Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
sunstoned

BYU police of Joseph Bishop interview tape released

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

This was what was known to begin with.  He said he asked Denson to expose herself and gave another sister a "frisky" backrub (clarified later by consig to be including touching her buttocks).

Is he in pajamas?  I wonder if that was a conscious choice to appear less capable or if it is because he is less capable.  Seems strange a man of his age would be in an appointment with anyone, let alone police like that.  I would have expected something closer to business wear.

added:  I see this mentioned in the article, I wonder if he was in his PJs when Denson saw him.

Quote

The 85-year-old man welcomed them into his home by greeting them as his friends, according to the recording, and apologized for still being in his plaid pajama pants. He had just been hospitalized for issues with his heart, he told them.

Quote

But a long sought-after police recording recently obtained by The Salt Lake Tribune offers new details about this controversy, including that Bishop says he immediately told his church leaders about his inappropriate behavior — and still maintained his position of power.

He kept his calling after confessing to asking a woman to show him her breasts?

I find that very hard to believe.  Finding MTC Presidents and convenient excuses to release potential liabilities isn't that hard.  It is consistent with him blaming others like his wives for his problems, abuse of others (he claims his first wife didn't love him implying lack of sex, yet she was willing to expose herself at the dinner table for his pleasure)

Undrrstandable why BYU didn't want to make it public.

Quote

he recalled going into a small storage room with her and asked her to expose herself because she had recently had a breast augmentation

She didn't have an augmentation while a missionary, if he got this wrong (either the person or the reason), should we assume the rest is accurate?

Quote

Bishop often veered into long stories about the work he did for the church and his spiritual experiences, at times saying it pained him to think that he enjoyed many blessings and yet was “wayward.”

Same thing happened in his Denson interview.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

No confession of rape.  Maybe this was an over-step on Denson's part.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Also, Radio Free Mormon (RFM) was outted in this article.  He was the lawyer who filed the suite to get the transcripts released.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Not sure how this helps Denson's lawsuit.  The only part left is her claim that the Church leadership knew prior to Bishop being called as MTC President that he was a predator and withheld this info so that she could not make a decision to protect herself.  For her lawsuit it is only evidence that the Church leaders can ignore predatory behaviour, not that they did in her case.

At best this is evidence someone in Church leadership knew afterwards.  It works possibly for possible victims who came later.  Did he say who he confessed to?  Is the report itself online?

Edited by Calm
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Calm said:

Not sure how this helps Denson's lawsuit.  She is claiming the Church leadership knew prior to Bishop being called as MTC President that he was a predator.

At best this is evidence someone in Church leadership knew afterwards.  It works possibly for possible victims who came later.  Did he say who he confessed to?  Is the report itself online?

Bishop says he confessed to a higher-up and still kept his job.  Also the confession was about an incident that didn't include Denson (remember she didn't have enhancement surgery and wasn't well-endowed)  How is this not problematic for the church? If the suit continues, the question remains about what the church knew and when.  If the confession was pre-Denson, then the church continued to allow a predator to be the MTC president. Pretty bad for the lawsuit from the church's perspective. Also, pretty bad that the church let Bishop the sexual predator to continue to walk the halls of the MTC.

Edited by Exiled
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I really wish you would pay more attention to what is said.  Please show where I even hinted it wasn't a problem for the Church.  Go back and read my post please and then rewrite your comment if you still have questions. Hopefully the clarifications will help make it clear what I am referring to.

Quote

 If the confession was pre-Denson, then the church continued to allow a predator to be the MTC president.

Bishop said it was Denson.  If you claim he is wrong there, you open it up to him being wrong about the confession unless there is confirmation through someone else.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
58 minutes ago, Calm said:

Not sure how this helps Denson's lawsuit.  

Is there still a lawsuit?  Last I heard, her lawyers quit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

Also, Radio Free Mormon (RFM) was outted in this article.  He was the lawyer who filed the suite to get the transcripts released.

A washington based attorney was named; no connection to RFM was made.

Tidbit, someone who is believed to be RFM that posts on another forum alluded to knowing the a piece of the content of the audio - the poster gave the approximate time frame in the complete audio/video.  This suggests to me that RFM has a copy of the police interview OR that RFM has spoken to someone with detailed knowledge of the audio.

35 minutes ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Is there still a lawsuit?  Last I heard, her lawyers quit.

She was given 21 days to find new counsel.

