Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

MormonLeaks: Former Mormon Mission President Admitting to Inappropriate Interactions with Women


Recommended Posts

Just now, rockpond said:

All good and fair statements.

Does the possibility that the woman's accusations and Bishop's admissions are true give you any pause?

Not really because i'm more of an 'innocent until proven guilty' kind of person (that's just naturally how I approach most things).  

If they are true, then he's not going to get away with a single thing and it'll be all the more worse for him because he didn't confess or repent.  There is nothing that can be done legally if they are true either so I don't feel compelled to come at the topic from the point of view of 'what if he's guilty?'  There are no good answers to that question so, (again, from a person who usually gives people the benefit of the doubt or at least tries to stay neutral), I don't see any reason to spend much time on it.

I tend to be pretty pragmatic with these kinds of things (for good and ill).
 

Link to comment
29 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Maybe it's my lack of imagination, but I don't believe that even under those circumstances anyone would answer the question "Did you molest her?" by saying "yes" if "yes" wasn't the truthful answer.   

If a person is 85 years old man suffering from dementia and under the influence of medication, and if a stranger used false pretenses to lure him into a private, one-on-one "interview," and if during that interview the interviewer switched gears and (while physically alone with the 85 year old) began accusing the man of rape, telling the man that she had previously threatened to murder him, and repeatedly demanded that he respond to her accusations in a prescribed way (namely, that he admit to the accused behavior and apologize for it), it doesn't seem to take much imagination to theorize that the man just might . . . respond to her those accusations in the prescribed way.  Those accusations may well be true, or partially true, or not true at all.  But the circumstances under which the "confession" of Bro. Bishop was extracted makes it necessarily suspect.

29 minutes ago, cinepro said:

There are a million reasons and situations in which a person who is guilty of attempted rape and molestation would lie about it, or refuse to answer such a line of questioning.  

There are also reasons for an innocent person to deny accusations of rape, or refuse to listen to accusations of such.

I think the presumption of innocence should apply here.

29 minutes ago, cinepro said:

If he were totally out of it and just couldn't remember anything, then I could see an argument that she was berating a vegetable who didn't know where he was or what he was saying. 

There is quite a broad spectrum of mental competency.  

29 minutes ago, cinepro said:

But he clearly remembers many people and situations from decades past, including their names and what happened, and knows there are other situations they aren't referring to. 

Actually no, he may not.  We don't know that.  His mental competency may be compromised, whether incident to age, or dementia, or medication, or coercive questioning while physically isolated and alone with an accuser who specifically reminded him that she had threatened to murder him.

Have you ever worked with older people?  Or anyone with failing mental faculties?  Their memory, their ability to recollect, can be profoundly hit and miss.  My wife has fond memories of her freshman year at BYU, during which she made weekly trips to a rest home to visit with an elderly woman named Chloe.  Chloe would regale my wife with stories of her early marriage during World War II.  Chloe would get up out of her bed and show my wife dance moves from the 1940s.  Chloe would sing songs from that era, too, and had the lyrics down pat.  And the next week, my wife would go back and hear the exact same stories, dance the same moves, and listen to the same lyrics as the week before.  You see, Chloe did not remember my wife from week to week, even after several months of such visits.  Chloe also did not remember her children by sight (though she did remember their names, and her husband's name).  

I cannot begin to imagine what Chloe would have said if a stranger had lured into a room under false pretenses of friendliness, only to then turn on her, make accusations against her, tell her that he had previously threatented to murder her, and demand that she admit to the accusations and apologize for them.  Her memories were fragmented.  Sporadic.  Very hit or miss.  Given these considerations, and the coercive/threatening nature of the "interview," I don't think I would give much credence to any purported "confessions" the stranger may have extracted from her. 

29 minutes ago, cinepro said:

The interviewer isn't creating false memories and implanting them and reinforcing them.  He is the one introducing new information into the conversation (and is even clear that he doesn't remember the attempted rape described by the interviewer).

