sunstoned Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 (edited) If this information is true, I will be shocked. This is what you would expect from a cut throat for profit corporation. Not a christian church. Quote Lawyers for @LDSchurch accumulated a dossier on the woman who accused former MTC pres of rape. The attorney CC'd the son of the accuser, who, as the scandal was unfolding, emailed a truncated version to members of the media. Quote Turner Bitton with the Utah Coalition Against Sexual Assault says even if the church didn’t put out the letter, the methods used in it are intended to silence accusers, “it sends a message to that individual person but to everyone else that if you come forward we are going to dig through your past we're going to dig through your experiences who you are your very identity,” Bitton said. http://kutv.com/news/local/exclusive-documents-reveal-how-the-lds-church-responded-to-mtc-sex-scandal Edited March 31, 2018 by sunstoned 1
Marginal Gains Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 (edited) After 30 years of inaction, after having his confession in their hands, the action they took was to send ‘the boys’ round to intimidate the victims family? Edited March 31, 2018 by Marginal Gains 1
Popular Post The Nehor Posted March 31, 2018 Popular Post Posted March 31, 2018 This is one of the most confusing and badly written articles I have ever read. The writer should be fired for gross incompetence. At one point of the accuser sent it but in the first sentence it reads like the accused and his son and lawyer sent it but it is not clear if his son is the lawyer in question. There is a dossier about the accuser written by a lawyer for the church that could possibly be used to weaken her credibility. Okay, that is normal lawyer stuff. Now I guess Bishop’s son sent it to the media to discredit her publicly which is a stupid move. The church lawyer is ticked that he forwarded it because it is part of normal settlement negotiations. Some Guy insinuated that using these records is wrong for some reason he never elaborates on. This is normal settlement stuff. You show a bit of your hand to ****er and see if you can work something out without a trial. What is so shocking about this other than that Bishop’s son is a moron? 8
The Nehor Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 4 minutes ago, Marginal Gains said: After 30 years of inaction, after having his confession in their hands, the action they took was to send ‘the boys’ round to intimidate the victims family? No, they got together a dossier of what they have and sent it to the attorneys of the victim. The attorneys of the victim are also putting together something like it about the accused. Where do you get that they are trying to intimidate her family? 1
Marginal Gains Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 (edited) 20 minutes ago, The Nehor said: No, they got together a dossier of what they have and sent it to the attorneys of the victim. The attorneys of the victim are also putting together something like it about the accused. Where do you get that they are trying to intimidate her family? https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10213620200730716&id=1574530763 and Quote Lawyers for @LDSchurch accumulated a dossier on the woman who accused former MTC pres of rape. The attorney CC'd the son of the accuser, who, as the scandal was unfolding, emailed a truncated version to members of the media. They already had the guys confession. He had admitted it. Why were the Church’s lawyers digging for dirt on the victim at that point? Quote Turner Bitton with the Utah Coalition Against Sexual Assault said even if the church didn’t put out the letter, the methods used in it are intended to silence accusers. “It sends a message to that individual person, but to everyone else, that if you come forward we are going to dig through your past we're going to dig through your experiences who you are your very identity,” Bitton said. I think the Church now needs to come clean about who holds what records on members and who they will share that information with. Edited March 31, 2018 by Marginal Gains 4
Marginal Gains Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 (edited) At the point Greg Bishop did this, he had known for months that his father had confessed. Quote SALT LAKE CITY — (KUTV) - On March 20, as a sexual assault scandal was exploding around former Missionary Training Center President Joseph Bishop, his son, and attorney Greg Bishop sent an email to 2News unsolicited. In the email, he unspools a five-page dossier about the past of the woman who had accused his father of rape. The email included the woman’s criminal record, alleged false allegations she’d made in the past, and jobs she’d lost. It even included details about an incident that occurred when she was 17 years old. Bishop encouraged reporters to examine the woman’s past adding, “consider the source.” Edited March 31, 2018 by Marginal Gains 1
Rajah Manchou Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, The Nehor said: There is a dossier about the accuser written by a lawyer for the church that could possibly be used to weaken her credibility. Okay, that is normal lawyer stuff. How does one be normal about weakening the credibility of a sister missionary who was taken here by her MTC Mission President? “It was very dirty, dusty, [with] water dripping, running down the walls. It was a dark dank smelly place,” the person told 2News. “That’s why the fully built out little room down there was so odd. It had nice floors, walls, ceilings but no windows. It looked like almost any other training room in the MTC with the exception of the bed of course. It was just really odd and totally out of place.” The former employee told 2News they felt compelled to share their experience after hearing Bishop’s accuser’s story. They said “There is no earthly reason she should’ve known that room existed, and no reason anyone should’ve been in the room alone with her.” And to crank it up to WarrenJeffs-level creepy: The former employee said they were told the room was “used by the previous MTC president as a place he would take naps and sometimes pray and also watch [Mormon Tabernacle Choir] videos to help him relax.” [source] I do hope its not as awful as this sounds. Edited March 31, 2018 by Rajah Manchou 4
provoman Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 (edited) 6 hours ago, Marginal Gains said: After 30 years of inaction, after having his confession in their hands, the action they took was to send ‘the boys’ round to intimidate the victims family? CFR TO “having his confession” CFR to “send ‘the boys’ round to intimidate the victim’s family” Edited March 31, 2018 by provoman
provoman Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 5 hours ago, Marginal Gains said: At the point Greg Bishop did this, he had known for months that his father had confessed. CFR What proof do you offer to show that Greg Bishop “had known for months that his father had confessed”?
