Menlo Park Kingdom Hall: The State Lawsuit

The Menlo Park Kingdom Hall takeover scandal is like a movie monster that just won’t die.

Three former elders have filed Court cases in San Francisco Federal Court (dismissed), San Mateo Superior Court in Redwood City (dismissed), and earlier this year another case that is progressing in San Jose Federal Court. There was another filing in federal court on April, 2012 [Cobb & Cobb Sr. v. Chase Bank] that is still developing.

These court cases all center around four Menlo Park elders that the Watchtower Society removed and replaced in the summer of 2010. Three of the elders decided to challenge their replacement as officers of the non-profit corporation that owned and managed the land, building, and financial assets connected to the Menlo Park Kingdom Hall.

Over the past two years, has provided our readers with ongoing articles and PDF copies of most relevant court documents. This post presents the transcript of the state case heard in the Superior Court of San Mateo County, California on February 22, 2012. The original transcript is quite lengthy, so it’s been broken into seven parts for ease of reading and downloading. Below the link to each section there is an abbreviated synopsis for quick reference.

Those close to the case suggest that our readers give special attention to section 6 below. Defendant Ernest Brede, the current COBOE at Menlo Park, describes events during and after the takeover, and testifies under oath that the existing board of directors was never officially voted out of office. Instead, as directed by a Watchtower Society attorney, a new corporation was simply formed to replace the existing corporation. That is a clear violation of California corporation law.

As you read the full transcript of this case, you may notice that while the court gave the appearance of being fair, the judge sustained practically every objection made by the Watchtower’s attorneys – even to the point of designating printed and signed letters and publications issued by the Watchtower as being “hearsay.” While it often seems that the judge would give Jason Cobb a little slack (he was appearing “pro per” and had not been given time to fully prepare for that day’s trial), he tended to rule for the defense on most critical issues as they came up.

It’s interesting to note that the Watchtower seems to have changed its official position about what kind of religion it really is. For decades the Society has criticized the Catholic and Orthodox churches, and most mainstream Protestant denominations, for being “hierarchies.” Instead of being ruled from the top down by a pope or archbishop, Jehovah’s Witnesses have traditionally presented themselves as groups of Bible students meeting together in small groups, directed in an ecclesiastical “theocratic arrangement.” Watchtower publications still promote the idea that appointments of local elders and special pioneers are directed by holy spirit, not from direct orders by branch office managers.

Watchtower attorney Calvin Rouse destroys that claim forever as officially recorded on pages 4 and 5 (segment 1). Rouse states emphatically, “We are a hierarchical religion just like the Catholic Church.” What follows is even more enlightening.

Thank you, Brother Rouse, for finally clearing up that long-standing misunderstanding on our part. Until now, we thought Jehovah’s Witnesses were part of a “theocratic organization” and that “Jehovah hated evil hierarchies” like the Catholic Church. We were taught and constantly reminded that those false religions were “a snare and a racket.” Now we find out that we aren’t really any different, but are “just like them.”

Jehovah must have changed His mind – again.

[All segments are PDFs. Click on segment title to read or download.]

San Mateo Court Trial Testimony – Segment 1

[25 pages] Court session opens. Attorney Calvin Rouse (assigned to case by Watchtower Legal Department) introduced as representing Ernest Brede, current COBOE of the English Menlo Park Kingdom Hall. Rouse defends the Watchtower’s actions by admitting that it is a “hierarchical religion structured just like the Catholic Church…and governed from the top down.” Watchtower attorney Smith attempts to poison the well by mentioning to the judge that Jason Cobb is “pro per” and “there is a possibility he is not trained in the law that could be an issue.” Cobb states that the Watchtower has always claimed to be a “theocratic organization,” and has historically been more of a congregational style religion. He points out that there are two considerations: ecclesiastical and corporate legal. Cobb testifies that the current body of elders tried to take over the Kingdom Hall corporation without legal authority to do so. Smith objects to Cobb’s introduction of Watchtower letters as “hearsay;” Judge rules for Smith. Smith also objects to a state issued corporate document as “hearsay;” Court rules for Mr. Cobb. Cobb testifies that the existing Board of Directors were never voted out of office as per state law. Rouse cross examines Cobb.

San Mateo Court Trial Testimony – Segment 2

[25 pages] Rouse continues to question Cobb about appointment of elders and responsibilities within the congregation. Cobb testifies about where direction and authority comes from within the organization. Cobb explains why he filed the lawsuit; how elders can hold dual responsibility. Rouse argues that Cobb knows no one else that has served in a dual capacity after being removed by the Society. Cobb defines the meaning of “ruled theocratically” as used by the Watchtower; are elders appointed by men at the branch office or by “holy spirit”? Local congregation appoints and votes for corporate officers. Cobb calls Arlen St. Clair to the stand. St. Clair testifies that he was never voted out as Secretary of the MP corporation by the congregation or the other officers, nor did he resign, and he did not join another congregation. Cobb calls his father, Jon Cobb Sr. to the stand. Cobb Sr. testifies about appointments and authority of elders.