Take a look at pp. 25-26:

Quote

INTERVIEWER: Well one thing I learned is that people when they have some kind of an addiction, like my step-father was violently sexually abusive. And you and I talked about that at MTC. And ...

JB: We did?

INTERVIEWER: Yes, we did, yeah.

JB: There's my bad memory again.

INTERVIEWER: There's your bad memory, anyway, yeah you helped me understand that it wasn't my fault, which was really amazing. But you also kind of groomed me, a little bit, and you took me down into the basement, it wasn't really a basement, but it was downstairs, a little storage room.

JB: Mm-hmm.

INTERVIEWER: I'm not angry with you, because I think ...

JB: You ought to be ...

INTERVIEWER: Well maybe, but I'm not. I'm over a lot of things that have happened to me. But you hurt me. And I need an apology.

JB: Well I apologize, from the depths of my heart, I can't remember what it was but I'm ...

And p. 27:

Quote

INTERVIEWER: Do you remember the movies in the basement? The DVD, the VHS player and the TV? No. Do you remember tearing my blouse, pulling up my skirt, ripping the back of my skirt and trying to rape me? But you didn't, because you didn't have a fu ll erection. You don't remember that?

JB: No. Let me tell you what I do remember.

Also p. 30:

Quote

INTERVIEWER: No one ever said hey what about this woman you tried to rape at the MTC?  Nobody ever said that? No. So is it a coverup?

JB: Well I don't, I don't know.

And p. 31:

Quote

INTERVIEWER: In a position to ... let me tell you some of the things that you did in MTC, and I need closure, I'm not angry but I am a broken woman because of the things that you did. Okay one of the things you did, what you told me, that you and other leaders, and I didn't know what leaders meant at the time, would go to a place, and I don't know if it was a hot tub or a hot springs, in Wyoming. Did you remember that?

JB: No.

INTERVIEWER: Had that ever happened? Why would you tell me that then?

JB: I don't know.

INTERVIEWER: Okay. There was woman in the hot tub, or at the springs or whatever with you and these other people who took her bikini top off. You don't remember that?

JB: I had an experience similar to that, but it wasn't in a hot tub.

INTERVIEWER: What was it in? What was it?

JB: She, well it was in Utah, it wasn't in Wyoming.

Also take a look at p. 42:

Quote

INTERVIEWER: You ... with your addiction, a predator. You were a predator. You preyed on vulnerable women, broken women, who you thought were not strong, and could not -- you told me that no one would believe me.

JB: I did?

INTERVIEWER: Yes you did.

JB: I apologize for that.

Quite a few prompts, these.

29 minutes ago, cinepro said:

I don't know why you've decided this is the prudent issue on which to take up the defense,

I'm not defending Bro. Bishop.  I am declining to condemn him based on highly suspect "evidence."

29 minutes ago, cinepro said:

but keep in mind that this is the start of the process, not the end. 

What "process?"  

29 minutes ago, cinepro said:

I'm all for not "judging" until the story plays out, but it's not premature to judge him provisionally based on what he admits to.

His admission is highly suspect.  

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Wouldn't there be a companion to the girl at the MTC? Should could be interviewed to corroborate Bishop at the MTC, and possibly to the girl's state of mind after the alleged incident.  (of course the 30+years time laps would make her memories unreliable).

This is why we have a statute of limitations, to get the trial when the evidence is fresh.  

The most disturbing thing to me is the the idea that this girl is experienced with accusing men falsely of this particular crime. If that were true, then all credibility of the accuser would be lost and there would be no hope of prosecuting the case unless a more credible witness were to appear. 

