Tom Phillips Case Thrown Out

[Duncan]

I'm a Brit and never heard anyone use that word that way.  Lala I've heard often, used for nuts, crazy..

 

ah! I have heard Lulu used by Two Brits, one is from Liverpool and one is from Darlington on the other side of the island. Both were missionaries who have passed through my ward and one is currently serving here

[stemelbow]

I don't know.  From what I see on some of the boards, he still has a great deal of support even if many don't agree with his methods.  I just hope he drops things and takes a break, but it doesn't appear that he will from the statements released.  He should listen to the judge.

 

It does appear he is feeling a bit emboldened by support he's received. 

[rpn]

My understanding is that there are mission presidents who are given financial support while serving (I have known MP who served without financial support, so I do not think it to be every MP).     There are documents that urge them not to talk about it and not to have in country bank accounts and not to disclose the support as income.   Maybe that is completely consistent with England's tax laws. 

 

It is fair to say that the documents that are public do not fully explain why this is done or explain it in a way that presents itself as honest.  (The documents can easily be read as attempt to hide something, though its presence in a widely distributed handbook argues against any such intention.  It could simply be a cryptic instruction that is otherwise given orallly and explained more about how it works financially and taxwise.   Faithful members presumably assume that.)   Many exmo's think it is tax evasion and there has been talk about it for awhile now, since the MP handbook was published online surreptitiously.

[Duncan]

My understanding is that there are mission presidents who are given financial support while serving (I have known MP who served without financial support, so I do not think it to be every MP).     There are documents that urge them not to talk about it and not to have in country bank accounts and not to disclose the support as income.   Maybe that is completely consistent with England's tax laws. 

 

It is fair to say that the documents that are public do not fully explain why this is done or explain it in a way that presents itself as honest.  (The documents can easily be read as attempt to hide something, though its presence in a widely distributed handbook argues against any such intention.  It could simply be a cryptic instruction that is otherwise given orallly and explained more about how it works financially and taxwise.   Faithful members presumably assume that.)   Many exmo's think it is tax evasion and there has been talk about it for awhile now, since the MP handbook was published online surreptitiously.

 

and I think a british court would rule in favour of Phillips if it is shown that a Mission Pres. in England is doing anything illegal otherwise I suspect it'll be bumped out of court like today's was, but tax law, yikes!!!zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Scott Lloyd]

Let's call this "Plan B and C" ==>>

 

 

"Plan B" go to jail,

"Plan C" pay a fine and civil penalty.

That would be a rare and delicious instance of poetic justice.

Edited March 20, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[ALarson]

That would be a deliciously rare instance of poetic justice.

I agree.  

 

Someone posted this about the court costs:

 

This awaits confirmation, but the 'live blog' notes from court that I saw suggested that Philips' costs would be paid by 'central funds' (i.e. public funds, since he was relying on the advice of the judge who issued the original summons. The church, when I last looked, would get nothing.

But, as I said, this needs to be confirmed.

 

Where is the "live blog"???

[Scott Lloyd]

It does appear he is feeling a bit emboldened by support he's received. 

Perhaps.

 

But I'm sure he sees it in his best interest to convey the impression he has a lot of public support and that he still has a viable chance. Otherwise his support will dry up.

[why me]

I'm loving it:

"He added: 'I am satisfied that the process of the court is being manipulated to provide a high-profile forum to attack the religious beliefs of others.'"

Couldn't have said it better myself!

This has been my point also. There was no way that such a case could proceed. A pandora's box would be opened to the detriment of public peace. This case did have serious consequences if it proceeded and found the lds church at fault.

[why me]

Perhaps.

 

But I'm sure he sees it in his best interest to convey the impression he has a lot of public support and that he still has a viable chance. Otherwise his support will dry up.

I might add that there are two losers now. Tom and MT who tied their ship to Tom. No longer can MT claim neutral status now. And this is a big win for the lds apologists and a complete vindication of their position regarding MT. We should all thank Tom.

Edited March 20, 2014 by why me

[why me]

I don't know.  From what I see on some of the boards, he still has a great deal of support even if many don't agree with his methods.  I just hope he drops things and takes a break, but it doesn't appear that he will from the statements released.  He should listen to the judge.

He may have support for his efforts. But this was a big loss for the critics and I think that when it all quiets down, Tom just may find himself with less support from the more intellectual critics of the lds church.

[rpn]

 

and I think a british court would rule in favour of Phillips if it is shown that a Mission Pres. in England is doing anything illegal otherwise I suspect it'll be bumped out of court like today's was, but tax law, yikes!!!zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

The court order suggests that the churches arguments that TP is wrongfully bringing (because he cannot represent someone else under the law and he has no personal standing to do so?)  the case may be heard  though if TP brings another case.   I think if tax evasion were alleged, it would have to be the tax office itself to do it.  So TP would have to persuade them to do it.   His credibility is less now that it was before this order.

[ALarson]

He may have support for his efforts. But this was a big loss for the critics and I think that when it all quiets down, Tom just may find himself with less support from the more intellectual critics of the lds church.

Well, it's a big loss for Tom Phillips.  From what I saw, most of the "critics" did not agree with what he was doing even though they supported his right to try.  Of course there were the crazies who were in full support of his actions.

[Avatar4321]

Interesting question:

 

My understanding is that he raised money from donors for his court costs. Since it was obvious from the beginning that this suit would be thrown out, could an argument be made that he has committed fraud against those who donated to his legal fund?

