<\/p>\n
-Judge Elizabeth Best, Montana Seventh Judicial District Court, July 22nd, 2021<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n On July 22nd, 2021, Montana Judge Elizabeth Best ordered a combination of fines and sanctions against the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, a corporation operated by Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses since 1909.<\/p>\n According to\u00a0the 9-page order<\/a><\/span> issued by Judge Best, Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses must pay $11,075 in legal fees along with a $500 per day fine for each day it violates the orders of the court to produce critical documents in the Nunez v. Watchtower civil case. The court ruled that Watchtower has been intentionally obstructive in its defiance of orders from\u00a0May 28th<\/a><\/span>\u00a0and\u00a0June 23rd<\/a><\/span>\u00a0of this year, and must retroactively pay the daily fine until it complies with the order.<\/p>\n As an additional penalty against the Jehovah\u2019s Witness defendants, Judge Best ruled that Watchtower and the Christian Congregation of Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses (CCJW) are \u201cprohibited from arguing, making innuendo, mentioning, offering evidence of any \u201cadvice of counsel\u201d defense, and from offering any evidence about the advice their attorneys gave them at any time before trial.\u201d<\/p>\n This order is directly related to documents that were privately shared by Watchtower in Judge Manley\u2019s chambers during the 2018 trial in Thompson Falls.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n In 2016, Lexi Nunez filed a civil lawsuit against Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses for\u00a0Negligence Per Se<\/a><\/span>, arguing that church elders and their parent corporation, Watchtower, violated Montana\u2019s mandatory child abuse reporting laws. Elders in Thompson Falls claimed they were advised by Watchtower\u2019s New York Legal Department that they had no legal obligation to report Lexi\u2019s step-grandfather, Max Reyes, when they learned that he had abused Lexi\u2019s aunt Holly and uncle Peter.<\/p>\n By preventing church elders from contacting law enforcement, Nunez was subjected to continued abuse by Reyes, despite the fact that the church had disfellowshipped Reyes for over a year.<\/p>\n The case went to trial in September 2018. Judge James Manley ruled prior to trial that the Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses had violated Montana\u2019s statutory reporting code, and the jury was instructed to determine whether the defendants acted with malice. The jury found the defendants guilty, assessing a total of $35 million dollars as a civil award to Nunez.<\/p>\n In January of 2020, the Montana Supreme Court, while sympathetic to Nunez, ruled that Watchtower had successfully navigated a loophole in the mandatory reporting act. The Court decreed that while the facts of the case were disturbing, the Jehovah\u2019s Witness elders were acting according to their \u201cestablished church practice\u201d when they sealed off reports about the abuser, Max Reyes. Thus, the 2018 judgment was reversed.<\/p>\n Soon after the reversal, Nunez filed an amended complaint, arguing that while statutory negligence was off the table, she could still argue common law negligence, which is independent of the issue of mandatory reporting. In other words, Nunez wanted her opportunity to demonstrate that Watchtower and the Thompson Falls elders were negligent on their own merits, after learning of Max Reyes\u2019s propensity for abusing children.<\/p>\n The Court agreed and permitted Nunez to proceed on her assertions of common law negligence.<\/p>\n On April 16th, 2021, the case took a dramatic turn when attorneys for Nunez filed a motion to compel the Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses to turn over documents that were disclosed on September 23rd, 2018, the night before closing arguments in the original trial.<\/p>\n Watchtower attorney Joel Taylor produced several pages of documents from a CM (Child Maltreatment) telephone log in an effort to persuade Judge Manley that Watchtower was justified in arguing lack of malice by congregation elders \u2013 because those pages purportedly revealed a good faith effort by elders to seek legal advice.<\/p>\n Later that evening, Taylor emailed Nunez\u2019s attorneys just\u00a0three of ten pages<\/a><\/span>\u00a0that resembled a case file on Max Reyes.<\/p>\n Those pages tipped off attorneys for Nunez that there was something more ominous lurking beneath the \u201ctelephonic log.