There was a second woman, and the church knew

[rockpond]

Here's the latest.  Apparently there was a second victim of Bishop to came forward in 2010.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900013796/lds-church-says-a-second-missionary-made-sexual-abuse-allegation-against-former-mtc-president.html

Curious that the first press release on Tuesday didn't bother to mention that there was a second victim who corroborates the story of the woman in the recording.

The church statement claims "We are committed to bringing accountability for what has occurred."  But their commitment for any transparency seems to only go as far as they are forced by pressure from the media.

I wonder when our Prophet will address this instead of unnamed church spokespeople?

Edited March 24, 2018 by rockpond

[Calm]

Perhaps they wanted to check with the victim first before making the knowledge public.  Just as the identity of the first victim is now out there once she was talked about publicly, it is likely anyone's name is going to eventually be exposed.

If this was so, probably could have been phrased better.

I am frustrated, but believe we probably don't have all the reasons they were reluctant to share more than miminal information. Some of the reasons I might even disagree with, but it would be good to know before insisting they should have behaved a certain way.

Edited March 24, 2018 by Calm

[rockpond]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

Perhaps they wanted to check with the victim first before making the knowledge public.  Just as the identity of the first victim is now out there once she was talked about publicly, it is likely anyone's name is going to eventually be exposed.

If this was so, probably could have been phrased better.

I am frustrated, but believe we probably don't have all the reasons they were reluctant to share more than miminal information. Some of the reasons I might even disagree with, but it would be good to know before insisting they should have behaved a certain way.

They didn't identify her.  I'm not sure why it would matter if they mentioned that there was a second woman who corroborated her story rather than letting so many people assume that she was out making false accusations against multiple men and that Bishop was just her latest target.

And all the evidence suggests that, without MormonLeaks, they would have kept this all hidden.  I'm sure some will feel that's justified but it's not helping us work towards solutions.

[Calm]

Please ignore.  Imprudent comment.

Edited March 24, 2018 by Calm

[SamuelTheLamanite]

Would carbon dioxide continue to skeptical? It is now almost certain that Bishop is guilty and must be held accountable. It is very troubling that local leaders didn't believe the sisters. All allegations must be taken seriously. I see change coming to the church now.  

Edited March 24, 2018 by SamuelTheLamanite

[rockpond]

2 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Would carbon dioxide continue to skeptical? It is now almost certain that Bishop is guilty and must be held accountable. It is very troubling that local leaders didn't believe the sisters. All allegations must be taken seriously. I see change coming to the church now.  

Too bad they couldn't have changed without having their hand forced.  How many other cases of sexual abuse have been settled with hush money?

[drums12]

16 hours ago, rockpond said:

Here's the latest.  Apparently there was a second victim of Bishop to came forward in 2010.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900013796/lds-church-says-a-second-missionary-made-sexual-abuse-allegation-against-former-mtc-president.html

Curious that the first press release on Tuesday didn't bother to mention that there was a second victim who corroborates the story of the woman in the recording.

The church statement claims "We are committed to bringing accountability for what has occurred."  But their commitment for any transparency seems to only go as far as they are forced by pressure from the media.

I wonder when our Prophet will address this instead of unnamed church spokespeople?

Your thread title says "the Church knew."  I read the article you linked to.  It says the second accuser told her local leaders.  Then his leaders confronted him.  I don't know if you're aware, but Bishops and Stake Presidents have directories and can (and do) contact leaders of other Stakes/Wards directly.  I know this from personal experience.  So while it's possible this was reported by her leaders to Salt Lake, it is also possible it wasn't.  We don't know the details.  In any case, let me state emphatically that I am disgusted, repulsed, and sickened by this whole thing.  If General Authorities knew, and it seems likely that at least Elder Asay and Elder Wells had some knowledge of this man's proclivities, there is no defending them.  

edited to remove personal content

 

Edited March 24, 2018 by drums12

[jkwilliams]

7 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Too bad they couldn't have changed without having their hand forced.  How many other cases of sexual abuse have been settled with hush money?

A friend of mine, who is an attorney, said:

John: it's not a coincidence that it was during litigation against the church in a sex abuse case when I determined the church is not true.

[Jeanne]

Hope tithing dollars are not used for such negotiations.  The very idea that they gave good counsel and got help for this second woman sounds delightful...but why would she need help...if she were lying?  Oh well..Bishop denied so we will just let that one go...is anybody sick about this?

[rockpond]

12 minutes ago, drums12 said:

Your thread title says "the Church knew."  I read the article you linked to.  It says the second accuser told her local leaders.  Then his leaders confronted him.  I don't know if you're aware, but Bishops and Stake Presidents have directories and can (and do) contact leaders of other Stakes/Wards directly.  I know this from personal experience.  So while it's possible this was reported by her leaders to Salt Lake, it is also possible it wasn't.  We don't know the details.  In any case, let me state emphatically that I am disgusted, repulsed, and sickened by this whole thing.  If General Authorities knew, and it seems likely that at least Elder Asay and Elder Wells had some knowledge of this man's proclivities, there is no defending them.  