 

Edited by provoman
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Exiled said:

Bishop says he confessed to a higher-up and still kept his job.  Also the confession was about an incident that didn't include Denson (remember she didn't have enhancement surgery and wasn't well-endowed)  How is this not problematic for the church? If the suit continues, the question remains about what the church knew and when.  If the confession was pre-Denson, then the church continued to allow a predator to be the MTC president. Pretty bad for the lawsuit from the church's perspective. Also, pretty bad that the church let Bishop the sexual predator to continue to walk the halls of the MTC.

There two thing that must be proven.

1. Knowledge before the claimed assault happened.

2. Evidence of the assault.

I think without showing both the whole case is lost. 

As for this the BYU police recording; I have a difficult time believing Craig Vernon or her had not listened to it. I believe they had copy and listened/watched it.

Firstly, she said she heard the recording. Second, to my knowledge Craig Vernon was not a party appealing that the recording was withheld.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Is there still a lawsuit?  Last I heard, her lawyers quit.

That was announced Jun 3 and she was given 3 weeks to find new ones.  That means 8 more days, right?

This may help her find a new one, but lawyers on both sides would have had this info already, wouldn't they?  It would be only redacted for the public?

provoman seems to have the same understanding as I do about this as evidence, which makes me more confident. :)

Edited by Calm
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, sunstoned said:

No confession of rape.  Maybe this was an over-step on Denson's part.

I remember reading the lawyer son, Greg Bishop, said the exposure encounter happened between Bishop and Denson after the MTC.  This may be him reasoning from Denson's comments on tape about being bigger busted postMTC and his dad remembering Denson as having an enhancement.  If he was accurate, it puts a strange twist on it.

There is the clinical, puzzle solving me that would like this dug into deeper and details shared publicly to see how much guessing by everyone was accurate and another part of me that is disgusted by the drama (primarily Bishop, Denson bewilders me) and would be happy to see it quietly and quickly resolved.

My first impression of Bishop is he goes on and on about being weak and making mistakes, but when it comes to being accountable he shifts to how he has suffered, was cheated of greatness by his weaknesses, and how others are responsible for placing him in problematic situations...his wives having personal issues that led to him being sexually inappropriate with sister missionaries in the first case and divorce in the second, church leaders not giving him proper support leaving him to struggle and make errors on his own, Denson for exposing him if she went public...now Church leaders knowingly leaving him in a predatory position and him being mostly curious about a breast enhancement for his wife.  It is all too convenient for him.  He doesn't have to be responsible because he wouldn't have done these things if people had only loved him, listened to him.

And that he is thinking his wife possibly should get enhancement while talking about her exposing herself to him at dinner...if this is how he really thought back then and is not dementia, eeewww.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

From the first clip (so far) he says he only confessed to his bishop, shakes his head when asked if he told anyone else.

Clip 2...he is claiming he knows it is true that the Church paid for Denson to have a breast enhancement prior to her mission (so paying for cosmetic surgery for someone younger than 21?).  He says a church official called and was upset that the Church would have paid for it.

Does anyone here believe this is anything but dementia?

----

Clip 2:

The detective says it sounds like there was a lot of drama around her at the MTC.  Then asks at what point did Bishop get involved with her...which sounds to me like Bishop or Denson had shared with police other, earlier stuff about Denson at the MTC that didn't involve Bishop...but maybe he was just exaggerating the alleged complaint about the enhancement.

He identifies a physical placement and reason (busy primary office) for his secondary office.  Seems to confirm that claim it existed and he would go there to work or whatever.

I wonder how much is storytelling and how much is remembering, because the room was apparently by the cafeteria and he emphatically goes "smelly place" and then catches himself and says "wasn't too smelly".

When speaking about asking her to expose herself, he claims he was in the room and she came to him.  He is very cleartoned and forceful in his wording when speaking about what happened.  While there is a possibility it is a strong created memory due to having been thinking about it since the Denson interview, I lean more to it actually happened.  

But the breast enhancement sideline where he is so positive about that when I  have never heard of such a thing.  What bishop would agree to a 19 or 20 year old asking for a breast enhancement surgery?  In the 80's.

 If this is true, was it a result of a scam by Denson wanting something paid for by others as she did later in her life or a predator bishop grooming a victim...would a bishop take that risk?  Does Denson not mention it as it makes her look more like a scammer?  Was she hoping the Church didn't have records of it?  Do they if true?  And why would a church leader call the MTC to complain and not her former bishop...or were they investigating that bishop?  Why would the MTC President be involved and not just talk straight to Denson?  Need to clear talking to her with him first or did she share with him that info?