San Mateo Court Trial Testimony – Segment 3

[25 pages] Cobb Sr. continues testimony about how and who selects elders. Cobb reads from a Watchtower that states that elders are not appointed by “a hierarchical form of government.” All quotes from Watchtowers ruled “hearsay.” Paul Koehler’s involvement in the reassignment of elders. Cobb Sr. testifies that an appointment to elder does not automatically make one an officer of the corporation. Officers are appointed based on other qualifications and skills and then approved by the membership. Rouse cross-examines Cobb Sr. about authority and responsibilities of the Governing Body. Rouse allowed to quote from elder book and compares a circuit overseer to an “archbishop.” Redirect by Jason Cobb. How are complaints involving circuit overseers handled? “Obeying God rather than men.” If elder chose to follow Bible command and refused a conflicting order by a circuit servant, should he be punished? Discussion of MP corporate bylaws.

San Mateo Court Trial Testimony – Segment 4

[25 pages – page #85 is missing] Brief discussion about when the new corporation bylaws were added. Lunch break. Cobb tries to introduce Watchtower CD into evidence. Cobb allowed to refer to CD. Court rules that testimony will not become an argument over Bible doctrine. Cobb tries again to introduce Watchtower volume into evidence. Smith objects and court agrees. Extended clarification over what documents are admissible. [Missing page.] Rouse tries to condense plaintiff’s case. Discussion as to whether case should continue. Cobb identifies the issue before the court is whether replacement of officers met the guidelines of California corporate law. Ernest Brede called to the stand. Brede explains his connection to the Regional Building Committee. He describes the organizational structure from publishers to the top of the corporation. Auditing of accounts. Rouse surprised to find out that George Stock was also removed as an elder. Brede denies that he was part of a “hostile takeover” of MPKH. How the transition played out. Leon Opolsky’s connection to the new body of elders. Lack of bylaws before takeover. Why were locks changed? Were false financial reports created? Official announcement to the congregation. [Court Testimony – Segment 4 – missing page 85]

San Mateo Court Trial Testimony – Segment 5

[20 pages] Jason Cobb conducts trial examination of Ernest Brede. Long discussion of the events leading up to the “takeover” of the Kingdom Hall by the Brede and the other newly appointed elders. Cobb asks for details of how corporate meetings were scheduled and conducted and on what authority. Cobb points to fact that the new elder group voted themselves in as officers of a corporation that didn’t legally exist. Cobb asks Brede what Leon Opolsky (Watchtower Legal) told him to do, but the judge allows the question to go unanswered.

San Mateo Court Trial Testimony – Segment 6

[10 pages] Jason Cobb continues questioning Ernest Brede. Cobb asks about a report given to the congregation in November about the financial health of the Kingdom Hall corporation. Smith objects and court rules for the objection. Judge instructs Cobb to focus on the issue of the validity of the election of the new board of directors. Cobb asks Brede if there was ever a motion presented to the congregation to remove the existing officers. Brede answers, “There was not.” Smith objects but is overruled. Cobb asks Brede if he was told before coming to Menlo Park that he (and the other defendants) would be appointed as elders. He answers, “Not before we came.” Cobb asks if Brede if the existing elders had resigned or abandoned their positions. Brede answers, “No.” Cobb is stymied by objections, but makes the point that removal of an elder from spiritual oversight does not meet the legal requirements of removal as a corporate officer. Rouse cross examines Brede. Brede explains that he followed the instructions given him by Leon Opolsky, a corporate attorney in California working for the Watchtower. Why the name of the Kingdom Hall corporation was changed.

San Mateo Court Trial Testimony – Segment 7

[18 pages] Cobb cross-examines Brede. Court acknowledges that the names on the corporate documents were out of phase between September, 2010 and January, 2011. Cobb states that the documents show that the “English” congregation/corporation had no standing before January, 2011. Cobb tries to have a bound volume of 1995 Watchtowers admitted into evidence. Smith objects, calling the book “hearsay.” Court rules for Smith. Smith wants to call George Stock as a witness to confirm that the takeover met Watchtower guidelines. Court rules that his testimony would be duplicative and Stock is dismissed. Cobb tries to submit a document showing that the Watchtower supports following corporate law. Smith and Rouse object to its admission as “hearsay.” Court rules that document has no foundation. Rouse sums up defense by claiming that current law gives religions the power to decide the rules over everything it controls and that local elders or members can not take their complaints to court. Cobb counters that if the state rules on a point of law that is not aimed to restrict a religion or belief, then state law applies. Court rules that Cobb’s example of case-law does not apply. Court rules that the Watchtower Society is a hierarchical organization and everything they do falls under First Amendment protection. Court dismisses the case in favor of the Watchtower and the defendants. Court to issue order officially removing Cobb and confirming the new elders as corporation officers.

Court Trial Testimony – Full Version

9 thoughts on “Menlo Park Kingdom Hall: The State Lawsuit

  1. A reader from Germany has been kind enough to send us a cleaned-up and compressed version of the entire court case transcript. You’ll find the link at the bottom of the article. Please feel free to comment. Much more to come in the weeks ahead.

