Status of Discovery in Denson Lawsuit

[Calm]

My appraisal of Bishop's mental and physical status during police interview is based on this article:

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona-investigations/2018/03/24/amid-quiet-life-chandler-explosive-sexual-assault-allegations-hit-mormon-leader/449975002/

Quote

Joseph Layton Bishop lives in a suburban golf resort — a quiet, gated community in south Chandler.

When a stranger knocks, the 85-year-old answers from a back room with an energetic, "Come in." He greets a visitor with a smile, a firm handshake and clear eyes.

For Bishop, a former president of the Mormon Church's Provo, Utah, Missionary Training Center, the serenity of his retirement imploded this week with the release of a recorded interview...

According to the police report, Bishop did recall having a meeting with a female missionary years ago. The police report said: "While talking to her he asked her to show him her breasts which she did.”

The police report ends with a message from a deputy county attorney in Utah advising detectives that he had "no reason to doubt the victim's disclosures, and would have likely prosecuted Mr. Bishop but for the expiration of the statute of limitations," which is four years in Utah.

Greg Bishop said his father did not remember making that statement to police....

At Joseph Bishop's house in Chandler, the visitor identified himself as another journalist hoping to conduct an interview — this time about what he had said in the recorded conversation.

The old man's smile vanished.

"Not going to happen," he said, ushering the reporter outside, where women chatted on a nearby tennis court and golfers practiced putting on a green.

 

 

I can't remember where I read he was in a  wheelchair.  I think on Reddit from the same person who first said they knew him and he had memory issues.

Edited May 31, 2019 by Calm

[provoman]

59 minutes ago, Calm said:

 

I do not rfm has published the less redacted version.

As for the remaining suit; she must show prior AND damages. A user on another forum - purportedly her, posted that other victim would be subpoened if she did not want to willingly provide testimony/statement. 

question: I do have a question: what if the second accuser wants to stay uninvolved? Being put into the spotlight may change her life, and I don't know how I feel about doing that to her without her permission. Is there a part of the story I'm missing? Was there some sort of NDA or can she remain anonymous to the public if she chooses?

response: "She’ll be ordered to testify but perhaps only in a deposition. My attorney Craig Vernon and I are very careful about throwing someone into the public eye without their consent. 

If she testifies under subpoena, she won’t be breaking the NDA and will be able to keep her settlement and hopefully remain anonymous"

And list of missionaries she demanded is presumably to find other victims sothat she can say essentially 'here are all the victims, even though there is no proof of what happened to me, these other victims show a pattern of behavior and suggest that I am a victim too, therefore damages'

Edited May 31, 2019 by provoman

[Tacenda]

3 hours ago, Calm said:

I appreciate it.  I hate podcasts and have to force myself to listen to the rest of Norton's when I can focus enough (I can focus on text so much easier), to face listening to another one not knowing if there is actual substance...yeah, not going to do that, not that obsessed.  

Eagerly awaiting the text of the unredacted btw.  If I understand the issue, it is not just personal names and contact info that is redacted but more and that such is required from police in general, so BYU should follow that standard.  I actually felt bad for the people in the Denson police reports that had all their info but SSN given and think that should be redacted, perhaps illegal (one report started to, but then stopped after half a page.

Calm, I finally heard it on the podcast. I kept missing it and would listen again and dosing off. It is at 1:05 in.  But like you, it would be nice to see the actual report.

[Amulek]

7 hours ago, Calm said:

Assuming the rubbing the buttock is an accurate reading of the redacted portion, this means that is it possible that this sister reported to church leadership in 2010 that she was sexually assaulted by Bishop when he gave her a backrub and rubbed her butt.  At which point Bishop denied it happened, the woman was provided with professional and pastoral counseling and the matter otherwise dropped apparently.

Possibly. Without names it's hard to be sure though. I've always been under the impression that "frisky backrub" girl and "asked to expose breasts" girl were two separate individuals. But, even if they weren't, we've got no way of knowing whether the individual who came forward in 2010 was that person or someone else entirely, right?

 

6 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I finally heard it on the podcast. I kept missing it and would listen again and dosing off. It is at 1:05 in.  But like you, it would be nice to see the actual report.