The breast enhancement is a huge part of Bishop's story and he is quite confidant about it.  If that isn't true, big problem for his credibility about anything he confessed, imo.  He should be judged as unreliable if  false.  If true, but not Denson and he simply got confused on that point, they will need an actual name and victim who can confirm it to prove that, imo.  Denson has too great a credibility issue to rely on her and Bishop's memory is questionable if he is so certain it is Denson and it wasn't.  

Iirc, Denson has a breast enhancement (think it is mentioned she got it later in her interview), there is a possibility Bishop is correct in his story and Denson is lying about having hers until after the mission (to avoid getting called on getting it paid for by her former bishop or someone else in the Church).  If that is true, that in one way helps her case...Bishop admits to sexually abusing her even if consensual and if he is accurate in that, more likely accurate in his claim he confessed to his bishop...which places responsibility on that bishop in his calling to have reported it to leaders who could have released Bishop.  But that still leaves it as leadership not being aware of any abuse prior to Denson's mission call, which is what is st issue in her lawsuit.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I think the police interview explains why Vernon was willing to take the case on commission as while it isn't solid, it certainly sounds like there were more witnesses out there and at least one thing throwing doubt on the Church not knowing prior to him being called (if it was ignored after, than why not before).

But now I want to know why Vernon walked, as if I was in a jury and it was confirmed the Church knew ahead or afterwards and left him in, I would want settlements for anyone who could prove they had personal time with Bishop and claimed to be victimized.  If turns out they left him in after he asked someone to expose herself, I will be furious.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, provoman said:

There two thing that must be proven.

1. Knowledge before the claimed assault happened.

2. Evidence of the assault.

I think without showing both the whole case is lost. 

As for this the BYU police recording; I have a difficult time believing Craig Vernon or her had not listened to it. I believe they had copy and listened/watched it.

Firstly, she said she heard the recording. Second, to my knowledge Craig Vernon was not a party appealing that the recording was withheld.

 

It depends on when the incidents happened. I think she can be placed in the basement room with Bishop because she described it well and there is independent corroboration that the room exists. So, if the other missionary showed herself to Bishop and he confessed prior to when the Denson incident allegedly occurred, then there was prior knowledge that can be imputed to the church.  This could be problematic for the church if the above could be shown.  Obviously, it needs to be investigated if it hadn't already been done. Also, the other attorneys leaving the case is problematic because it could be a result of other things happening behind the scenes other than the latest nonsense.  For instance, why the failure to answer discovery? Was the church pressing to find out about her recent craziness and she refused to answer? Or was it something else?

Share this post


Link to post
42 minutes ago, Calm said:

I think the police interview explains why Vernon was willing to take the case on commission as while it isn't solid, it certainly sounds like there were more witnesses out there and at least one thing throwing doubt on the Church not knowing prior to him being called (if it was ignored after, than why not before).

But now I want to know why he walked, as if I was in a jury and it was confirmed the Church knew ahead or afterwards and left him in, I would want settlements for anyone who could prove they had personal time with Bishop and claimed to be victimized.  If turns out they left him in after he asked someone to expose herself, I will be furious.

Based on his recording with Denson, there the question of if he admitted to something what did he admit. He talks about withholding information when speaking to his mission president; so I wonder how he described his behavior to whomever when he was MTC President

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
59 minutes ago, provoman said:

Based on his recording with Denson, there the question of if he admitted to something what did he admit. He talks about withholding information when speaking to his mission president; so I wonder how he described his behavior to whomever when he was MTC President

But when he says he withheld it, he also says it was nothing.  That interview is useless on its own, as he makes much ado about his suffering and repentance and needing to take responsibility, but personally admits to nothing immoral, imo.  He doesn't even state he was the one who asked his wife to expose herself, it is just something he agrees he told Denson about long ago that his wife did.  I have read his confessional stuff about ten times, he couldn't make it more useless for demonstrating guilt or innocence if he tried, imo.  I would love to see something solid beyond a simple repetition of what Denson says first.  I think he is and was a creep and would like to have concrete justification for thinking that way.  Dementia can lead to hypersexuality and Denson has confidently gone to bizarre extremes n the past, so her taking advantage of the situation coming up with stories he then owns and it's nothing of him...that's possible though I latch on to his initial story about his second wife's issues as evidence for a history...but what if that was all dementia as well.