  2. yes A heirarchy just like the catholic church ! next time the watch tower starts talking about theocratic this and that and being difrerent from all other religeions, somebody needs to ask how ? how is your religeion different from all those others that you call false ? recently the oldest new testament bible was found dateing to like 395 ad and in it is a drawing of 3 crosses not poles,it sure looks like the society preached up a storm about jesus dieing on a pole onley to have worlds oldest bible show crosses.. did the society restore the divine name to true worship as claimed ? no they restored onley the use of a name that represents god and they changed the bible substituteing the word jehovah in places no tetragram apears ! what about the claim that their god is the god of true prophecy ? obviously their god is the god of of prophecys that dont come true.. so I simply have to ask how are jehovahs wittnesses diferant from any other religeion? I will answer my own qustion ! they are the onley religeion that dares to preach what they preach from door to door in jehovahs name! my god ! does the bible not say word for word that if someone should speak a thing in the name of jehovah and it does not happen then they are false prophets and you must not listen to them..I like the elders who started the menolo park case! the obviously knew that the w.b.t.s would musle their way out of any wrong doing, but not before showing themselfs to be religeious thugs dressed in false cloth of rightousness! The menelo park brothers in fact won the case by loseing they showed that the claimed earthly channel of jehovah would take no more mercy love or consideration in a court of law than the religeions they call false ! the conclusion of the matter is exactly what the attorney said… we are a heirarchy NO Differant than the catholic church !! so why should anybody continue to support this organization?

  3. @arimatthewdavies – now Since their is no thread on this topic I am going to post it right here.
    I am going to give you a down to earth perfectly selfish human reason why I say jehovah is the one true god… when I pray to jehovah to give me work to pay my bills in jesus name I consistantly get work to pay my bills ! when I dont pray I get random work calls and stay short of cash$ This lets me know that jehovah god cares about me even though I do little if anything to merrit his favor, this make me want jehovah as god as freind it makes me want to do something to show my apreciation ! Yes indeed what a motive for serveing god, you heard it said on the street money talks b.s. walks ? well my freinds lets be honest here if all jehovah has to offer is the hope that I might get resurected if I bust my butt doing kingdom hall stuff than I would honestly say no politley. but thats not the case jehovah healed me from drugs,he keeps me alive when I ought to die from poor health, he gives me work to buy stuff, he helped me get a house, a car, among many other needs,, again let me be real here the promise of liveing forever in a paradise earth figures very little in why Jehovah is my god and jesus my king, I dont even like the idea of liveing forever. to die is not a fearfull thing but a mercy from this never ending liveing zombie life,,
    My god is jehovah! my king is jesus ! because he does things for me, he is a freind ,the freind that dosent pack up and leave when things get tough.
    he is a god that I can go to church and sing songs about and mean it, he is a god that I can write blogs about and not be makeing up a story to entertain somebody, and lastly but not least he gave his own son to fix my mess and pay for it with his own life ! yes now that jesus did that I sure want to do everything I can to say thank you lord thank you !

  4. Where’s your martyr?…
    Where’s your white knight, determined to expose the TYRANY of Jehovah’s Witnesses?….
    Where’s the ‘SAVIOR OF THE UNIVERSE’?… Flash? Superman?….

    The streets are quiet, but with the sounds of keyboards typing…

    What a lonely place………………………

  5. From what I ahve read so far in this case, the judge is obviously biased toward Watchtower. Of that I am certain. The question remains, how did he get that way? There are only two factors that motivate people, one is fear, the other is greed. Either he has been threatened with negative consequences, or he has been bought.

  6. You guys are so retarded and I am so dumbfounded with whoever writes these articles and how they could be so unrealistic. First off how can this article be so twisted in the truth, and bitter towards an organization that just wants to do good and be good in general. Weather in court or knocking on peoples doors they show love and mean good, regardless if anyone personally agrees with their beliefs. Its besides the point if you personally believe something or not. And saying JW’s are like the Catholic Church is nothing more than a solid fact. Calvin Rouse is making a simple fact that its a religion and should be judged fairly as one. Its like comparing cars, you have many different types but they all take gas, and consist of the same things. Each car has a different name made by different people and they all are made up of different parts….lol but its still a damn car! And if you all knew how to read you’d see he never states they “changed their mind” but he gives them a name that applies to the subject being discussed. Calling them a theocratic organization plays no part in the discussion they were talking about. And it would make a normal person seem that you people are so pissed off at life that you cant find anything better to do with your time that be negative and over analyze. Good luck with making it in the real world! and as a side note I’ve met the attorney Calvin Rouse and I could not see him be anymore than a very down to earth and honest person. He is well known internationally for winning major cases on honesty and truth unlike most lawyers I’ve met and trust me, I’m in this business.

  7. JP…you sound like a bitter man….resorting to name calling and twisting things around to fit what you want to believe. That is sadly true with many JW’s. They’re calling their organization theocratic and then comparing themselves with hierachical religions to suit their cause, has everything to with their discussions! You can’t be both! Those of us who make comments on this site are enjoying our lives now in the real world. We are not as you say “pissed off’, only trying to help those like you who are being deceived.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments Protected by WP-SpamShield Spam Blocker