Same here. Completely new facts should be backed up with...you know, actual evidence. 

But again, assuming, arguendo, that such touching occurred - that in and of itself isn't enough to prove an assault took place. It's certainly inappropriate / immoral behavior, but it's not necessarily illegal. 

 

[Tacenda]

2 minutes ago, Amulek said:

Possibly. Without names it's hard to be sure though. I've always been under the impression that "frisky backrub" girl and "asked to expose breasts" girl were two separate individuals. But, even if they weren't, we've got no way of knowing whether the individual who came forward in 2010 was that person or someone else entirely, right?

 

Same here. Completely new facts should be backed up with...you know, actual evidence. 

But again, assuming, arguendo, that such touching occurred - that in and of itself isn't enough to prove an assault took place. It's certainly inappropriate / immoral behavior, but it's not necessarily illegal. 

 

I think it's definitely sexual assault. 

[Amulek]

15 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I think it's definitely sexual assault. 

Only if there wasn't consent. Do you have any evidence that it wasn't consensual?

 

[Abulafia]

23 hours ago, juliann said:

We had smac and a couple of other lawyers analyzing the legal side of things as I recall. It was impossible to take her accusations seriously after that thread. So we haven't had much defending of her here. That is what makes me roll my eyes that this is such a surprise to some and I hope there is some serious self-reflection for those who did but I am mostly seeing attacks on Norton instead (not that he doesn't deserve it.) 

You spend more time in critical sites so maybe you know this. Have you seen any substantiation of her claims of childhood abuse or her self-proclaimed mental illness diagnoses? It seems like a lot of people are cherrypicking which claims to believe when none are any more substantiated than the others. 

 

Hi, I'm  in some fb groups, but don't spend any time really on critical sites nowadays.

I haven't seen substantiated evidence of childhood sexual trauma  or of mental illness diagnosis... 

 

What I do know is that an English acquaintance  and her daughter, (who lived at the Bishop's home) who want to be anonymous are both alleging molestation by Bishop while they lived there. 

The corroborating evidence is enough for me to establish a pattern of abusive behaviour by Bishop.

 

As for McKenna, if she hasn't had  professional help for her dysfunctional behaviour, then she needs it.  I'm finding the public lynching of her to be pretty abhorrent.  Whatever she has or hasn't done/said to Mike Norton,  she's way more vulnerable and alone  than Jo Bishop or Mike. 

Shawn MaCraney had her on his show last year, talking about the dossier and the razor blades.  I'm finding I have little patience with some  ex Mormons, particularly Mike, who has been a private investigator, who say they were hoodwinked. The information was always there.   

 

One fb user explained that they didn't believe anything coming from the church lawyers, but it seemed to me that summaries of police reports are, well summaries of police reports. 

 

 

 

I

[provoman]

1 hour ago, Abulafia said:

Shawn MaCraney had her on his show last year, talking about the dossier and the razor blades.  I'm finding I have little patience with some  ex Mormons, particularly Mike, who has been a private investigator, who say they were hoodwinked. The information was always there.   

One fb user explained that they didn't believe anything coming from the church lawyers, but it seemed to me that summaries of police reports are, well summaries of police reports. 

In the Shawn MaCraney show, did they go into details? I have only watched seconds of the show and what I heard was Mckenna say "Some of its true, some of its 'I don't know where that came from', some it would be true except they twisted it so much that it is not even true"

It seems Mike - despite a reddit post by someone purporting to be Mckenna - did not have a copy of the dossier; as the may 26 video Mike posted suggests that Ethan Krok gave him a copy of the dossier.  I do think Mike's reaction and some of his words to Mckenna were a bit much.  He responded emotionally, as did Mckenna when she spoke to Joseph Bishop; my unprofessional opinion is that Mike and Mckenna responded under heightened sense of emotion to someone they saw as a actual physical threat to their families. 

It is also interesting, that yes, much of what Mike discussed can be found in articles from over a year ago. 

