Steven Unthank & the FDS Legal Vulnerability

In 2011, a former Jehovah's Witness in Australia pursued an extraordinary private criminal prosecution that inadvertently exposed a structural vulnerability at the intersection of Watchtower theology and corporate law. By naming the "Faithful and Discreet Slave" as a defendant in a child protection case, Steven Unthank forced the organization's legal team into a courtroom admission that appeared to contradict decades of published doctrine. Within twelve months, the Governing Body announced the most significant redefinition of the Faithful and Discreet Slave in modern Watchtower history. Whether the two events are connected remains a matter of debate — but the timeline has drawn sustained attention from researchers and former members.

Background: Victoria's Working with Children Laws

In 2005, the Australian state of Victoria enacted the Working with Children Act 2005, requiring individuals who work with or supervise children in any capacity — including in religious settings — to undergo police background checks and obtain a Working with Children Check card. Schools, sports clubs, and religious organizations across the state complied with the new requirements.^[1]

Jehovah's Witness elders in Victoria, however, largely did not comply. According to accounts from Steven Unthank and contemporaneous reports, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia sent correspondence to congregations advising that elders' door-to-door ministry constituted "personal ministry" rather than organizational activity, and that individual elders could voluntarily apply for checks if they chose. In practice, compliance among JW elders remained minimal for approximately three years (2005–2008) — a period during which elders continued to supervise children at Kingdom Hall meetings and in field service without background screening.^[2]

This non-compliance took on particular significance in light of what would later be revealed by the Australian Royal Commission: the organization held internal records of over 1,006 alleged perpetrators of child sexual abuse within Jehovah's Witnesses in Australia, not one of whom had been reported to police by the organization.^[3]

Steven Unthank

Steven Unthank was a former Jehovah's Witness and a carpenter by trade, living in regional Victoria. He had experienced child sexual abuse at the hands of a JW elder — a man who, rather than being disciplined or reported to authorities, subsequently rose through the organizational hierarchy to become a director of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia and a member of the Australian branch committee.^[4]

Unthank attempted to have the Victorian Office of Public Prosecutions take up the matter of elder non-compliance with Working with Children laws. When authorities declined to prosecute, Unthank pursued an avenue rarely used in Australian law: a private criminal prosecution. Under Australian legal procedure, a private citizen may bring criminal charges, but the procedural hurdles are substantial — the applicant must demonstrate that the relevant authorities are unwilling to act and must present a credible case, all without the resources of a prosecutor's office.^[2]

After years of navigating these requirements, the Chief Magistrate granted Unthank standing to bring the case forward. He filed seven charges against five JW entities — both incorporated bodies and, critically, unincorporated ones.^[5]

Recommended Reading

Burning Down the House

by Bethany Leger ( @stoptheshunning)

Coping with toxic family dynamics, estrangement, and rebuilding your life. For anyone dealing with the fallout of leaving a high-control group.

View on Amazon →

The Legal Vulnerability

To understand the significance of Unthank's legal strategy, it is necessary to examine how Watchtower theology intersected with corporate law under the pre-2012 doctrine.

For decades, the Watchtower had taught that the "Faithful and Discreet Slave" (FDS) — a concept drawn from Jesus' parable in Matthew 24:45–47 — consisted of all anointed Christians, numbering approximately 144,000 (with several thousand believed to be alive on earth at any given time). This was not a corporation, a registered charity, or a legal entity. It was an unincorporated body of individuals scattered across every country in the world.^[6]

Simultaneously, the organization taught that the FDS had been "appointed over all the master's belongings" — an appointment understood as having already occurred in 1919. "All the master's belongings" was interpreted to include all organizational assets: Kingdom Halls, Assembly Halls, branch offices, printing facilities, real estate holdings, and financial reserves worldwide.^[7]

These two doctrinal positions, taken together, created what legal commentators have identified as a structural vulnerability. Under common-law principles governing unincorporated associations, such a body can be served with legal process through any of its members. If the FDS was a real body of people — as published Watchtower theology maintained — and if that body held doctrinal possession of all organizational assets, then theoretically any anointed Jehovah's Witness anywhere in the world could be served legal papers on behalf of the entire class, and a judgment against the FDS could potentially attach to the organization's worldwide assets.^[2]

This legal implication appears not to have been anticipated by the organization. The FDS doctrine had existed in a theological context for nearly a century, while corporate asset protection operated in a separate legal context. Unthank's case brought the two into direct collision.

The Court Proceedings

Among the entities Unthank charged was the Faithful and Discreet Slave itself — not as a metaphor, but as a named defendant. To effect service, he presented the legal papers to an elderly anointed Jehovah's Witness woman living in Victoria. Under the legal principles governing unincorporated associations, this constituted valid service on the entire class.^[5]

The October 11, 2011 Hearing

The hearing took place at the Latrobe Valley Magistrates' Court. In an unusual inversion, Unthank — the former Witness bringing the prosecution — argued in favor of the FDS's existence as a genuine body of people with real authority over the worldwide congregation. His legal strategy required the FDS to be a real, servable entity; if it was real, it could be charged, and its assets could be exposed to liability.^[5]

The Watchtower's legal team, represented by Vincent Toole Solicitors, took the opposite position. Through their solicitors, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society told the court that the Faithful and Discreet Slave was not a real body of people. It was, they argued, merely a "theological arrangement" — a concept, not an entity capable of being served or charged.^[5]

