OK Monica you are not playing the strongest card against AA,people do get mugged in grocery stores and bars and all those other places they even get hit upon in church,ministers and priests take advantage of there power over children,so the dynamics in that regard have some similarities ,I use to hear that argument from AA people all the time,when I would bring up the Karla Brada case,the AA people”s argument was always, ,that could have happened in a church,yes it could, and that has happened in a church, however here is the argument you need to make,the priest or minister or bar owner or grocery store owner did not go to a judge and say send the offender to my church or my bar or my grocery,AA goes to the judges and says mandate the offender to AA and we will monitor there attendance,it is written in the AA pamphlet on working with the courts that any AA member may go to a judges and tell him to mandate offenders to AA..I have often wondered if the Brada attorny played that card and if not why?
,I have heard you touch on it but the strongest argument is the fact that it is written in the AA doctrine to approach the judges therefor initiating and enabling the offender,therefor AA plays a role in any crime committed against anyone attending AA,if there is one argument that will take AA down I believe that is it,there in lies the liability,it would likely take some sort of class action lawsuit ,maybe some up and coming young attorney to organize it,I have spoken to a few judges,but they wont admitt any wrong doing because the jails are full and they just want to get re elected by showing they are working with AA to curb drug and alcohal abuse.
Monica “- Thank you for pointing this out. I have already seen this but your specific point of view is helpful in Legal terms. Thank you. I have written this rebuttle so many times but it does take simplifying it and tossing it back in the perfect layer of words. Connecting each dot to dot – but as you say. ” from AA to the courts ” not blaming the courts. “