one is defending the perpetrator over the victim, no one disputed the abuse, no one disputes that Kendrick was guilty, I am disputing that the watchtower society was negligent and thus complicit which is something quite different from your ignorant and frankly quite ludicrous assertion. I doubt you even know what the definition of a cult is and yet here you are, commenting upon a trial of which you have not the slightest idea of what went on. If i may be permitted a rare self opinion, you must be one of the ill informed bigots i think i have the misfortune to stumble upon, a man who comments upon a serious trial without actually having considered the evidence. I do not thank you for demonstrating it, its not for me to correct flaws in your character.
Originally posted by FMFmy work is done here, if you do find any evidence that the WTBTS was negligent and thus complicit with the abuse, please let me know, ill be in my office regards Robbie.
I don't need to provide you with "evidence", robbie. You can read the transcripts just like me. I agree with the decision of the court. I also note that you don't.