Amulek Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 (edited) Quote Jordan acknowledged that he wrote the letter and only sent it to Bishop because he had been included in an email chain by the accuser’s attorney. Jordan says he did not release the letter to the media. I don't want this to sound like vicarious victim blaming, but it sounds like the mishandling was by the victim's lawyer. It isn't the church's fault that their attorney copied Bishop's son on the email - the victim's lawyer is responsible for that by including him in their correspondence with the church. The judgement mistake by the son to take the (legally obtained) information public is his own fault - not the church's. Edited March 31, 2018 by Amulek 3
Gray Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 6 hours ago, Marginal Gains said: I think the Church now needs to come clean about who holds what records on members and who they will share that information with. There's been a lot of talk about the confidentiality of the confessional. I've always been skeptical about that because this stuff tends to leak out at the ward level. Looks like there's even more reason to be skeptical about that.
Popular Post juliann Posted March 31, 2018 Popular Post Posted March 31, 2018 I don't find it surprising a legal team would investigate someone who is suing their client. They would be irresponsible not to. I am bothered that anything was shared with the perp, though. It doesn't even make sense to me, the church and Bishop have different interests. As I said before, I think that stunningly stupid son has done more damage to his predator father than anyone could have thought possible. The apple apparently doesn't fall far from the tree.... 7
why me Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 (edited) I think that we all need to see where it all will land before commenting on the people involved because it all tends to go this way: those who want to believe that the church is at fault will have their opinions and speculations. And others will have their opinions. At the end of the day, very few of the now pundits know what exactly happened. It will all come out eventually. Edited March 31, 2018 by why me 1
Exiled Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 The church will fight hard to defend its reputation, regardless of whatever damage may happen to an accuser. I think this is the message that was sent. 2
Popular Post cinepro Posted March 31, 2018 Popular Post Posted March 31, 2018 (edited) I doubt that the Church or its lawyers ever created such a dossier about the accuser. After all, when the initial accusations were made public on March 21, the Church itself let us know... Quote “The church, as a religious organization, does not have the investigative tools available to law enforcement agencies. Nor can the church substitute for the courts in adjudicating legal claims. The church has great faith in the judicial system to determine the truth of these claims,” http://universe.byu.edu/2018/03/21/lds-church-responds-to-allegations-of-sexual-abuse-by-former-mtc-president/ If the Church didn't have the resources to investigate an MTC President who was accused of assault, then there's no way they would have the resources to investigate a former member who never held a position of distinction. To think otherwise is just illogical! But in all seriousness, this is an utter disaster for the Church. Ever since this first came to light on the 21st, literally nothing has come out that has made the Church look competent, let alone "good." In a normal organization, the CEO by now would have become the public face of the situation, and I suspect privately people would be losing their jobs. I'm extremely disappointed that President Nelson hasn't called a press conference and said "Here's what happened (as far as we know), we're sorry, and here's what we're going to do..." I suspect the reason that hasn't happened is because, for the most part, Church members still don't really know or care about what happened. Edited March 31, 2018 by cinepro 12
ERMD Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 I was in the MTC when Joseph Bishop was the mission president there. The one thing I remember from one of his talks given in a devotional is, "Don't do anything stupid." 2
Duncan Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 3 minutes ago, ERMD said: I was in the MTC when Joseph Bishop was the mission president there. The one thing I remember from one of his talks given in a devotional is, "Don't do anything stupid." where did you serve?