Edited May 31, 2019 by provoman

[Abulafia]

2 hours ago, provoman said:

In the Shawn MaCraney show, did they go into details? I have only watched seconds of the show and what I heard was Mckenna say "Some of its true, some of its 'I don't know where that came from', some it would be true except they twisted it so much that it is not even true"

It seems Mike - despite a reddit post by someone purporting to be Mckenna - did not have a copy of the dossier; as the may 26 video Mike posted suggests that Ethan Krok gave him a copy of the dossier.  I do think Mike's reaction and some of his words to Mckenna were a bit much.  He responded emotionally, as did Mckenna when she spoke to Joseph Bishop; my unprofessional opinion is that Mike and Mckenna responded under heightened sense of emotion to someone they saw as a actual physical threat to their families. 

It is also interesting, that yes, much of what Mike discussed can be found in articles from over a year ago. 

Of course, McKenna gave her spin on things, but the razor blades were mentioned and quite a bit of other stuff too. Enough for someone to appreciate she has had a dysfunctional past.  

Edited May 31, 2019 by Abulafia

[juliann]

4 hours ago, Abulafia said:

Hi, I'm  in some fb groups, but don't spend any time really on critical sites nowadays.

I haven't seen substantiated evidence of childhood sexual trauma  or of mental illness diagnosis... 

 

What I do know is that an English acquaintance  and her daughter, (who lived at the Bishop's home) who want to be anonymous are both alleging molestation by Bishop while they lived there. 

The corroborating evidence is enough for me to establish a pattern of abusive behaviour by Bishop.

 

As for McKenna, if she hasn't had  professional help for her dysfunctional behaviour, then she needs it.  I'm finding the public lynching of her to be pretty abhorrent.  Whatever she has or hasn't done/said to Mike Norton,  she's way more vulnerable and alone  than Jo Bishop or Mike. 

 

There is a really good chance her back story is made up as well. It has been the most effective ploy of all of it. She is still being defended because of her "past trauma" vn as she is being excoriated as a liar. Bizarre.  As for Bishop, I've yet to run into anyone who doesn't think he did something, if not to her to others. But after 5 rape accusations, I think that one has seen its day. And most of us, I think, dropped that as plausible early on as well. 

Sometimes scammers are just scammers. It might not be a deep psychological issue, maybe it is a life style. Dysfunctional doesn't always equate to mental illness. But to maintain the apologetic, it seems it has to begin with childhood trauma, which makes her vulnerable to other abuse, then exacerbated by Bishop and so on.   This was a fascinating podcast that is trying to salvage the situation (which only the community they keep referring to seems to care much about.) The panel is a bit arrogant if not insufferable, but it is good instruction into the mindset of those who think this is harming the critic community,  http://angelsonfire.org/mhh79-mckenna-geddon-the-heated-aftermath-pt-1/?fbclid=IwAR0kvzdZA56_WesNo0KjzZcSmqO9VgmDuEOmfApF_oPcHEimBAON2eg9jPo

 

[Tacenda]

15 minutes ago, juliann said:

There is a really good chance her back story is made up as well. It has been the most effective ploy of all of it. She is still being defended because of her "past trauma" vn as she is being excoriated as a liar. Bizarre.  As for Bishop, I've yet to run into anyone who doesn't think he did something, if not to her to others. But after 5 rape accusations, I think that one has seen its day. And most of us, I think, dropped that as plausible early on as well. 

Sometimes scammers are just scammers. It might not be a deep psychological issue, maybe it is a life style. Dysfunctional doesn't always equate to mental illness. But to maintain the apologetic, it seems it has to begin with childhood trauma, which makes her vulnerable to other abuse, then exacerbated by Bishop and so on.   This was a fascinating podcast that is trying to salvage the situation (which only the community they keep referring to seems to care much about.) The panel is a bit arrogant if not insufferable, but it is good instruction into the mindset of those who think this is harming the critic community,  http://angelsonfire.org/mhh79-mckenna-geddon-the-heated-aftermath-pt-1/?fbclid=IwAR0kvzdZA56_WesNo0KjzZcSmqO9VgmDuEOmfApF_oPcHEimBAON2eg9jPo

 

Do you remember in the beginning when McKenna said the police told her it was "rape"? She didn't accuse him of rape at first because according to her he wasn't able to, you get the picture. Then the police told her it didn't matter. That it comes under that title for what he did do. So in this case she didn't call it rape at first, it was after what the police told her it was.