 

When I was at the MTC my companion had a mental breakdown and I sat in the waiting room, of the psych area, for over 5 hours while he was in the office with the therapist. If they had left or whatever I don't remember if there was another exit or what, so if they had left maybe I wouldn't have even seen them. So, possibly some dirty birdie business could have happened? Or maybe they just called her down to meet with him, the mission rules of the 1980's wasn't like it is today

Link to comment
1 minute ago, smac97 said:

If a person is 85 years old man suffering from dementia and under the influence of medication, and if a stranger used false pretenses to lure him into a private, one-on-one "interview," and if during that interview the interviewer switched gears and (while physically alone with the 85 year old) began accusing the man of rape, telling the man that she had previously threatened to murder him, and repeatedly demanded that he respond to her accusations in a prescribed way (namely, that he admit to the accused behavior and apologize for it), it doesn't seem to take much imagination to theorize that the man just might . . . respond to her those accusations in the prescribed way.  Those accusations may well be true, or partially true, or not true at all.  But the circumstances under which the "confession" of Bro. Bishop was extracted makes it necessarily suspect.

There are also reasons for an innocent person to deny accusations of rape, or refuse to listen to accusations of such.

I think the presumption of innocence should apply here.

There is quite a broad spectrum of mental competency.  

Actually no, he may not.  We don't know that.  His mental competency may be compromised, whether incident to age, or dementia, or medication, or coercive questioning while physically isolated and alone with an accuser who specifically reminded him that she had threatened to murder him.

Have you ever worked with older people?  Or anyone with failing mental faculties?  Their memory, their ability to recollect, can be profoundly hit and miss.  My wife has fond memories of her freshman year at BYU, during which she made weekly trips to a rest home to visit with an elderly woman named Chloe.  Chloe would regale my wife with stories of her early marriage during World War II.  Chloe would get up out of her bed and show my wife dance moves from the 1940s.  Chloe would sing songs from that era, too, and had the lyrics down pat.  And the next week, my wife would go back and hear the exact same stories, dance the same moves, and listen to the same lyrics as the week before.  You see, Chloe did not remember my wife from week to week, even after several months of such visits.  Chloe also did not remember her children by sight (though she did remember their names, and her husband's name).  

I cannot begin to imagine what Chloe would have said if a stranger had lured into a room under false pretenses of friendliness, only to then turn on her, make accusations against her, tell her that he had previously threatented to murder her, and demand that she admit to the accusations and apologize for them.  Her memories were fragmented.  Sporadic.  Very hit or miss.  Given these considerations, and the coercive/threatening nature of the "interview," I don't think I would give much credence to any purported "confessions" the stranger may have extracted from her. 

Take a look at pp. 25-26:

And p. 27:

Also p. 30:

And p. 31:

Also take a look at p. 42:

Quite a few prompts, these.

I'm not defending Bro. Bishop.  I am declining to condemn him based on highly suspect "evidence."

What "process?"  

His admission is highly suspect.  

Thanks,

-Smac

My Dad is 85, he doesn't tell the same stories over and over, but younger people than that do! My Dad is an exception to health though, he is really, really well for his age, his eyesight is dimming but we can't compare people though.Then again we'll sustain a 93 yr to be the President of the Church next week, so who knows if we'll be regaled with the same story over and over or not

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

That's the "most disturbing" part of all this for you?  The possibility that a mission and MTC president was sexually abusing young women isn't more or at least equally disturbing?  The fact that he may have continued to do it while high ranking church leaders knew about his proclivities doesn't rank up there?

When I said disturbing, I was trying to imagine myself taking this girl's case. I was talking about how I would approach representing her.  Her history of false accusations would be my biggest hangup from a professional point of view.

That would give me the most pause if I were to consider advocating for her.  An attorney cannot lie to the court, and I would be worried about doing that.

 

Link to comment
29 minutes ago, Exiled said:

He was being interviewed in a retirement home, right?  So, there are many staff that could have helped Bishop stop the interview at any time if he felt threatened. 

How do you know?

29 minutes ago, Exiled said:

Also, there is no evidence of dementia other than what you wish to believe

There is also no evidence of rape other than what you wish to believe.

The difference here is that I am applying a presumption of innocence.  You are not.

29 minutes ago, Exiled said:

regarding someone who is old and cannot remember some facts of one of his possible exploits.

I don't know the man.  I had never heard of him before this story came out.

I am not defending him.  I am declining to judge or condemn him based on highly suspect evidence.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, Danzo said:

The most disturbing thing to me is the the idea that this girl is experienced with accusing men falsely of this particular crime. If that were true, then all credibility of the accuser would be lost and there would be no hope of prosecuting the case unless a more credible witness were to appear.

Who did she falsely accuse of this?

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Duncan said:

When I was at the MTC my companion had a mental breakdown and I sat in the waiting room, of the psych area, for over 5 hours while he was in the office with the therapist. If they had left or whatever I don't remember if there was another exit or what, so if they had left maybe I wouldn't have even seen them. So, possibly some dirty birdie business could have happened? Or maybe they just called her down to meet with him, the mission rules of the 1980's wasn't like it is today

You would not be able to testify what happened in the therapist's office but you could confirm that he went to the office and spent 5 hours there.  That could be useful to corroborate others testimony.  For example if you said he was only there for 30 minutes that would not leave a lot of time for mischief, but 5 hours could be enough time. It wouldn't be enough to prove anything but it could be part of a circumstantial case.

Link to comment
49 minutes ago, omni said:

You keep bringing up the issue with the interview being conducted under false pretenses, but what relevance does this have with whether or not the allegations are true?

False pretenses + repeated reminders of threats to murder him + accusations of rape + demands for apology = potentially coercive environment.

49 minutes ago, omni said:

Additionally you keep bringing up dementia.  While more information may come out in the future, at this point there is no evidence for dementia other than the fact that Bishop is old and occasionally has issues remembering events that occurred 30 years ago.

My understanding is that his son has indicated that there is some dementia (and/or that Bro. Bishop may have been under the influence of medication at the time of the interview).

49 minutes ago, omni said:

I find it telling that Bishop's son inferred medication may have played a role in his father's responses, but no mention of dementia.  

I am fine with retracting my remarks about potential dementia if my recollection is incorrect.

49 minutes ago, omni said:

Also, didn't Bishop mention he was getting married in a few weeks?

Yes.

49 minutes ago, omni said:

We can't say for certain whether the allegations are true,

We also can't say that they are false.  But the presumption of innocence carries the day.  So in the absence of competent, probative evidence, I will presume him to be innocent.

49 minutes ago, omni said:

but it appears from the details the interviewer was able to provide (hot tubbing incident, dinners with his wife, the other sister missionary "molestation", etc.) that something inappropriate likely occurred.

Quite a variation in their recollections of those things.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, Gray said:

Who did she falsely accuse of this?

It was reported earlier that there were accusations that she had a history of accusing people of sexual misconduct. 

"Bishop adamantly denied the allegations through his son, Gregory Bishop, who questioned the woman's credibility, saying she has accused 10 other men of sexual assault, sexual harassment or assault without charges being filed and has sought cash settlements in other cases. In 2010, she threatened to kill Bishop, according to police records and her own statements."

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900013479/woman-levels-accusations-against-former-mtc-president.html

Edited by Danzo
Link to comment
Just now, Danzo said:

You would not be able to testify what happened in the therapist's office but you could confirm that he went to the office and spent 5 hours there.  That could be useful to corroborate others testimony.  For example if you said he was only there for 30 minutes that would not leave a lot of time for mischief, but 5 hours could be enough time. It wouldn't be enough to prove anything but it could be part of a circumstantial case.

that is true, I can definately remember that day! I talked to a lot people and read every magazine they had and even cut out some recipes from Chatelaine

Link to comment
58 minutes ago, Exiled said:

Assuming the statute of limitations was not an issue, could you bring yourself to view the accuser's side of things

Probably not.  Her (purported) prior history of making sex assault allegations (against ten other men), and the highly troubling behavior she exhibited (false pretenses, reminders of prior threats to murder him, etc.) would make her a very problematic client.