My testimony, which was already like a few leaves clinging to a tree in November, it now more like down to its last leaf.  I have come to the conclusion that I have to take my concerns (all of them from historical issues to modern Church policies, Mormon culture, etc) to God.  If He wants me to stay I need to know from him.  Otherwise I think I have to walk away to have some mental peace.  In fact, I've not attended church in almost a year.  I don't plan to resign my membership, but I really have a hard time seeing myself being fully engaged in Mormonism anymore.  My heart is broken, for many reasons, of which this sexual abuse issue is just the latest.  Sorry for the personal stuff in this post.  

I agree that Tad Walch's first sentence could be read two ways:  "The LDS Church learned in 2010 that a second woman had made an allegation of sexual abuse against a former president of the church's Missionary Training Center in Provo, the church said in a statement released Friday afternoon."  Did they learn IN 2010 that the woman had made an allegation?  Or, did they learn AFTER Tuesday's press release that a second woman had come forward in 2010?

I'm not entirely sure but the church newsroom has shown itself to be trying to hide as much as possible.  Again, where is our prophet?  Why won't he address this head on?

But... thank you for sharing a bit of your faith journey.  I think I understand some of your pain as I believe I have been there.

[rockpond]

4 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Hope tithing dollars are not used for such negotiations.  The very idea that they gave good counsel and got help for this second woman sounds delightful...but why would she need help...if she were lying?  Oh well..Bishop denied so we will just let that one go...is anybody sick about this?

I'm sick.

And, in my opinion, "tithing dollars" were used because that's all the church has.  Everything it has ever been given, or gained by the service of church members, or earned from interest off of donations, etc is "tithing".

[carbon dioxide]

3 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Would carbon dioxide continue to skeptical? It is now almost certain that Bishop is guilty and must be held accountable. It is very troubling that local leaders didn't believe the sisters. All allegations must be taken seriously. I see change coming to the church now.  

I was not going to comment since I was banned from the other thread so I simply will say this and nothing more.  I was not skeptical or asserting that what is claimed to have happened did not happen. I have no reason to believe she is lying.  I am just frustrated and maybe a little skeptical of the motive being that it is 2018.   These things come out decades after the fact and the remedy seems to be often in society is to sue organizations like the Church when they were not responsible for what the individual who committed the crime did.  Sue the person responsible is fine but don't sue people and organizations if they were not involved in the actual crime.   I don't know what the victim is seeking so I will keep an open mind but as a general rule when I hear about any lawsuit and money is high on the list of what they are suing for, I do question motive.   I do believe there should be a law that says in any lawsuit,  anything beyond paying legal costs and medical bills should be given to charity.   If such was a law, it would clarify motive and would eliminate many of the lawsuits in our society where many people do actually use the legal system as a way to financial security.  That does happen and I believe you would agree that it does.   I don't know if that is her intent and perhaps I was wrong to assume it but it is an issue that needs to be clarified in my mind.  That is really my problem and not much beyond that.  That is all I have to say.  

[Calm]

Quote

When she reported the alleged abuse to her local church leaders in 2010, they provided emotional support as well as professional counseling services.

Seems coincidental that the two both reported in 2010.  There must have been some contact...that is the only reason I can think leaders would ignore two accounts of abuse.

[ttribe]

7 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

I was not going to comment since I was banned from the other thread so I simply will say this and nothing more.  I was not skeptical or asserting that what is claimed to have happened did not happen. I have no reason to believe she is lying.  I am just frustrated and maybe a little skeptical of the motive being that it is 2018.   These things come out decades after the fact and the remedy seems to be often in society is to sue organizations like the Church when they were not responsible for what the individual who committed the crime did.  Sue the person responsible is fine but don't sue people and organizations if they were not involved in the actual crime.   I don't know what the victim is seeking so I will keep an open mind but as a general rule when I hear about any lawsuit and money is high on the list of what they are suing for, I do question motive.   I do believe there should be a law that says in any lawsuit,  anything beyond paying legal costs and medical bills should be given to charity.   If such was a law, it would clarify motive and would eliminate many of the lawsuits in our society where many people do actually use the legal system as a way to financial security.  That does happen and I believe you would agree that it does.   I don't know if that is her intent and perhaps I was wrong to assume it but it is an issue that needs to be clarified in my mind.  That is really my problem and not much beyond that.  That is all I have to say.  

Victims hide.  They fear.  They try to forget.  It's not a coincidence that the #MeToo movement has so many woman finally speaking out about abuse; it's because they finally feel the collective courage to do so.  I suspect that's part of what we are seeing with these two women, as well.

Edited March 24, 2018 by ttribe

[carbon dioxide]

21 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I'm sick.

And, in my opinion, "tithing dollars" were used because that's all the church has.  Everything it has ever been given, or gained by the service of church members, or earned from interest off of donations, etc is "tithing".

