Jeanne Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 To the OP...of course he did. Link to comment
SouthernMo Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 6 minutes ago, The Nehor said: I have heard of cases where the First Presidency overturned the results of a disciplinary council. It is not a rubber stamp process for them. That’s good to hear. Do you know if the stake president is the one who sends the notes/minutes/transcript of the council/hearing to the first presidency? Or does the stake clerk/executive secretary send those without the SP’s ability to edit those notes? Link to comment
Steve-o Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 1 minute ago, SouthernMo said: That’s good to hear. Do you know if the stake president is the one who sends the notes/minutes/transcript of the council/hearing to the first presidency? Or does the stake clerk/executive secretary send those without the SP’s ability to edit those notes? Why would that matter? Do you think the stake clerk would send something contradicting the stake president? 1 Link to comment
Hestia Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 No personal posts. Only warning. Link to comment
The Nehor Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Steve-o said: I don't understand. Why did the Stake President make the appeal for Sam Young? Wouldn't Sam Young do that himself? How would something like this work in a court case? I know it's not the same but it's the closest thing I can think of. Would a judge appeal to a higher court to have his own judgement appealed? Or would the person file their own appeal through their attorney? Does anyone know? At the conclusion of the disciplinary council if any discipline is imposed the Stake President (or Bishop) is required to explain the option and the process for an appeal. The person appealing is invited to explain the grounds why they are appealing in writing: specifically to explain any alleged errors and/or unfairness and give it to the person who conducted the council. This written document (has to be submitted within 30 days of the decision) is added to the recorded church records of the proceedings and any evidence and all of it is forwarded to the next highest level of authority for the appeal. Then the person or body to whom the appeal is made can decide to uphold the original decision, modify it, or ask it to be reheard. The First Presidency also has the power to delegate the appeal to another and ask them to submit a recommendation to the First Presidency. Local leaders are specifically told not to ask higher authorities to weigh in on the initial decision. The First Presidency has ultimate authority over decisions and is not specifically required to follow procedures. I know of a story I believe is true (but cannot specifically vouch for so take with some amount of sodium) where the First Presidency without the decision being appealed at all modified a decision (in this case ending all discipline). It is best not to think of it in the same way you would think of an appeal in a western legal system. Edited November 13, 2018 by The Nehor 2 Link to comment
MorningStar Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 That's really unfair because now he doesn't have an official letter to post all over the Internet. 3 Link to comment
CV75 Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 1 hour ago, Steve-o said: I don't understand. Why did the Stake President make the appeal for Sam Young? Wouldn't Sam Young do that himself? How would something like this work in a court case? I know it's not the same but it's the closest thing I can think of. Would a judge appeal to a higher court to have his own judgement appealed? Or would the person file their own appeal through their attorney? Does anyone know? The protocol is for the excommunicated person to put his request in writing to the presiding authority (Stake President) who sends it along to the First Presidency, who communicated back through the same channels. Ask your bishop to show you Handbook 1 for more details. 1 Link to comment
Danzo Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 1 minute ago, MorningStar said: That's really unfair because now he doesn't have an official letter to post all over the Internet. Don't worry, He'll find something to post on the internet. 2 Link to comment
mfbukowski Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 2 hours ago, bluebell said: Would a letter mailed to his home somehow have been more compassionate? He could deny receiving it or come up with some assertion that it violated his privacy or who knows what Whatever the church did, it would be wrong, you can count on that. And then he would respond to the response, because he would have an objective statement he could release to a blog etc- it would be never ending. Verbally tell him the result from a trusted source, like his Bishop and then let it go. No more to be said. 2 Link to comment
mfbukowski Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 4 minutes ago, MorningStar said: That's really unfair because now he doesn't have an official letter to post all over the Internet. Hard to tell if you are serious or being sarcastic. 1 Link to comment
MorningStar Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 11 minutes ago, mfbukowski said: Hard to tell if you are serious or being sarcastic. 😂 Definitely sarcastic. I'm sure he was awaiting the letter for publicity purposes - not because he felt that was the nicest way to do it. Maybe if they had sent a text? 1 Link to comment
SouthernMo Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 1 hour ago, Steve-o said: Why would that matter? Do you think the stake clerk would send something contradicting the stake president? Two things: One challenge a stake clerk would have is to accurately capture what is said (and how it’s said?). Not a criticism, but just human nature. They are not court reporters. The first presidency then would rely on this spotty record to make a decision. The other risk is that the SP, who presided over the council would have the naturally human tendency to record and report the happenings of the council in his brief to the first presidency in a one-sided way - no matter how fair he tries to be. I’m not leveling any specific accusations of impropriety in Sam Young’s case or others. I’m trying to understand the process of appeal as it’s currently operated to understand what the first presidency sees (and subsequently considers) when they receive an appeal. Link to comment