[juliann]

1 minute ago, Tacenda said:

Do you remember in the beginning when McKenna said the police told her it was "rape"? She didn't accuse him of rape at first because according to her he wasn't able to, you get the picture. Then the police told her it didn't matter. That it comes under that title for what he did do. So in this case she didn't call it rape at first, it was after what the police told her it was.

And you have a police report saying this happened? 

[Tacenda]

24 minutes ago, juliann said:

And you have a police report saying this happened? 

This is all I have, I don't have the police reports, I wish!  https://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/faith/woman-who-says-former-provo-mtc-president-sexually-assaulted-her/article_531190a8-fd18-5c57-8bda-9906d0265c97.html

Denson and her lawyers condemned the term “non-consensual immorality” used by Quentin L. Cook, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in the LDS Church, during the faith’s semiannual general conference on Sunday. They said sexual assault needs to be referred to as a crime.

Denson also said she didn’t know Bishop had potentially assaulted other women until recently, and didn’t know the term for what happened to her was rape until she spoke to Brigham Young University University Police in 2017.

[Amulek]

12 minutes ago, juliann said:

And you have a police report saying this happened? 

It's not in a police report. It's McKenna's description of what happened when she went to the BYU police in 2017 to report the attack.

Apparently we are to believe that a woman of her age, preparing to file suit against the church during the rise of the MeToo movement, innocently walked into the BYU Police station to report a decades old attack only to just then discover that what Bishop had allegedly done all those years ago is actually considered rape.

Right. And Bill Clinton did not have...oh, never mind. 

 

[juliann]

So again, the only support for this is Denson.  And we all know how taking her at her word turned out. 

Here is the rule: ANYTHING that begins with "Denson said..." has to be documented from another source or thrown out.

[Abulafia]

5 minutes ago, juliann said:

So again, the only support for this is Denson.  And we all know how taking her at her word turned out. 

Here is the rule: ANYTHING that begins with "Denson said..." has to be documented from another source or thrown out.

I just want to make clear that if McKenna has committed crimes, then she shouldn't be above the law.  That may allow her to heal as much as the next person.

 

I am disturbed to discover that it was the church lawyer who provided Mike with the detailed police reports.   

 

Maybe I shouldn't  be, but I am.

[bluebell]

13 minutes ago, juliann said:

There is a really good chance her back story is made up as well. It has been the most effective ploy of all of it. She is still being defended because of her "past trauma" vn as she is being excoriated as a liar. Bizarre.  As for Bishop, I've yet to run into anyone who doesn't think he did something, if not to her to others. But after 5 rape accusations, I think that one has seen its day. And most of us, I think, dropped that as plausible early on as well. 

Sometimes scammers are just scammers. It might not be a deep psychological issue, maybe it is a life style. Dysfunctional doesn't always equate to mental illness. But to maintain the apologetic, it seems it has to begin with childhood trauma, which makes her vulnerable to other abuse, then exacerbated by Bishop and so on.   This was a fascinating podcast that is trying to salvage the situation (which only the community they keep referring to seems to care much about.) The panel is a bit arrogant if not insufferable, but it is good instruction into the mindset of those who think this is harming the critic community,  http://angelsonfire.org/mhh79-mckenna-geddon-the-heated-aftermath-pt-1/?fbclid=IwAR0kvzdZA56_WesNo0KjzZcSmqO9VgmDuEOmfApF_oPcHEimBAON2eg9jPo

 

I've read of others saying that we can probably trust the diagnosis of mental illness because why would she tell people she had those problems if she actually didn't because they don't make her look good or stable.  But, being able to blame your actions on a mental illness looks way better than just admitting that you are a selfish greedy jerk.  

I'm not saying she doesn't have mental health problems; I'm just saying that her offering up the information about the diagnosis herself does not make it more likely to be true. 

[Amulek]

15 minutes ago, Abulafia said:

I am disturbed to discover that it was the church lawyer who provided Mike with the detailed police reports. 

Can you please provide a reference for this?

I understand that Mike Norton has alleged that he has been working with the church's attorneys, but where is the evidence that the church's lawyers provided him with any of these reports? Is it just something he has claimed - possibly in one of those long, vulgar diatribes I have yet to listen to? Any additional info you could provide would be greatly appreciated. 

