Written By: Miss Usato Last updated: September 18th, 2024
On September 12th, 2024, in Mozambique, the story continues with Former Jehovah’s Witness Mauricio Fernando, previously known as Warwick PIMO. In 2023, his YouTube channel was taken down after he released controversial videos that showed the organization’s true colors in their shunning practices. His local congregation elders tracked him down and interrogated him, leading to his disfellowshipping and eviction. After months of silence, Warwick PIMO reappeared, suing the elders who questioned him for several hours. If you want to read the article covering the beginning of his story, click here.
Below, he continues the process of bringing the elders to trial.
The Journal Principal did another broadcast on September 13th, 2024. Below is the translation in English:
“Unbelievable! In the district of Massinga, Inhambane, a former Jehovah’s Witnesses church member, is suing the religious organization and demanding compensation of about 2 million meticais (31,314.00 in U.S. Dollars). The organization is accused of unlawful access and threats.
The evidence session took place this Thursday at the District Court of Massinga. Three senior members of the Jehovah’s Witnesses were made defendants in the civil case for allegedly orchestrating the expulsion of the young man, Maurício Fernando, from the organization. He had been assigned to the translation department. This event took place last year after the young man published information on social media that went against the principles of the religion and compromised Jehovah’s Witnesses.”
*The published information mentioned is regarding the deleted videos. If you would like to learn more about the videos Mauricio leaked, click here.
“-The defendants, José Adriano Paulo, Orlando Semende Magaissa, and Adilson Domingos da Silva, in co-authorship, committed the following legal offenses: threats under article 195, paragraph 1, in absolute concurrence of offenses with the crime of unlawful access, under article 256, paragraph 1, both of the penal code. In the final arguments, the defense lawyers presented their case regarding the two crimes listed in the public prosecutor’s indictment for threats. It is a matter of state obedience. Religious institutions must conduct their programs and activities knowing that they operate within the state, and within this state, there are laws. These laws must be followed, and here, they were not. There cannot be a process that removes someone’s constitutional right to have religious faith and to be somewhere because individuals within the organization took action. Still, the organization is made up of people. He (Maurício) is also part of the organization. When he did what he did, it was an attempt to improve the organization. The organization itself is made up of specific individuals. We must consider these individuals separately, and that’s what we did. We removed the organization and addressed the people involved. In this way, we aim to create a better society.
The case’s judge, Arsénio Nhanombe, scheduled the verdict for September 24th.”
Mr. José Adriano Paulo, one of the accused elders, was called in for questioning. Mauricio mentioned that the judge skillfully managed the trial, particularly when José attempted to deceive him by lying and occasionally basing his responses on Bible verses. “The judge firmly insisted that he provide direct answers, repeatedly preventing him from using biblical references to avoid addressing the core issues; José claimed that a disfellowshipped person could still comment at congregational meetings and interact with all Jehovah’s Witnesses, insisting that nothing is lost after being disfellowshipped. This blatant lie startled several Jehovah’s Witnesses present in the courtroom.”
The hearing on September 12th began around 9 a.m. local time in Mozambique. Some Jehovah’s Witnesses from local congregations were present. Just before the hearing started, the lawyers representing the Jehovah’s Witnesses requested that the media not show the defendants’ faces, as they did not want to be publicly identified. The crimes they are accused of—unlawful access and threats—allow them the option of not appearing on camera. However, the judge denied the request.
When asked why a 12-hour interrogation was necessary for what was supposed to be an investigation of a sin, José responded that it was because Mauricio, the defendant, did not accept the truth. The prosecutor then inquired whether they were sure Mauricio had published the organization’s materials online before they called him, to which the answer was yes—they already had proof. The prosecutor followed up by asking why, if Mauricio had confessed after three hours, they continued interrogating him for several more hours. José had no response. The prosecutor also questioned why they didn’t suspend the meeting and prepare a report after Mauricio hesitated for so long, but again, there was no answer.
Another question arose about why Mauricio was not informed about the meeting and why they called him just before heading to the Kingdom Hall for the interrogation. They claimed they had called him earlier, but no evidence of this was presented to the court—no record of the call or its timing.
The questions were similar for the other two defendants, but their answers were inconsistent. Adilson Silva was asked why he ordered photos of Mauricio’s device to be taken, to which he responded that it was to confirm that everything had been deleted. When asked why he didn’t trust his fellow Witnesses’ word that the materials were deleted, he claimed he did trust them. “My lawyer asked if he was imitating Thomas from the Bible, and Adilson awkwardly laughed when questioned about the difference between Thomas’s doubt and his behavior.”
Mauricio said, “My lawyer inquired if they had any documents, notes, or reports saved regarding my case. They admitted that there was nothing. When asked why, if they believed they were acting correctly, they conducted everything secretively, leaving no trace; they had had no answer. They were all then questioned separately. When it was my turn, I was asked to clarify specific details that were still unclear, but that was all.”
We await the verdict on September 24th, 2024.
Link tied to this article:
Aiding Transparency to Watchtowers teachings. If you have additional information about this topic or would like to reach the author- Please email [email protected]