\u201d It was clear that a\u00a0database of child abusers and victims<\/a><\/span>\u00a0is a tool used by Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses in the management of their global religious organization.<\/p>\n This legal strategy proved to be a monumental challenge for Watchtower, as they never expected a second trial and the document discovery that would follow.<\/p>\n Consequently, Nunez initiated discovery in early 2021 on all 10 pages, along with any supplemental information related to a Child Abuse\/Maltreatment database.<\/p>\n Those documents suggest the extent of data collected by Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses about child abusers and their victims.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The April 16th motion to compel production of these documents launched a substantial legal battle between Nunez and Watchtower that has led to the disclosure that even more documents exist about the Nunez case. Watchtower insists that these documents are irrelevant and privileged and should not be disclosed to the Plaintiff.<\/p>\n Judge Elizabeth Best, assigned to the 2022 trial, disagreed.<\/p>\n On May 26th, 2021,\u00a0Judge Best issued an 11-page order<\/a><\/span>\u00a0compelling production of all documents sought by Nunez, and chastised Watchtower for its abuse of the discovery process. Nunez\u2019s attorneys had argued that Taylor could not selectively turn over 3 of 10 pages to the plaintiff at the 2018 trial, then claim attorney-client privilege on the other 7 pages.<\/p>\n On page 9 of the Order, the Court stated: \u201cDefendants\u2019 attempt, now, to obstruct disclosure of the entire document, which on the face of the previously disclosed three pages constitutes attorney-client communications and legal advice, by cloaking it as \u201cprivileged,\u201d is, at best, disingenuous. Defendants may not cherry pick portions of documents for which they waive privilege because it works to their strategic advantage, while withholding other parts because it does not. Defendants have clearly waived any claim of privilege.\u201d<\/p>\n The Judge also addressed Watchtower\u2019s continued claims that the documents do not form a part of any database of information.<\/p>\n She continues:<\/p>\n \u201cDefendants object that the discovery request is \u201cvague and ambiguous,\u201d representing that they do not know what the words \u201cCM Database\u201d mean. The Court finds this objection to be frivolous and interposed for an improper purpose. It is clear to the Court that the Defendants understand what the Plaintiff is seeking, regardless of whether they choose to call the information sought something different. The Defendants\u2019 counsel discussed the \u201cCM Database\u201d with the Court during the Rule 16 conference, which led to the Court\u2019s scheduling order, and never objected that they did not understand the term.\u201d<\/p>\n Judge Best concluded her Order by advising Watchtower that the Court \u201cwill not tolerate further obstruction and will consider sanctions for similar conduct in the future\u201d<\/p>\n Watchtower continued to defy the judge, and instead of producing the 10 pages to Nunez, they delayed the process further by submitting the pages to the Court itself for\u00a0in camera<\/em>\u00a0review. (Inspection by judge)<\/p>\n On June 17th, 2021, Judge Best issued yet another court order, this time compelling production of the documents and issuing legal and financial penalties to Watchtower for their obstruction.\u00a0In her 8-page order<\/a><\/span>, the judge condemned Watchtower\u2019s behavior and fined the religious organization all costs and attorneys fees associated with their motion to compel document production. The legal fees alone were $11,075.00.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, prior to the June 17th Order, Watchtower had complicated their case even further by submitting a supplemental privilege log to the court, a document that disclosed the existence of\u00a022 new pages of documents<\/em><\/strong> previously unknown to Nunez. Many of the records concern legal advice provided to the Polson Montana congregation when elders conferred with Watchtower about Peter McGowan. Peter was not only a victim of Max Reyes, but he was also responsible for years of sexual abuse of his own niece, Lexi.<\/p>\n The existence of these documents raises serious questions about why this information was not turned over to Nunez\u2019s attorneys in 2018. Watchtower\u2019s position is that they are irrelevant to the case, and protected.