jkwilliams Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 18 minutes ago, ERMD said: I was in the MTC when Joseph Bishop was the mission president there. The one thing I remember from one of his talks given in a devotional is, "Don't do anything stupid." He was the president when I was there, too. 2
california boy Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 43 minutes ago, Exiled said: The church will fight hard to defend its reputation, regardless of whatever damage may happen to an accuser. I think this is the message that was sent. That is the clear message I get. And those that defend Bishop have the exact same mentality. Am I wrong on the timing? I thought that this woman initially did not intend to sue the church and that the law suit happened after this all came out, including the remarks by Bishop's son. If that is the case, then the church investigating and collecting information to smear the victim when they don't have the resources to investigate Bishop is just unbelievable. Please correct me if I have the timing wrong. And Bishop is still a member in good standing right? Or has he been exed?
DBMormon Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 these questions need answered and remember, Questions Are Honored! 1.)Why were Joseph Bishop’s books removed from Deseret Book in December 2017 when he admitted to officers he asked to see her breasts? And certainly by Jan 2018 when the Church learned of the audio? 2.) church statements indicate that Church leaders have little ability to discern the guilt of a abuser in such cases. Why is the spirit of discernment useless in such cases? When is the Spirit of discernment useful and when is it not? 3.) President Kimball and several other high ranking leaders were involved in calling Bishop to his higher callings. Why was the spirit of discernment not helpful in the extending of these callings? 4.) Why did you act surprised by the leaked audio and the allegations when you knew these since at least 2010, knew there was a second victim, and also assuredly had the Dec 2017 police report admission of his immorality, as well as had knowledge of the audio since Jan 2018? 5.) Why did the Church choose to use rhetoric that called into question the victims credibility when the Church knew there was a second victim, assuredly had the Dec 2017 police report admission of his immorality, as well as had knowledge of the audio (Where Bishop gives a partial confession) since Jan 2018? 6.) Why when the Church had to have understood that Bishop was guilty of abuse due to knowing there was a second victim, assuredly had the Dec 2017 police report admission of his immorality, as well as had knowledge of the audio (Where Bishop gives a partial confession) since Jan 2018, did the Church begin to collect every negative piece of info on the victim knowing she was almost assuredly telling the truth. 7.) Why did the Church imply that it had turned over to police her allegations of abuse when what they actually turned over was her threats to Bishop’s life over to police? Why did the Church fail to disclose the actual substance of that reporting to law enforcement? 8.) Why imply that you trust law enforcement to bring justice and arrive at the truth when law enforcement has already said they can do nothing due to the statute of limitations? 9.) Why did the Church claim it knew nothing about the results from the Pleasant Grove Police investigation in 2010? It could have and likely did have that report shortly after its completion but certainly when the Church PR stated it did not know the results in March of 2018, it certainly had the results then. LDS Church did you have the police report of this when Church PR spoke saying you did not know the results? 10.) How many good righteous leaders failed at using discernment throughout this entire church journey of Joseph Bishop, including prophet of the Church? 11.) Why did the Church state that only “a few weeks” had passed between their knowing the audio and the audio leaking when it had actually been 8 weeks or essentially 2 months? 12.) Why does the Church fail to act every step of the way allowing Bishop to go undisciplined and to continue in callings around children and youth in spite of knowing he had admitted to asking to see her breasts, knowing there was a second victim, hearing his own partial admission on audio….. continuing up to the present moment? 13.) In light of #12 How am I supposed to have confidence in the LDS Church to take sexual abuse seriously and have confidence that the Church will seek to prevent abuse and protect victims? 14.) Why does putting together a dossier on a victim containing dozens and dozens of pages of dirt on her seem to go so quick while discerning and or collecting enough dirt on Joseph Bishop the abuser seems to be an impossible task that Law Enforcement is more equipped to handle by the Church’s own words. 15.) Why in the two months of knowing the leaked audio was Joseph Bishop allowed to continue in his calling in his local Sunday School Presidency where he would have continued direct access to youth and young adults? 16.) The BYU law Enforcement when asked for their report by new agencies first issued a completely redacted report. Was the LDS Church and any kind of representative from it involved in conversations with BYU law enforcement contributing to a discussion of that redaction. 