 

[Abulafia]

29 minutes ago, Amulek said:

Can you please provide a reference for this?

I understand that Mike Norton has alleged that he has been working with the church's attorneys, but where is the evidence that the church's lawyers provided him with any of these reports? Is it just something he has claimed - possibly in one of those long, vulgar diatribes I have yet to listen to? Any additional info you could provide would be greatly appreciated. 

 

No problem. It was from Mike's response to Radio Free Mormon.

 

I'm copy pasting..

 

Either Bill or RFM referred to me as a “mole” for the church in my position as a close friend of Denson. Around the same time it was said that I was, “working for [Mormon church attorney] David Jordan.”

I want to emphasize that not only was I not “working for” David Jordan or the Mormon church as a paid or unpaid employee or contractor. Not only was I not “working for” them, I specifically recall telling David Jordan the first time that I spoke to him (I initiated contact with him), I made it clear that I was asking for NOTHING in return and wanted NOTHING in return. If anything, David Jordan was “working for” me by helping me legally acquire some police reports that were not easily accessible to the general public. That’s not to say the reports aren’t “public information”, they’re just not easily accessible. To the best of my knowledge, David’s Jordan didn’t violate any laws or made any ethics violations as an attorney in helping me acquire information for MY PERSONAL QUEST to find out the truth about June “McKenna” Denson."

"

[Abulafia]

https://radiofreemormon.org/2019/05/radio-free-mormon-068-will-the-real-mckenna-denson-please-stand-up/

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Denson also said she ....didn’t know the term for what happened to her was rape until she spoke to Brigham Young University University Police in 2017.

This gives a nuance of someone who is possibly naive, so I can see a scammer using this approach to look more of a victim.

Otoh, even if she accused multiple men of rape before, she might be unaware of the legal definition and originally decided to go with something less with Bishop as being more believable or easier to accept than the horror of rape.

(this is assuming the accusation is false, if true the unaware of legal definition could still apply)

Edited May 31, 2019 by Calm

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Abulafia said:

I just want to make clear that if McKenna has committed crimes, then she shouldn't be above the law.  That may allow her to heal as much as the next person.

 

I am disturbed to discover that it was the church lawyer who provided Mike with the detailed police reports.   

 

Maybe I shouldn't  be, but I am.

I thought it was Ethan Krok.

added:  "David Jordan was “working for” me by helping me legally acquire some police reports that were not easily accessible to the general public" 

That is a strange phrasing if he just gave Norton the reports.  I wonder if he just told him how to get them himself from the various police.

David Jordan had to know that Norton would blab it all over and would not have done anything unethical imo if only to protect himself.

Edited May 31, 2019 by Calm

[provoman]

sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss

Edited June 1, 2019 by provoman

[jpv]

On 5/30/2019 at 10:17 AM, changed said:

best thing they can encourage anyone else to do is to be self-reliant ...  

I'd change that to Christ-reliant. 

[jpv]

On 5/30/2019 at 9:09 PM, Calm said:

Yep, that is the first bolded part I point to as impossible where she actually lead him to stating that (she says it, he says "yes").

My iPad is freezing, so that is as far as I am going to take it...at least for now.

I am going to start demanding CFRs (meaning I want specifics so I know exactly what is meant or even better quotes so I don't have to doublecheck the paraphrase is accurate) for any vague claims.  And honestly since I feel like I have invested a lot of time and effort being precise and providing references that is being ignored because vague claims continue to be made without reference to  specifics, I will start reporting if the CFRs are not met...not because I want to punish anyone, but because I think the conversation will be more useful to all if people doublecheck their memories and understanding.

There are a number of peoples' reputations involved and being tarred as a liar and conman or sexual predator or protector of a sexual predator is life shattering, not only for the person, but for their loved ones.  If such attacks are made, best evidence needs to be provided, not assumed.

Calm, I pretty much see eye to eye with your accounts. To be fair, he did refer to himself as a sexual predator, not just her calling him that in the interview when he says he's been free from it from a few years talking about 12 step/AA: "Yes. I’m Joe. I’m a sexual predator. Now then, how long you’ve been clean from alcohol?"