<\/p>\n Finally, on July 22nd, 2021 the Montana Court imposed what might be one of the severest censures of a defendant and counsel in Montana history. The following is an excerpt from the Judge\u2019s order:<\/p>\n \u201cThis Court issued Orders on May 28, 2021 (Doc. 210)<\/a><\/span> and on June 23, 2021 (Doc. 214)<\/a><\/span> in which it set forth relevant law on discovery and its expectations of all parties during discovery. The May 28, 2021, Order compelled production of certain specific documents by Watchtower.\u00a0Watchtower not only flouted its disobedience of that Order<\/span><\/em><\/strong>, in subsequent pleadings it asserted that an order issued by Judge Manley (Doc. 116) was the \u201claw of the case\u201d and that, therefore,\u00a0it is \u201cconfused\u201d about this Court\u2019s orders<\/em><\/strong>, and seeks \u201cguidance\u201d before producing documents the Court has ordered produced.\u00a0The Court finds Watchtower\u2019s arguments to be frivolous and specious, interposed solely to obstruct and delay.<\/span><\/em><\/strong>\u201c<\/p>\n \u201cBased on the Court\u2019s review of Watchtower\u2019s documents submitted for in camera review,\u00a0the Court immediately recognized Watchtower\u2019s obstruction<\/span><\/em><\/strong>\u00a0and issued another Order, this time assessing sanctions. (Doc. 214).\u00a0Watchtower defied that Order and continues to refuse to produce 22 pages of documents, and unabashedly misrepresents the truth.<\/span><\/em><\/strong>\u00a0As to documents the Court expressly ordered it to produce, Watchtower asserts that it complied and is simply waiting for the Court to address its embellished claims of privilege, and its \u201cconfusion\u201d and its claim that a previous order issued by Judge Manley, before the first trial, supersedes this Court\u2019s Orders.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWatchtower\u2019s representations raise other very serious concerns about its candor with the Court from the outset<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. Before the Court\u2019s first Order of May 28, 2021, counsel Joel Taylor (Taylor), on behalf of Watchtower, signed and filed an affidavit in which he represented, inter alia, that the fourth page of one document at issue \u201ccontains no information.\u201d The document, later reluctantly produced, contains information about Max Reyes abusing Peter McGowan, and notably contains blank spaces in response to a question, \u201cEfforts to protect the victim?\u201d which is obviously potentially probative of Nunez\u2019s claims of breach of a duty to protect minors. Failure to answer such a question is, actually, \u201cinformation,\u201d which is apparent to any competent lawyer.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cLikewise, Watchtower initially opposed the Motion to Compel by representing that withheld documents were \u201cunrelated\u201d to previously disclosed documents, and Taylor attested to the truth of this representation in his affidavit.\u00a0It is clear that this representation was false.<\/span><\/em><\/strong> Documents 1a and 1b relate to Max\u2019s abuse of Peter and Holly beginning in 1994.\u00a0Watchtower pretended, in its initial briefing, not to understand the term, \u201cdatabase.\u201d It turns out, from the few documents now produced, that they were indeed part of an \u201celectronic database\u201d -in Watchtower\u2019s own words.<\/span><\/em><\/strong>\u201c<\/p>\n \u201cNunez\u2019s discovery requests were based on an email from Watchtower lawyer Taylor, in which he described them as \u201cthe other 7 pages involve Peter\/Alexis\u201d and \u201cthe remaining pages involve Peter Jr. \u2018s confession [to] the Polson Congregation regarding his abuse of Alexis.\u201d<\/p>\n Watchtower\u2019s defiance is breathtaking and must, as the Montana Supreme Court has often said, not be dealt with leniently.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n <\/p>\n \u201cAfter the Court\u2019s first order to produce the documents, Watchtower produced only seven pages of documents, none of which relate to Peter abusing Alexis. Rather, the produced documents relate to evidence already known to Nunez, the abuse of Peter, Holly, and Alexis by Max Reyes. The missing pages regarding Peter\u2019s abuse of Alexis have not been produced at all. In sum, then,\u00a0Watchtower has misrepresented to the Court that it has even partially complied with the Court\u2019s Order<\/span><\/em><\/strong>.