17.) The Victim claims her Bishop from 1987 not only reached out to Church leadership about her allegations but that he also put the victim in touch with Carlos Assay. The Victim swears she met with Assay over this allegation. And the Church acknowledges it reached out to her 1987 Bishop three times by phone. Is this Bishop helping the Church cover-up the Assay visit and what was the substance of those three phone calls? Every part of this victims story seems to check out. Her making up a visit with Carlos Assay seems a ridiculous thing to fabricate and knowing what the Church has done through this entire episode, which seems more likely? That the Victim created the Assay story out of whole cloth or that the Church is doing all it can to wipe that visit off the record? 18.) What is the Church’s reason for the victim knowing about this secret room that is behind multiple locked doors. Eric Hawkins agreed that room exists and the Room is not one students could access normally and the victim knowing about this room speaks volumes about the credibility of her story. Why didn’t the Church take her allegations seriously knowing this room existed and there is little reason to grasp how she would have known about it otherwise? 19.) Why was Greg Bishop in a conversation about the dossier on this woman? Why was he CC’d on Church /Legal Docs he was not supposed to have? 20.) If he received these by accident as the Church alleges, why didn’t the Church go public acknowledging the mistake and condemning his use of it when he begin quoting the Docs word for word in his conversations with the media and the Church knowing he was CC’d on the Docs 3
juliann Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 37 minutes ago, cinepro said: But in all seriousness, this is an utter disaster for the Church. Ever since this first came to light on the 21st, literally nothing has come out that has made the Church look competent, let alone "good." In a normal organization, the CEO by now would have become the public face of the situation, and I suspect privately people would be losing their jobs. I'm extremely disappointed that President Nelson hasn't called a press conference and said "Here's what happened (as far as we know), we're sorry, and here's what we're going to do..." I suspect the reason that hasn't happened is because, for the most part, Church members still don't really know or care about what happened. Actually, I think the church is doing the smart thing and keeping their mouth shut, unlike the son. It wouldn't be any wiser for them to start blabbing than it was for the son. I do think most members care, assuming they have gotten a complete story. If all they are hearing is a background like this victim has and a denial from a mission prez, I wouldn't blame them for doubting. The church does care about public opinion and I am seeing the most rapid responses since Pres Nelson stepped up than usual. Notice how fast they responded to the children in rooms with older men. I am encouraged. 3
Exiled Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 8 minutes ago, california boy said: That is the clear message I get. And those that defend Bishop have the exact same mentality. Am I wrong on the timing? I thought that this woman initially did not intend to sue the church and that the law suit happened after this all came out, including the remarks by Bishop's son. If that is the case, then the church investigating and collecting information to smear the victim when they don't have the resources to investigate Bishop is just unbelievable. Please correct me if I have the timing wrong. And Bishop is still a member in good standing right? Or has he been exed? I believe she and her lawyer were in settlement negotiations with the church and the church gathered dirt against her as a way to show her and her lawyer how hard they will fight.
Robert F. Smith Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 15 hours ago, sunstoned said: If this information is true, I will be shocked. This is what you would expect from a cut throat for profit corporation. Not a christian church. http://kutv.com/news/local/exclusive-documents-reveal-how-the-lds-church-responded-to-mtc-sex-scandal The article you cite is a confused mass of very poor quality. The reporter obviously unable to make a coherent and meaningful presentation. The basic info is best gotten first at http://kutv.com/news/local/lds-church-responds-to-allegations-of-sexual-assault-by-former-mission-president . The ultimate problem is that one cannot wait over 30 years to obtain the facts. The perpetrator is 85. His son is his attorney. They are naturally trying to discredit the victim, who may be impeached based on her actual record. Reconstructing what actually happened at this remove is absurd and impractical. No one gains anything at this point, even if there had been a good case originally. 3
Bernard Gui Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 (edited) So glad we have so many experts here on what everyone else is thinking, plotting, hiding, doing, not doing, did, didn’t, said, didn’t say, admitted, denied, discerned, failed to discern, ignored, blah, blah, blah. We all might want to review Elder Redlund’s talk. Edited March 31, 2018 by Bernard Gui 3
Recommended Posts