There was a second woman, and the church knew

[bluebell]

52 minutes ago, Maestrophil said:

My opinion - pedophiles do not reform.  

I agree with you, but even if a small percentage of them can or do, it's still a situation where extreme measures need to be taken so that everyone else can be kept safe.  Sending some kid out on a mission who struggles with this sin just seems insane.  

Edited March 27, 2018 by bluebell

[cinepro]

53 minutes ago, Danzo said:

if ricks is 23 and he mollested a girl in 1997

was ricks a 2 year old when he molested a 6 year old?

 

It looks like he was 23 in 1999 (and the mission call was rescinded once the Church realized he was, in fact, a child molester):

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/688956/Molesters-mission-call-withdrawn.html

Quote

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has rescinded a mission assignment for a convicted child molester.

Shonn M. Ricks, 23, of Benson, Cache County, served about 14 months in prison.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 27, 2018 by cinepro

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

http://www.nowscape.com/atheism/mo_pedophile.htm

Just a portion... but seems this has been going on for quite awhile. That some bishops still don't get it, or don't read the handbook. 

But Lavina Fielding Anderson, an excommunicated Mormon who co-wrote a book
documenting what she describes as widespread "ecclesiastical and spiritual
abuses" by the church in cases of child abuse, said she was not surprised
recently when a development in the case of convicted child molester Shonn M.
Ricks made the news in Utah.

Ricks, 23, was found guilty by a Salt Lake City jury of molesting a 6-year-old
girl in February 1997.  Citing Ricks' severe heart condition, the judge reduced
his two second-degree felony convictions to third-degree felonies, which carry a
maximum sentence of five years rather than the 15 years he could have received.

Then when Ricks, a Mormon, came up for parole in a hearing last August, his
friends, relatives and church leaders reportedly filled the room.

The reason: Mormon leaders contended that Ricks was sufficiently rehabilitated
after less than two years in prison to receive a church "call" to a mission in
Chile.

The parole board chairman, also a Mormon, pushed for the early release -- which
the full board later approved -- and Ricks was freed over the objections of the
victim's father, who also is a Mormon.

I think members sometimes get confused about what repentance is and what the Atonement does for the repentant.  Repentance does not take away all consequences of our sins.  Being repentant does not mean that you are free from suffering all the effects of the consequences of your sins.  

As members, we need to be supportive and forgiving, but not dumb.

[juliann]

3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

http://www.nowscape.com/atheism/mo_pedophile.htm

Just a portion... but seems this has been going on for quite awhile. That some bishops still don't get it, or don't read the handbook. 

 

Any reason why you left off a highly important portion....that higher leadership rescinded the mission call when made aware??  Not cool.

[Calm]

4 hours ago, Maestrophil said:

My opinion - pedophiles do not reform.  

Not all child molestors are pedophiles, they may be situational offenders.  Juvenile offenders are unlikely to repeat.

Sex offenders in general have a low recividism rate.  Unfortunately haven't come across a good one that separates out child sexual abuse.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-heroux/sex-offenders-recidivism_b_976765.html

Having said that, no way would I put someone who has molested a child in the past in an unnecessary stressful situation (which missions are) or in any authority position with anyone under 18.

Edited March 27, 2018 by Calm

[rongo]

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

Not all child molestors are pedophiles, they may be situational offenders.  Juvenile offenders are unlikely to repeat.

Boy, do I disagree with all of the above. Even if the Huffington Post says otherwise. 

If juvenile offenders are unlikely to repeat, then why annotate their records (usually for life)?

[Calm]

17 minutes ago, rongo said:

Boy, do I disagree with all of the above. Even if the Huffington Post says otherwise. 

If juvenile offenders are unlikely to repeat, then why annotate their records (usually for life)?

The previous stats I posted up specifically dealing with child sexual abuse has the stats on juvenile offenders, the huffington post was only for an easy stat on sex offenders in general.  Even if really inaccurate, it is the relationship with other rates of recividism I find interesting.  Every site I read had sex offenders as lower recividism, which doesn't mean no sex offenders reoffended, so caution is always wise.

Juvenile offenders likely abuse other children because they are the only available to them sexual option...easy access, easy control, they are likely not pedophiles (those attracted to children sexually).

Even if they are unlikely to reoffend, it may still be at a higher rate than juveniles or adults who did not offend as juveniles...can't remember if I saw stats on that, I know being a victim as a child really ups the chance of being a victim as an adult.

I am not an expert.  Just sharing stats from research.  If you have better sources, I would be very interested to post them ( I like the darkness into light site because it avoids much of the emotional drama language other sites had, plus is about the easiest to understand with the most collected stats in one place, they use CDC numbers too).

Edited March 27, 2018 by Calm

[Maestrophil]

20 hours ago, bluebell said:

I agree with you, but even if a small percentage of them can or do, it's still a situation where extreme measures need to be taken so that everyone else can be kept safe.  Sending some kid out on a mission who struggles with this sin just seems insane.  

Or making them a mission president, or leader (yes, I know Bishop was not a pedophile, but the principle is the same)