The Nehor Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 10 minutes ago, SouthernMo said: Two things: One challenge a stake clerk would have is to accurately capture what is said (and how it’s said?). Not a criticism, but just human nature. They are not court reporters. The first presidency then would rely on this spotty record to make a decision. The other risk is that the SP, who presided over the council would have the naturally human tendency to record and report the happenings of the council in his brief to the first presidency in a one-sided way - no matter how fair he tries to be. I’m not leveling any specific accusations of impropriety in Sam Young’s case or others. I’m trying to understand the process of appeal as it’s currently operated to understand what the first presidency sees (and subsequently considers) when they receive an appeal. The report is nothing like a court report. It is not a verbatim report. It is structured to focus only on general topics of discussion during the council. I have never heard of a Bishop or Stake President editing this report. Not saying it has never happened but I have never seen it and I have written a few. The First Presidency (or Stake President) is not considering the appeal based on judicial standards or irregularities. They use a bit of basic judgement and a lot of the Holy Ghost. 1 Link to comment
ksfisher Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 12 hours ago, SouthernMo said: Two things: One challenge a stake clerk would have is to accurately capture what is said (and how it’s said?). Not a criticism, but just human nature. They are not court reporters. The first presidency then would rely on this spotty record to make a decision. The other risk is that the SP, who presided over the council would have the naturally human tendency to record and report the happenings of the council in his brief to the first presidency in a one-sided way - no matter how fair he tries to be. I’m not leveling any specific accusations of impropriety in Sam Young’s case or others. I’m trying to understand the process of appeal as it’s currently operated to understand what the first presidency sees (and subsequently considers) when they receive an appeal. Copyright violation removed by mod 1 Link to comment
The Nehor Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 I would advise against posting verbatim information from Handbook 1. Link to comment
Calm Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 (edited) Quote But I'm shocked by the rudeness of how the action was communicated: in a hallway, verbally, from the man who X'd Sam Young. Not a very compassionate procedure. We have only Young's report on how it went down, do we not? I wouldn't assume it was an accurate portrayal (I wouldn't assume a description from the SP of Young's behaviour was accurate either, btw). I think a one on one, face to face exchange is usually more compassionate than a letter. Edited November 13, 2018 by Calm 1 Link to comment
Steve-o Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 13 minutes ago, The Nehor said: I would advise against posting verbatim information from Handbook 1. Why? What does it harm? Link to comment
Avatar4321 Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 I can’t say I’m shocked. I would have been surprised if it was overturned. the only one who can overturn it now is Sam through humble and sincere repentance. I hope he returns Link to comment
The Nehor Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 1 minute ago, Steve-o said: Why? What does it harm? The church protects its copyright. Link to comment
Calm Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 6 minutes ago, The Nehor said: The church protects its copyright. Mods haven't like it too much in the past as well though I don't think it is in the guidelines. Link to comment
SouthernMo Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 36 minutes ago, The Nehor said: The First Presidency (or Stake President) is not considering the appeal based on judicial standards or irregularities. They use a bit of basic judgement and a lot of the Holy Ghost. Nor should it be. But, the information one has in reviewing a decision affects one’s perception of the Holy Ghost. Link to comment
ksfisher Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 29 minutes ago, The Nehor said: I would advise against posting verbatim information from Handbook 1. I don't see how it does any harm in this case, and could help clear up confusion. I could paraphrase what is written, but what is written says things so much better than I could paraphrase. 2 Link to comment
smac97 Posted November 13, 2018 Author Share Posted November 13, 2018 1 minute ago, SouthernMo said: Nor should it be. But, the information one has in reviewing a decision affects one’s perception of the Holy Ghost. Per section 6.10.10 of Handbook 1, the individual under discipline appeals by submitting a written statement of the purported errors or unfairness of the disciplinary proceedings against him. That written statement is submitted to the First Presidency along with the "Report of Church Disciplinary Action" form previously completed by the local leader. Other "relevant" documents may also be submitted. Also, the First Presidency reserves the right to to supersede the provisions of the Handbook (also in section 6.10.10). Thanks, -Smac Link to comment
Steve-o Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 15 minutes ago, Calm said: We have only Young's report on how it went down, do we not? I wouldn't assume it was an accurate portrayal (I wouldn't assume a description from the SP of Young's behaviour was accurate either, btw). I think a one on one, face to face exchange is usually more compassionate than a letter. I agree. In person would be good but I think telling him in person and giving him a letter would be best. Isn't that what they usually do in a disciplinary council? I thought they told the person and then gave them a letter so I thought they would do the same for the appeal. I think it matters who the messenger is. If Sam Young had a conflict or personal disagreement with how the Stake President handled the disciplinary council and appealed the Stake President's decision to the first presidency I don't think the Stake President would be the best person to go back to Sam Young and tell him the appeal was denied. Both Sam Young and the Stake President could behave badly or misinterpret things. It's at least possible when there has been conflict between the two. It's kind of like if I had a dispute with my boss. I could make a complaint to my bosses boss or to human resources. I would expect to hear back from them and it would be weird if they gave the decision about my dispute to my boss to tell me. It feels wrong. Link to comment
ksfisher Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 17 minutes ago, The Nehor said: The church protects its copyright. I'll need to remember to stop quoting the Book of Mormon here as well. 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts