Dichiarazione ufficiale della congregazione di Fremont
Dalla dichiarazione ufficiale della congregazione si possono rilevare alcuni dati importanti
1. Il pedofilo non era un nominato ma un semplice fedele.
2. Gli abusi in discussione non avvennero nella sala del regno.
3. La denuncia obbligatoria di un pedofilo è diventata legge solo nel 1997. I fatti risalgono al 1993.
4.
Gli anziani non sapevano nulla degli abusi su Candance Conti.
A mio parere una assoluzione nei successivi gradi di giudizio è inevitabile.
Read a “Discussion of Liability Issues” in court documents filed on 04-19-2012.
“Settlement Conference Statement of The North Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, Fremont California”
“Discussion of Liability Issues”
At the time of the alleged abuse, Kendrick was not an agent of either the North Fremont Congregation or Watchtower of New York. He was not in any position of responsibility or authority within either the congregation or Watchtower of New York. Therefore, Watchtower of New York and the North Fremont Congregation cannot be liable for any alleged conduct by Kendrick that did not occur on Kingdom Hall property or during congregation activity.
“If, arguendo, the abuse occurred, it was by one congregation member against another congregation member. Neither of the Church Defendants can be held liable for abuse of this
nature.
Further, the Church Defendants had no legal duty to report abuse of a minor to the authorities before January 1, 1997,(clergy first became mandated reporters at that time) and did not report the touching of Kendrick's step-daughter. Nonetheless, a police report was evidently made by the family and Kendrick was prosecuted.
The minister-communicant privilege is still recognized by California law. The Church Defendants could not have disclosed the 1993 incident without violating that privilege, which belonged to both Kendrick and the Church Defendants.
The fact that Kendrick later pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor arising out of the 1993 incident with Andrea was never disclosed to the Church Defendants. The Church Defendants had no notice of "child sexual abuse" by Kendrick in 1993. They had a confession by Kendrick that he had inadvertently or accidentally touched Andrea's breast over her clothes, and Andrea and her mother, Evelyn Kendrick, never told the two elders anything different from what Kendrick had confessed to them (the elders).
The elders of the North Fremont Congregation removed Kendrick from any position of responsibility or authority in 1993 and watched him during church meetings and functions to see whether he acted inappropriately with any children at the Kingdom Hall. Kendrick was not allowed to engage in congregation activity around children without supervision. The elders and Plaintiffs parents never saw Kendrick abuse Plaintiff in the Kingdom Hall. The elders never saw Plaintiff leave the Kingdom Hall with Kendrick. Plaintiff s parents never allowed Kendrick to take Plaintiff to his home.
“Settlement Issues”
If Plaintiff was abused, it was committed by Kendrick, a third party not under the control or supervision of the Church Defendants. Kendrick denies abusing Plaintiff. Further, even if, arguendo, the jury should find that Kendrick abused Plaintiff in the Kingdom Hall by hugging her and having her sit on his lap while her parents were present, the damages for that alleged conduct would be minimal at best. Also, if the jury finds the Church Defendants liable for abuse of Plaintiff off of Kingdom Hall property (such as in Kendrick's private home), the Church Defendants will have little option except to appeal such a verdict. The Church Defendants could not let such a potential precedent go unchallenged.
Finally, Plaintiffs description of the location, nature, and extent of her alleged abuse is contradicted by, among other things, her parents and the elders and thus lacks credibility. No demand for settlement has yet been made by Plaintiff; however, the Church Defendants will participate in the mandatory settlement conference in good faith.”
----------