Update on Souza’s Case: Inside the Lawsuit Taking on Watchtower Leadership

Photo of the JW.org sign at Bethel, Warwick NY

Article published and written by: Miss Usato

This is an update outlining the allegations, legal maneuvering, and broader implications of a case challenging Jehovah’s Witness leadership over claims of abuse and institutional cover-up. A major civil lawsuit filed in the Southern District of New York has thrust the leadership and organizational practices of Jehovah’s Witnesses into the legal spotlight. The plaintiff, Stella Cristina Gomes de Souza, is seeking no less than $100 million in damages, claiming decades of harm tied to childhood sexual abuse and institutional cover-ups.

The Timeline

This Article will be updated when more news is presented.

Click here to see All Documents on this topic

November 12, 2025 — Complaint Filed

Stella Cristina Gomes de Souza filed a federal civil complaint (Case No. 1:25-cv-09458) against three defendants:

Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, Inc.
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc.
The Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses
in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging repeated child sexual abuse and subsequent organizational concealment.

The suit alleges that beginning at age 12 in Brazil, Ms. Souza was raped and sexually assaulted by a Circuit Overseer, a senior ministerial role entrusted with supervising multiple congregations. It further claims that Jehovah’s Witness leadership knowingly failed to notify authorities or intervene effectively, instead shuffling internal reports up the hierarchy and taking steps that protected the institution rather than the victim.

November 13–19, 2025 — Summons and First Amended Complaint

Following filing, Ms. Souza’s legal team issued requests for summonses for all three defendants. An amended complaint incorporating exhibits was also prepared to clarify and support the factual allegations.

Service affidavits show that:

Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. was served in late November.
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, Inc. and The Governing Body were served via the New York Secretary of State after personal service proved difficult.

November 26, 2025 — Public Reporting and Commentary

Many Youtube activists and sites, including AvoidJW shed light on this lawsuit. We stressed that this is not just a single perpetrator case but a systemic criticism of how reports of abuse were handled and routed within the organizational hierarchy. Jehovah’s Witnesses

Internal organizational policies allegedly required abuse reports to be routed first to higher ecclesiastical offices instead of authorities, a practice that contributes longstanding patterns of mishandling such cases.

Other advocate links on this topic: KimMikey, TotallyAwakeEXJW, JwThoughts, FixingMyFaith +2, ExJW Analyzer, Kingdom Wisdom, StopTheShunning

December 11–12, 2025 — Defendants Seek Pre-Motion Conferences

Both the Governing Body and Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York filed letters with the court requesting pre-motion conferences ahead of anticipated motions to dismiss. Their filings argue that Ms. Souza’s claims are time-barred under New York law and that the chosen forum is inconvenient, as many alleged events and witnesses are abroad.

December 18, 2025 — Plaintiff Files Response

Ms. Souza’s counsel, McLaughlin & Stern, LLP, filed a detailed opposition to the defense letters, calling the anticipated motions “baseless” and arguing:

The statute of limitations should be equitably tolled given extraordinary circumstances including prolonged abuse, coercive authority, and severe psychological trauma.
Service of process was reasonably accomplished despite obstacles.
Venue in New York is appropriate because key decisions, including the alleged cover-up and reassignment were directed from New York leadership.
The complaint plausibly connects acts and omissions by the Governing Body to the harms alleged.

December 19, 2025 — Court Sets Motion Schedule

Rather than holding pre-motion conferences, Judge Nelson Stephen Román issued an order waiving that requirement and setting a formal briefing schedule:

Defendants’ motions to dismiss due by January 21, 2026
Plaintiff’s opposition due February 24, 2026
Defendants’ replies due March 10, 2026

What is this about

At its core, this lawsuit is not simply about one survivor or one abuser. It asks a far broader question: whether a global religious organization can be held legally accountable in U.S. federal court for decisions made at the highest levels of its leadership, even when the underlying abuse occurred outside the United States.

Unlike many abuse cases that end with the individual perpetrator, Stella Cristina Gomes de Souza’s lawsuit directly targets the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses and Watchtower entities based in New York and Pennsylvania, alleging that leadership knew about the abuse, controlled the response, and chose concealment over protection. If the case survives early dismissal, discovery could reveal how abuse reports were handled—or suppressed across the organization, shifting the focus from isolated wrongdoing to institutional responsibility.

Much of the current legal fight reflects an attempt by the defendants to avoid scrutiny by leaning on procedural technicalities rather than confronting the substance of the allegations. Souza has made clear that the extreme realities of her childhood—prolonged sexual abuse, coercive religious authority, fear of retaliation, and severe, lasting psychological trauma—directly delayed her ability to come forward, a reality courts increasingly recognize in cases involving high-control institutions. The question of venue is equally critical: keeping the case in New York affirms that organizations cannot centralize authority and decision-making in the United States while attempting to shift accountability elsewhere. For survivors, the stakes are profound. This case directly challenges the notion that the passage of time erases responsibility or that institutional silence is legally harmless. While the court has yet to rule, one point is already unmistakable: these arguments can no longer be dismissed or buried.

This Case Targets the Decision-Makers, Not Just the Crime

Most abuse cases stop with the individual perpetrator. This one doesn’t.

Ms. Souza’s lawsuit explicitly targets:

The Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses
Watchtower entities based in New York and Pennsylvania

The core allegation is not only that abuse occurred, but that organizational leadership knew about it, controlled the response, and chose concealment over protection. If the case survives dismissal, discovery could expose how abuse reports were handled, escalated, suppressed, or redirected at the highest levels.

Translation: this case aims at institutional responsibility, not “bad apples.”

The Statute-of-Limitations Fight Is a Proxy War

Watchtower’s primary defense so far is procedural: the abuse happened too long ago.

The plaintiff’s response reframes that argument as legally and morally hollow, pointing to:

Severe childhood trauma
Coercive religious authority
Fear of retaliation
PTSD, suicide attempts, and psychological incapacity to come forward

Courts increasingly recognize that trauma delays disclosure, especially in closed, high-control environments. If the court agrees, it reinforces a growing legal consensus: institutions don’t get a free pass just because their silence worked for years.

New York Is the Strategic Battleground, and That Matters

Defendants argue the case belongs in Brazil. The plaintiff argues New York is central because:

Organizational decisions were made there
Leadership oversight flowed through New York headquarters
Abusers were reassigned, not reported, by centralized authority

If the court keeps the case in New York, it signals that global religious organizations can’t offshore accountability while retaining centralized control.

That’s a big deal, not just for Jehovah’s Witnesses, but for any multinational religious or nonprofit entity operating through a U.S. hub.

If the Case Proceeds, Discovery Is the Real Earthquake

Right now, this is a pre-discovery fight. No internal documents. No sworn testimony. No depositions.

If motions to dismiss fail:

Internal policies could be disclosed
Communications between elders, branches, and headquarters could surface
Patterns of handling abuse reports could be examined under oath

From a risk-management perspective, this is why the defense is pushing hard now. Discovery is where narratives meet receipts.

For Survivors, This Case Signals a Shift

For many former Jehovah’s Witnesses and survivors of abuse in high-control religious groups, the message is clear:

Time alone does not erase accountability
Institutional silence can itself be actionable harm
Centralized religious authority can create legal exposure

Even if this case never reaches trial, its existence, and the arguments being made, already reshape what survivors are told is “possible.”