58 minutes ago, Exiled said:

or is the dementia possibility argument so powerful that it clouds everything else out in your mind?

Possible dementia is just one element.  The incident-to-old-age decline in mental acuity is another, as his possibly having been under the influence of medication.  And the coercive/threatening/manipulative environment in which the woman extracted his admissions.  And the 33-year gap.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Duncan said:

we want the truth!!! isn't he in that business?last time I checked the scriptures:lol:

I want to know what color of a star Kolob is but I am unlikely to get an answer if I ask. Wanting to know something does not, in my experience, mean God will tell me.

Plus, what good would it do at this point? If she is right he possibly gets excommunicated. No legal action is possible. It might help him repent but doubtful at this point. If she is wrong and he is innocent and they announce this she screams of a coverup, protecting him, false revelation, and whatever.

Nothing substantive happens either way.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Duncan said:

If  God cares about about this situation I hope he would give somebody at some point some guidance about it,

He very well may.  

1 hour ago, Duncan said:

but reading the Church Statement it doesn't appear that he has or if he has then why the "we don't know" approach?

That's an interesting imponderable.  What God does or does not do is sometimes that way, particularly if it is predicated on human beings presuming to pass moral judgments on Him.  He is omnipotent and omniscient.  And He loves us.  And He is the "God of Truth."  The scope of his knowledge and understanding, and His goodness, far surpasses ours.  

1 hour ago, Duncan said:

Like take all of the different investigations and say to God, we don't know what to make of this, I assume that God would respond? 

He may.  Or He may not.  I have found this quote from Joseph Smith to be helpful:

Quote

That which is wrong under one circumstance, may be, and often is, right under another. God said, 'Thou shalt not kill'; at another time He said, 'Thou shalt utterly destroy.' This is the principle on which the government of heaven is conducted—by revelation adapted to the circumstances in which the children of the kingdom are placed. Whatever God requires is right, no matter what it is, although we may not see the reason thereof till long after the events transpire.'

Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 256 (11 April 1842)

God may or may not provide public guidance on this issue.  On balance, I'd say "probably not."  Those who have stewardship and responsibilities may receive inspiration, but for the rest of us, I think not.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment
1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

I want to know what color of a star Kolob is but I am unlikely to get an answer if I ask. Wanting to know something does not, in my experience, mean God will tell me.

Plus, what good would it do at this point? If she is right he possibly gets excommunicated. No legal action is possible. It might help him repent but doubtful at this point. If she is wrong and he is innocent and they announce this she screams of a coverup, protecting him, false revelation, and whatever.

Nothing substantive happens either way.

I have never known the Holy Ghost to be involved in anything and something terrible has come from it, like do all the investigation you need and then if it is right, does that only work for primary and teens but when we become adults the Holy Ghost stops working? we've figured it out, it's okay we don't need you and look, it's now this big mess.

"[The gift of the Holy Ghost] is the greatest gift that can be bestowed upon man." —Wilford Woodruff @LDS Church history Twitter, accessed not ten minutes ago

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Not really because i'm more of an 'innocent until proven guilty' kind of person (that's just naturally how I approach most things).  

If they are true, then he's not going to get away with a single thing and it'll be all the more worse for him because he didn't confess or repent.  There is nothing that can be done legally if they are true either so I don't feel compelled to come at the topic from the point of view of 'what if he's guilty?'  There are no good answers to that question so, (again, from a person who usually gives people the benefit of the doubt or at least tries to stay neutral), I don't see any reason to spend much time on it.

I tend to be pretty pragmatic with these kinds of things (for good and ill).
 

I think you are correct to consider him innocent until proven guilty.  But we also need to apply that same courtesy to the woman.  We must also be open to the possibility that she was telling the truth and is innocent of the accusations being placed on her.  In that case, I think the possibility that she is an innocent victim and that her account of events is accurate, should also give us pause.