Kind of wish someone in his ward leaked videos of him prior to the first interview to see if dementia is unlikely, but if relatively mild (hard to follow exactly what has been said, memory takes time to kick in and can get attached to wrong ideas) and he is relatively mobile, that wouldn't remove all doubt.  Where's a psychologist when you need one?!

I wished they had given him more time to think of his bishop's name he said he confessed to.  Probably thought that could be looked up.  Actual names and places would tend to impress me it was more memory than creation.

Also, more clips coming or not?  And make them visual and not just audio like the second one, please.  I want to see his facial expression and his eyes as he tells his story.

I wonder if there are medical records in the police report and if not, if there was any attempt to verify his competence.  I would assume that would be almost standard for someone that age, but they give out drivers' licenses pretty easily, so perhaps not.

I see three problems for Denson though the interview is nasty for Bishop.  

Bishop is apparently solid it was Denson.  If not her as would be true if Denson is honest on this point, implications for everything else he confesses to.  Reasonable doubt for a jury even if inclined to believe it.  But it would be a civil case with no one going to jail, so maybe they don't go the beyond reasonable doubt route.  Preponderance of evidence iirc?  But sometimes more like 'someone got hurt and someone else must pay' if some reports of civil cases are to be believed.

Second problem is the breast enhancement story is highly improbable in my view.  It is understandable as a combination of his current (and possibly long term) obsession with breasts and the discussion during the Denson interview being regurgitated as fact with increased drama due to dementia (could be basics are factual, but additional details false...Mom goes that route on occasion; maybe the person who exposed herself had a breast enhancement, the rest is his imagination filling in gaps in the story).  It reads like another one of his hero stories as in her problem essentially, but he gets caught up in trying to solve it because an upset church leader(and why complain to him? To get him to force her to give back the money?  Wouldn't that be done through her branch President if counseling is supposed to be done by them?) complains to him and he is the fair and just wise man calming the waters...at least until he decides he deserves a peak at the result for his efforts and thus he is led astray by his good intentions, pretty parallel to what happened with his counseling abuse victims.

Has anyone heard of a bishop paying for cosmetic surgery out of church funds for a young adult?  What types of safeguards were in place back then to prevent that?  Could a less than honest bishop have hidden it under necessary surgery costs?  I haven't heard of surgery being paid for by the Church, but I haven't lived in areas of poverty

'I think it was the Natural Man', instead of 'I was horny'...just selfrighteous creepy.

Third is the confession is post her alleged rape, but Vernon might recoup some of his expenses by doing the same thing with victims who attended postDenson.

His explanation for the first victim is curiosity ('oh wait', he goes, 'that would be so irresponsible to claim as an excuse, but I'm just mentioning that in length anyway....'  iirc, this is another repeat tactic from his previous interview, acting as if he is being responsible by owning up to his weaknesses, throwing out excuses in reality but then disavowing them...but they are still spoken just in case someone happens to be prone to excusing him).

Then the second victim is opportunity...she begs him for a backrub and they get carried away.

If no more opportunities for foreplay falling into his lap :bad: and no more opportunities to satisfy his curiosity (there's a sister with a great booty, wonder how my wife would look with one, I should ask this strange woman who I know will agree and not be shocked to let me see how it looks, so I can decide if it's worth the cost), then possibly no more victims.

But seriously, it seems likely more are out there.  Or maybe not since Vernon got the list of names of sisters and then withdrew.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Exiled said:

I think she can be placed in the basement room with Bishop because she described it well and there is independent corroboration that the room exists.

Not basement according to Bishop...and this was his more precise memory, by the cafeteria at the north end of the MTC admin building.  Close enough the smells bothered him, oh wait, not really.  

I have never been in the MTC, is there a lower floor?  I am wondering if confusion comes from it being bottom floor, but not completely underground as iirc there is a slope there.

 

2 hours ago, Exiled said:

So, if the other missionary showed herself to Bishop and he confessed prior to when the Denson incident allegedly occurred, then there was prior knowledge that can be imputed to the church.  This could be problematic for the church if the above could be shown. 

If there is a name attached to this victim (and I am thinking the only way they could do this is the victim came forward and described the abuse prior to it being made public, I do believe there is a victim btw...possibly Denson, possibly someone else) and it can be established she was at the MTC before Denson, there is still the hill to climb of how clear his memory is on confessing.  He admits to an impossible confession in the first interview (telling Elder Wells about molesting Denson years before he met her), he didn't mention this confession in the Denson interview, stated no one had talked to him about Denson's abuse, and he can't remember the bishop's name and no other details were given in the police interview as seen so far.