Multiple accounts from attendees report that Jehovah's Witnesses present in the gallery reacted audibly to this characterization. For active Witnesses — taught through decades of Watchtower study articles that the FDS was God's appointed channel on earth, that obedience to the slave was essential for divine approval, and that "Jehovah God and Jesus Christ completely trust the faithful and discreet slave" — hearing their own organization's legal team describe it as a mere "arrangement" was jarring.^[5][8]

The Watchtower's legal team also denied that the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses existed or operated within Victoria or Australia — an argument the magistrate did not accept.^[5]

The 2012 Redefinition

At the 128th Annual Meeting on October 6, 2012, the Governing Body announced what it presented as a major doctrinal clarification. The Faithful and Discreet Slave was no longer all anointed Christians. It was exclusively the Governing Body — a small group of men at world headquarters in New York. Additionally, the teaching that the FDS had already been "appointed over all the master's belongings" was revised: that appointment was now a future event, not something that had occurred in 1919. The formal publication of this new teaching appeared in the July 15, 2013 Watchtower.^[9]

For a full treatment of the doctrinal history and implications of this change, see The "Faithful and Discreet Slave" — Shifting Identity.

How the Redefinition Addressed the Legal Exposure

Observers have noted that the 2012 redefinition resolved both components of the legal vulnerability Unthank had exploited:

1. The FDS was no longer an unincorporated body. Under the new teaching, the FDS consisted of a small number of identifiable individuals at headquarters — not a diffuse, worldwide class servable through any member in any jurisdiction.

1. The FDS no longer possessed "all the master's belongings." By pushing the "appointment over all belongings" into the future, the doctrinal link between the FDS and organizational assets was severed. Even if the FDS could be served, it no longer held doctrinal claim to the organization's worldwide property and finances.^[10]

The Asset Protection Theory

A number of researchers and former members have argued that the timing of the 2012 redefinition is more than coincidental — that the legal threat posed by Unthank's case was a significant factor in motivating or accelerating the doctrinal change.^[10][11]

Proponents of this theory point to the following:

• The FDS doctrine had been stable for approximately 85 years (1927–2012) before being abruptly redefined.
• Unthank's case demonstrated a concrete mechanism by which the old doctrine could expose billions of dollars in global assets to legal liability.
• The Watchtower's own legal team effectively denied the doctrine in court in October 2011 — a full year before the official announcement.
• The redefinition perfectly resolved both components of the legal vulnerability (unincorporated servable body + doctrinal asset ownership).
• The entire sequence — legal exposure, courtroom denial, doctrinal redefinition, vulnerability closed — occurred within approximately twelve months.

Counterarguments

Several counterarguments have been raised:

The shift was already in motion. Beginning around 2009, Watchtower publications had begun subtly narrowing the FDS definition. A February 2009 article asked whether individual anointed members should "trust the slave appointed over them" — language that positioned the Governing Body above the broader anointed class. A June 2009 article stated, "The slave refers only to the Governing Body." These shifts predated Unthank's court case by two years.^[12][13]

Correlation does not prove causation. No internal Watchtower documents have surfaced confirming that legal liability motivated the doctrinal change. The Governing Body's official explanation — that progressive Bible study led to a refined understanding — cannot be disproven from external evidence alone.

Other legal pressures existed independently. The broader landscape of child sexual abuse litigation against the Watchtower, including the Candace Conti case (2012) and mounting scrutiny from Barbara Anderson's advocacy and the 2002 Dateline NBC investigation, may have contributed to organizational changes without any single case being decisive.^[14][15]

However, proponents note that a gradual doctrinal evolution and an accelerating legal trigger are not mutually exclusive — the organization may have been leaning in this direction while Unthank's case provided the urgent, concrete reason to finalize the change. They also note that as late as February 2012, published Watchtower material still referenced the "faithful and discreet slave class" — the collective formulation — suggesting the formal break had not yet been made even months after the courtroom admission.^[16]

Connection to the Australian Royal Commission

Unthank's years of advocacy around child protection within the Jehovah's Witness community preceded and, according to some accounts, helped pave the way for the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, which launched its Case Study 29 into Jehovah's Witnesses in 2015. The Commission's findings — including the revelation that the organization held records of 1,006 alleged perpetrators, none of whom had been reported to police — brought unprecedented public scrutiny to the organization's child protection failures in Australia.^[3]

Unthank has continued his advocacy through the Say Sorry campaign (with fellow advocate Steven Kaput) and a formal submission to the Australian Productivity Commission regarding the charitable status of religious organizations.^[17][18]

A Notable Footnote

During the proceedings, the magistrate reportedly took the unusual step of suggesting to Unthank that criminal charges could be brought against individual members of the Governing Body by name, rather than against the unincorporated body. Unthank has stated that the only barrier to pursuing this avenue was a lack of financial resources.^[4]

Timeline

See Also

• The "Faithful and Discreet Slave" — Shifting Identity — Full doctrinal history of the FDS teaching
• Child Sexual Abuse — Systemic Failures & Cover-Up — The broader pattern of institutional abuse response
• Legal Battles & Financial Penalties — Other major legal challenges faced by the organization
• The Governing Body — Structure, History & Power — The body that declared itself the sole faithful slave

References