[The Nehor]

Phillips promised, “My legal team will leave no stone unturned.”

 

Translation: My lawyers are billing me to sit around and watch YouTube videos while laughing at what a sucker I am.

[why me]

How about a few of us get together a suit against this ' gentleman' for pain and suffering and loss of affection over this. I think a flat 2 mil would be a good starting position. Who's with me ?

I think that Tom's punishment is with his family. What this case must have done to his active children was not pretty. And this is why certain actions do have intended and unintended consequences. I just hope that all can be well with his children and his relationship with them.

[rpn]

If he knew that he was eligible for reimbursement from the crown if he won, then maybe soliciting it without disclosing that is dishonest.    But I don't know whether attorneys in England CAN accept work on contingency, and if they can whether they WOULD in a case like this that looks and smells like a personal vendetta.   So maybe he can defend that he needed the money.  He has said he would use it for other things if he got more than he needed.

[Scott Lloyd]

I might add that there are two losers now. Tome and MT who tied their ship to Tom. No longer can MT claim neutral status now. And this is a big win for the lds apologists and a complete vindication of their position regarding MT. We should all thank Tom.

I wonder how many people seriously regarded MormonThink as neutral. They're about as neutral as Pravda during the Cold War.

Edited March 20, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[Kenngo1969]

Wow! This thing fairly reeks with spin and propaganda.

Reminds me of when Saddam Hussein claimed victory after his forces were routed.

Maybe Baghdad Bob found a new job as Mormon"Think's" spinmeister?

[Kenngo1969]

I think that Tom's punishment is with his family. What this case must have done to his active children was not pretty. And this is why certain actions do have intended and unintended consequences. I just hope that all can be well with his children and his relationship with them.

I'd love to be a "fly on the wall" for some of those dinner conversations!

[Kenngo1969]

I'm a Brit and never heard anyone use that word that way.  Lala I've heard often, used for nuts, crazy..

Don't worry.  We won't hold your common nationality/citizenship with Tom Phillips against you!

 

[David T]

LDS Newsroom: http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/judge-describes-court-case-as-abuse-of-legal-system

 

 

Judge Describes UK Court Case as "Abuse of Legal System"

LONDON — 

A district judge in Westminster Magistrates Court in the United Kingdom today dismissed a private prosecution brought against The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for alleged fraud and described it as "an abuse of the process of the court."

 

In throwing out the case brought by a former Church member, Judge Howard Riddle said, "I am satisfied that the process of the court is being manipulated to provide a high-profile forum to attack the religious beliefs of others."

 

Judge Riddle said no secular court in England would allow religious teachings to be put to a jury.

 

Interesting that it mentioned Phillips as a "former Church member", seeing that, as far as I understand, he has not resigned nor been excommunicated as of yet.

[Kenngo1969]

 

Here's David Twede's full blog post press release:

 

Summons Withdrawn

 

For immediate release

 

 

Contact:   mormonthinkeditors@gmail.com

 

 

  JUDGE WITHDRAWS MORMON FRAUD SUMMONS

 

Monson and LDS Church receive reprieve in UK fraud case

 

MARCH 20. LONDON--After almost a week of deliberation, a district judge today announced his decision to withdraw the fraud summons issued in February against Thomas S. Monson and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The announcement came almost a week after a daylong hearing in which Tom Phillips’ attorneys forcefully demonstrated the LDS Church’s complicity with a range of illicit acts contained in Fraud Act 2006. [Emphasis added by Kenngo1969].  For the immediate future, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will not have to defend itself against fraud charges in a trial by jury. ...        

 

"...forcefully demonstrated"?  Oh, please! If you demonstrated (proved) it, pray tell, why did the judge throw your case out?!!!     These folks seem positively delusional!  They may have forcefully argued that the Church of Jesus Christ was complicit in fraud, but they didn't demonstrate any such thing!  (And it's been my [albeit limited] experience that, generally, the weaker an attorney's case is, the more forcefully it is argued!)  Thus, I have no doubt that Phillips' attorneys argued his case very, very forcefully!

Edited March 20, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[why me]

I wonder how many people seriously regarded MormonThink as neutral. They're about as neutral as Pravda during the Cold War.

I think that many members actually believed their mission statement. I know that I have had battles about their non-neutrality on exmember boards. And I do believe that since they presented 'both sides', members did see them as neutral. But now, MT has exposed themselves for what they are: biased and one-sided. It was a victory for lds apologists because no one would now argue with them over this issue of non-neutrality.

[Tacenda]

I think that Tom's punishment is with his family. What this case must have done to his active children was not pretty. And this is why certain actions do have intended and unintended consequences. I just hope that all can be well with his children and his relationship with them.

This only tells you how desperate he is.  He wants to get his family back.  He wants to prove the church wrong, so that they will take him back.  Maybe he's done something else wrong that I don't know about, but if this is it then I can see how the church can be a divider or families feel the need to separate from an apostate, I feel sorry for him, can't help it.  But that's just because I see that the church has some skeletons that need to be taken out for people to heal.  That's always been my feeling.  Disillusioned members need this to be done so they can heal and move on.  I know the church is trying somewhat.   

Edited March 20, 2014 by Tacenda

[Bob Crockett]

Although I think what Phillips did is foolish, and rather malicious, at least he had the courage to say what he thinks using his own name.  He could have doled out his venom anoymously.  He didn't.   To that extent he rises above many on this board, in my opinion.