Absolutely horrible PR now for the Church, but not sure if it could be legally shown as liable given all of Bishop's contradictions without actual documentation from the Church tracking the confession and finding for no discipline and would they be stupid enough to lie if there was some?  Would Vernon have given up no matter how difficult Denson was if he had that document or an interview with Bishop's bishop detailing the confession?  Would Denson not have blabbed it if there was another witness that could torpedo the Church's case like that?

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

A lawyer has to keep his client apprised of the case, correct?  Denson would be told if victims came forward, would be told their stories, would have to be told of any documents known?  Vernon couldn't hide them knowing she was a loose cannon?

Anyone follow Denson close enough to be sure she never said anything about .Bishop having confessed to confessing post exposure incident?  If she kept her mouth shut about that, possibility there is more out there.

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post

Talk about having your sins shouted from the rooftops.....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Calm said:

A lawyer has to keep his client apprised of the case, correct?  Denson would be told if victims came forward, would be told their stories, would have to be told of any documents known?  Vernon couldn't hide them knowing she was a loose cannon?

Anyone follow Denson close enough to be sure she never said anything about .Bishop having confessed to confessing post exposure incident?  If she kept her mouth shut about that, possibility there is more out there.

from a reddit comment user name Mckenna-Denson posted 25 days ago

Oh dear. I’ve read your posts and I’m confused about your premise. You weren’t there. You don’t know what happened. You haven’t heard the or read the BYU PD interviews with Joseph Bishop. You haven’t been in the depositions. You haven’t spoken to any of the other victims. You speak of things from a point of opinion but throw them out as facts.

Edited by provoman

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Exiled said:

think she can be placed in the basement room with Bishop because she described it well and there is independent corroboration that the room exists.

But this independent corroboration also suggests she could have found out about the room without Bishop having taken her into it since this person confirms it had a bed and TV and was not even there when Bishop was president.

http://kutv.com/news/local/former-employee-confirms-odd-mtc-room-with-bed-and-tv

And the room existing is corroborated through floor plans, but does the bed and tv countbas independent as the individual came forward after hearing of Denson's account?  I don't doubt him, just want to understand appropriate legalese.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, provoman said:

from a reddit comment user name Mckenna-Denson

Oh dear. I’ve read your posts and I’m confused about your premise. You weren’t there. You don’t know what happened. You haven’t heard the or read the BYU PD interviews with Joseph Bishop. You haven’t been in the depositions. You haven’t spoken to any of the other victims. You speak of things from a point of opinion but throw them out as facts.

So she claims knowledge of others' accounts, but appears to have kept her mouth shut on details...if there are details more than just Bishop saying he talked to his bishop.  So there might be more info to be revealed. 

I think there are four other reported possible victims, the other 2010 victim that may be one of the others, a mother and daughter from England who stayed at his house in Provo while MTC President, and a woman in Texas.  

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Calm said:

Not basement according to Bishop...and this was his more precise memory, by the cafeteria at the north end of the MTC admin building.  Close enough the smells bothered him, oh wait, not really.  

I have never been in the MTC, is there a lower floor?  I am wondering if confusion comes from it being bottom floor, but not completely underground as iirc there is a slope there.

 

If there is a name attached to this victim (and I am thinking the only way they could do this is the victim came forward and described the abuse prior to it being made public, I do believe there is a victim btw...possibly Denson, possibly someone else) and it can be established she was at the MTC before Denson, there is still the hill to climb of how clear his memory is on confessing.  He admits to an impossible confession in the first interview (telling Elder Wells about molesting Denson years before he met her), he didn't mention this confession in the Denson interview, stated no one had talked to him about Denson's abuse, and he can't remember the bishop's name and no other details were given in the police interview as seen so far.

Absolutely horrible PR now for the Church, but not sure if it could be legally shown as liable given all of Bishop's contradictions without actual documentation from the Church tracking the confession and finding for no discipline and would they be stupid enough to lie if there was some?  Would Vernon have given up no matter how difficult Denson was if he had that document or an interview with Bishop's bishop detailing the confession?  Would Denson not have blabbed it if there was another witness that could torpedo the Church's case like that?

You want to say Bishop has dementia but no doctor has given an opinion as to this or to his competency to testify in court or in a deposition.  Perhaps he can't keep his story straight and/or is mixing up his victims, but he is competent.  Also, Denson claimed she is flat chested, or at least was when in the MTC. So, the breast incident is probably another victim.

Edited by Exiled

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...