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cOn June 11, 2021 (after the May 28, 2021, Order), Watchtower identified an additional 22 pages of documents that had, until that date, never been disclosed to Nunez or the Court. Simultaneously, it filed a new and improved privilege log listing documents in random order, many of which clearly refer to evidence of Peter abusing Alexis, which the Court had ordered produced.\u00a0Appallingly, Watchtower continues to withhold documents about Peter\u2019s abuse of Alexis, and appears to be attempting a sleight of hand by offering a modified privilege log<\/span><\/em><\/strong>.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWatchtower has reasserted its claims of privilege,\u00a0ignored the Court\u2019s Order overruling those claims, asserted \u201cconfusion\u201d and lack of understanding of the Orders<\/span><\/em><\/strong>\u00a0[asserting that it does not \u201cunderstand\u201d whether the Court\u2019s Orders apply to congregations, even though they briefed that very issue and claimed privilege for congregations starting in February 2021], and simultaneously\u00a0inconsistently asked the Court to alter or amend Orders which it feigns not to understand<\/span><\/em><\/strong>.\u00a0These arguments are frivolous, neither based on fact or law, and will not be tolerated, as the Court has previously warned.<\/span><\/em><\/strong>\u00a0Watchtower\u2019s defiance is breathtaking and must, as the Montana Supreme Court has often said, not be dealt with leniently<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. Instead, courts are instructed to \u201cintently punish transgressors rather than patiently encouraging their cooperation.\u201d\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe Court concludes that Watchtower has been deliberate in its violations of the Court\u2019s orders, and the Plaintiffs\u2019 right to discovery<\/span><\/em><\/strong>.\u00a0Its claims that it could not<\/span><\/em><\/strong>\u00a0understand the plain language in the Court\u2019s orders are absurd and frivolous<\/span><\/em><\/strong>.\u00a0Its decision to obstruct has wasted many hours of scarce time and resources for the<\/span><\/em><\/strong>\u00a0Plaintiffs, and for the Court itself<\/span><\/em><\/strong>, and has prevented Nunez from preparing for trial, which is obviously Watchtower\u2019s intent. Every time a party chooses\u00a0attrition and stonewalling<\/span><\/em><\/strong>, not only the opposing party in the case involved, but parties in numerous other cases lose opportunities to exercise their fundamental right to access to the Courts.\u201d<\/p>\n [highlighted areas by JWChildAbuse.org]<\/p>\n The conduct and actions of Watchtower\u2019s legal team are so grave that Judge Best warned the Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses that such violations of court orders could lead to an order of judgment by default, where the defendants would lose the case without ever facing a jury. This could potentially cost Watchtower millions, if not tens of millions of dollars. In 2015, a California court awarded a judgment<\/a><\/span> by default\u00a0against Watchtower for similar violations of the discovery process.<\/p>\n After losing appeals to the California and U.S. Supreme Courts, Watchtower paid more than 6 million dollars to the victim in judgment and interest.<\/p>\n Montana Judge Elizabeth Best concluded her Order by enumerating both financial and legal sanctions against Watchtower. Aside from the economic penalties, Watchtower will be barred from offering evidence that elders relied upon \u201cadvice of counsel\u201d as a defense, or that they believed they were complying with the law when they failed to protect Lexi Nunez from the sexual abuse by Max Reyes.<\/p>\n As of the date of this article, Watchtower continues in contempt of the court\u2019s orders and has not provided Nunez any further documents.<\/p>\n UPDATE:<\/strong><\/span> On August 31st, 2021, both sides settled the case for an undisclosed amount and signed a Stipulation for Dismissal With Prejudice.<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n July 22nd Order Assessing Sanctions and Attorneys Fees<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n June 23rd Order Compelling Production and Sanctions<\/a><\/span><\/p>\nWhy was Watchtower Fined?\u00a0 A Brief Case History<\/h4>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/jwchildabuse.org\/xqllht\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/April-16th-2021-Document.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nThe Harshest of All Judgments<\/h3>\n
\nDocuments:<\/h3>\n