Link to comment
22 minutes ago, rockpond said:

That's the "most disturbing" part of all this for you?  The possibility that a mission and MTC president was sexually abusing young women isn't more or at least equally disturbing? 

I find this allegation very disturbing.

22 minutes ago, rockpond said:

The fact that he may have continued to do it while high ranking church leaders knew about his proclivities doesn't rank up there?

Elder Asay might have known.  All we have is A) the uncorroborated say-so of an interested party with suspect credibility (and, perhaps, some mental health issues of her own), and B) the absence of any record of Elder Asay meeting with this woman.  On balance, I'm not about to start worrying about "high ranking church leaders {knowing} about his proclivities."  Too speculative.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment
Just now, rockpond said:

I think you are correct to consider him innocent until proven guilty.  But we also need to apply that same courtesy to the woman.  We must also be open to the possibility that she was telling the truth and is innocent of the accusations being placed on her.  In that case, I think the possibility that she is an innocent victim and that her account of events is accurate, should also give us pause.

Agreed. Seems like here and elsewhere people are making up their minds based on limited information. Way too soon for that. 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Duncan said:

I have never known the Holy Ghost to be involved in anything and something terrible has come from it, like do all the investigation you need and then if it is right, does that only work for primary and teens but when we become adults the Holy Ghost stops working? we've figured it out, it's okay we don't need you and look, it's now this big mess.

"[The gift of the Holy Ghost] is the greatest gift that can be bestowed upon man." —Wilford Woodruff @LDS Church history Twitter, accessed not ten minutes ago

Maybe because the Holy Ghost knows when he should get involved. One of the perks of being a god. If a church disciplinary council was convened and a Stake President prayed to know What decision to make I could see the Holy Ghost gluing him in. In a public case like this with no disciplinary council announcing the “will of God” would seem more like pandering. Pointless sensationalism.

Link to comment
33 minutes ago, bluebell said:

1)-I've read that dementia does not just cause memory loss.  It can also cause false memories.

2)-There is a link between dementia and hyper sexuality (as Cal has repeatedly mentioned) and I'm unsure if that, coupled with false memories, could result in sexualized false memories.

The frightening thing about this is to think about what if the above happened to you? You wouldn't know it, and your descendants might think that you had done things you didn't.

A brother in my ward years ago (his father is a prominent Church member I won't identify) had a grandfather who was a patriarch in his 80s when dementia hit, and he suddenly shifted to running around the neighborhood in his garments and becoming a massive porn consumer --- whereas that had never been there before. While some might argue that something like that doesn't come out of nowhere, I believe him that in his case, it hadn't existed at all in any form, and it was part and parcel of the dementia. Scary thought to think "What if that happened to me?"

I hadn't thought of this before, but if false memories get factored into this, then, wow. And what would your kids and grandkids and great-grandkids think about you if you started sharing really bad false memories?

Not saying that this is what happened here. 

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, Danzo said:

It was reported earlier that there were accusations that she had a history of accusing people of sexual misconduct. 

"Bishop adamantly denied the allegations through his son, Gregory Bishop, who questioned the woman's credibility, saying she has accused 10 other men of sexual assault, sexual harassment or assault without charges being filed and has sought cash settlements in other cases. In 2010, she threatened to kill Bishop, according to police records and her own statements."

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900013479/woman-levels-accusations-against-former-mtc-president.html

So Bishop's son claims that she accused others of sexual assault.  Does he have any evidence? On what basis are you claiming that she falsely accused others? Did the others she accused admit to molesting women?

Link to comment
22 minutes ago, smac97 said:

How do you know?

There is also no evidence of rape other than what you wish to believe.

The difference here is that I am applying a presumption of innocence.  You are not.

I don't know the man.  I had never heard of him before this story came out.

I am not defending him.  I am declining to judge or condemn him based on highly suspect evidence.

Thanks,

-Smac

Did you listen to the audio yet? I'd like your opinion after listening, seems some on here just plain don't want to go there.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...