I thought of that as well and I would be very offended if my tithing money was being used to pay lawyers and settlements.  However the church does have lots of income that come from other places and that do not come from member donations so i am sure that is where the money comes from.  The money for the mall near temple square came from its business income.   Otherwise I would withhold my tith money because my tith money is meant to build up the church, not to pay lawyers.  I work too hard and sacrifice too much for that.

Edited March 24, 2018 by carbon dioxide

[ttribe]

Just now, carbon dioxide said:

I thought of that as well and I would be very offended if my tithing money was being used to pay lawyers and settlements.  However the church does have lots of income that come from other places and that do not come from member donations so i am sure that is where the money comes from.  Otherwise I would withhold my tith money because my tith money is meant to build up the church, not to pay lawyers.  I work too hard and sacrifice too much for that.

All of the Church's money started out as tithing and donations.  They didn't buy and build businesses and assets out of thin air.  It may not have been your tithing money, but it was someone's.

[Avatar4321]

The Gospel is true regardless of whether people don't follow it or make mistakes. God still lives. Jesus Christ is still our Savior. He is still the source of our healing. The scriptures are still true. 

[rockpond]

16 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said:

The Gospel is true regardless of whether people don't follow it or make mistakes. God still lives. Jesus Christ is still our Savior. He is still the source of our healing. The scriptures are still true. 

Nobody here has suggested otherwise. 

[Avatar4321]

1 minute ago, rockpond said:

Nobody here has suggested otherwise. 

You and I are clearly reading different threads

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Jeanne said:

Hope tithing dollars are not used for such negotiations.  The very idea that they gave good counsel and got help for this second woman sounds delightful...but why would she need help...if she were lying?  Oh well..Bishop denied so we will just let that one go...is anybody sick about this?

I know I am sick about it. I feel no pity for him, although since he is 85 (if I read correctly) he may not remember much. However, from what I heard, he does know he has "molested others", so his memory lapse may just be due to the number of victims. If so I am even more sickened! I also do not feel sorry about whatever befalls the Church leaders whom she told, and who failed to act. As Jesus Christ himself said, "Woe be unto him that harms one of these little ones, for it would be better that they were never born", (sorry recalling this from memory) he also says, "they should have a millstone put around their necks and be cast into the sea". 

Now, before anyone points out that these women were not "little ones", because they were at least 21. That does not matter, these young women were in the MTC, giving of their time and lives to preach the Gospel. Also their parents sent them there at their expense, because they too believed, and someone to whom they were entrusted, violated that trust. In short there is NO excuse for this kind of behavior, ether in the act, or covering up that act! 

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, drums12 said:

Your thread title says "the Church knew."  I read the article you linked to.  It says the second accuser told her local leaders.  Then his leaders confronted him.  I don't know if you're aware, but Bishops and Stake Presidents have directories and can (and do) contact leaders of other Stakes/Wards directly.  I know this from personal experience.  So while it's possible this was reported by her leaders to Salt Lake, it is also possible it wasn't.  We don't know the details.  In any case, let me state emphatically that I am disgusted, repulsed, and sickened by this whole thing.  If General Authorities knew, and it seems likely that at least Elder Asay and Elder Wells had some knowledge of this man's proclivities, there is no defending them.  

My testimony, which was already like a few leaves clinging to a tree in November, it now more like down to its last leaf.  I have come to the conclusion that I have to take my concerns (all of them from historical issues to modern Church policies, Mormon culture, etc) to God.  If He wants me to stay I need to know from him.  Otherwise I think I have to walk away to have some mental peace.  In fact, I've not attended church in almost a year.  I don't plan to resign my membership, but I really have a hard time seeing myself being fully engaged in Mormonism anymore.  My heart is broken, for many reasons, of which this sexual abuse issue is just the latest.  Sorry for the personal stuff in this post.

 

I hear ya.

[rockpond]

1 hour ago, Avatar4321 said:

You and I are clearly reading different threads

Please identify who in this thread said that the gospel wasn’t true because of this mess?

[cinepro]

1 hour ago, Avatar4321 said:

The Gospel is true regardless of whether people don't follow it or make mistakes. God still lives. Jesus Christ is still our Savior. He is still the source of our healing. The scriptures are still true. 

Except for the stuff about leaders having discernment.  This might just put the nail in the coffin on that one for a lot of members...

[cinepro]

I don't think the Deseret News article has the whole statement from the Church.

This line:

Quote

"We are committed to bringing accountability for what has occurred."

...probably reads this way in the original:

Quote

"Now that this has gone public and we have exhausted all avenues of plausible deniability, we are committed to bringing accountability for what has occurred, decades after it was first reported and ignored."

 

Edited March 24, 2018 by cinepro

[rockpond]

58 minutes ago, cinepro said:

I don't think the Deseret News article has the whole statement from the Church.

This line:

...probably reads this way in the original:

 

Exactly.  

Thank you for fixing it.