SJR3t2 Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 (edited) Sorry if this has already posted here, but reading a few comments at the end of the thread makes me thing it has not been shared. Please take note this is being done by a long time lawyer. https://mormondiscussionpodcast.org/2018/03/radio-free-mormon-28-church-sex-scandal-cover/ Edited April 27, 2018 by SJR3t2
bluebell Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 10 minutes ago, SJR3t2 said: what are her weaknesses with her statements and accusations? Well, she's assuming that everything her mother told her is the truth, for example (just like Greg Bishop has done with everything his dad told him). That's completely understandable and I think I would do the same in her situation. It's just, from an outsider's view, accusations that are based only on someone's word or opinion and that aren't supported by evidence are weak. Some of the accusations she levels that have no evidence except her mother's say-so or her own personal feelings are: "she was raped by Joseph Bishop, the MTC President" "Joseph Bishop had had previously sexually assaulted women and the church knew this fact" "The church heard the tape and as an attempt to keep my birth mother quiet they compiled a dossier filled with any dirt they could gather." "My name was then given to Joseph Bishop’s son Greg Bishop and leaked to the media which I believe was not only an intimidation tactic to scare my birth mother but also a warning to other victims to demonstrate what would happen if they decide to come forward as well." 1
provoman Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 (edited) 23 minutes ago, SJR3t2 said: Sorry if this has already posted here, but reading a few comments at the end of the thread makes me thing it has not been shared. Please take note this is being done by a long time lawyer. https://mormondiscussionpodcast.org/2018/03/radio-free-mormon-28-church-sex-scandal-cover/ I'd rather not spend more than the 5 minutes I spent listening to consig RFM podcast. What little I put myself through appear full of speculation as fact or otherwise Dog-whistle politics. The current conspiracy from consig is that the GRAMA (aka Freedom of Information Act) request for the Mckenna/Bishop police report has 4 different redacted versions and in conspiracyesque fashion asks Quote The real issue, it seems to me, is WHY is it the BYU police are hiding this information in their reports, and WHO is directing them to do so. These are the real questions to my mind. I wonder if consig understands that BYU Police Department claims exemption from GRAMA requests? And given that BYU PD has long held out it is exempt from public records requests, I have doubts that ANYONE at BYU PD is properly trained in redacting Public records. (and yes the redactions in one copy that are not redacted in another copy are, in my opinion, not information that qualifies for being withheld) Edited April 27, 2018 by provoman 1
Analytics Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 17 hours ago, Danzo said: Good to know where you are coming from, I disagree and think people are and should be free to do what they want (good or bad) before, after, and during ones calling. I know that it is possible to have ones "calling and election made sure" but I don't know that is a prerequisite to being called as a mission president (these and other incidents lead me to believe that isn't the case). If Bishop did have his calling and election made sure, that would explain why he hasn't been excommunicated. 2
bluebell Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 21 minutes ago, SJR3t2 said: Sorry if this has already posted here, but reading a few comments at the end of the thread makes me thing it has not been shared. Please take note this is being done by a long time lawyer. https://mormondiscussionpodcast.org/2018/03/radio-free-mormon-28-church-sex-scandal-cover/ Many here won't listen to a podcast (myself included). Is there a transcript somewhere. There have been lawyers here on the board who have also weighed in and have not come to the same conclusion shared in the blurb (RFM dissect the Church Sex Abuse Scandal coverup like a legal case. He shows the incredible evidence that the Joseph Layton Bishop Jr. case was an attempted cover-up by the Church throughout the entire event.) But maybe RFM is looking at evidence that hasn't been examined here. 1
SJR3t2 Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 1 minute ago, bluebell said: Many here won't listen to a podcast (myself included). Is there a transcript somewhere. There have been lawyers here on the board who have also weighed in and have not come to the same conclusion shared in the blurb (RFM dissect the Church Sex Abuse Scandal coverup like a legal case. He shows the incredible evidence that the Joseph Layton Bishop Jr. case was an attempted cover-up by the Church throughout the entire event.) But maybe RFM is looking at evidence that hasn't been examined here. I just looked I didn't see a transcript, but if you get to chance to listen to it in the car while driving or something like that it is well worth it.
SJR3t2 Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 4 minutes ago, Analytics said: If Bishop did have his calling and election made sure, that would explain why he hasn't been excommunicated. I think you mean the second anointing.
SJR3t2 Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 6 minutes ago, bluebell said: Well, she's assuming that everything her mother told her is the truth, for example (just like Greg Bishop has done with everything his dad told him). That's completely understandable and I think I would do the same in her situation. It's just, from an outsider's view, accusations that are based only on someone's word or opinion and that aren't supported by evidence are weak. Some of the accusations she levels that have no evidence except her mother's say-so or her own personal feelings are: "she was raped by Joseph Bishop, the MTC President" "Joseph Bishop had had previously sexually assaulted women and the church knew this fact" "The church heard the tape and as an attempt to keep my birth mother quiet they compiled a dossier filled with any dirt they could gather." "My name was then given to Joseph Bishop’s son Greg Bishop and leaked to the media which I believe was not only an intimidation tactic to scare my birth mother but also a warning to other victims to demonstrate what would happen if they decide to come forward as well." He did rape. He admitted telling church leaders. When looked at what the church has done it shows it. How else do you suppose he would have gotten the sealed records the church had? 1
provoman Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 26 minutes ago, SJR3t2 said: Sorry if this has already posted here, but reading a few comments at the end of the thread makes me thing it has not been shared. Please take note this is being done by a long time lawyer. https://mormondiscussionpodcast.org/2018/03/radio-free-mormon-28-church-sex-scandal-cover/ here is another from consig where his conspiracy about the police reports is made clear Quote It seems that as time progressed, the first effort was to focus on redacting all statements made by Joseph Bishop. Initially, it does not seem to have been a priority to hide the recording. But as time went on, and presumably as more people got involved from higher up in the church and also Kirton McConkie, efforts were made to redact any reference to the audio recording and McKenna's statement. These are NOT redactions police would be likely to make in the ordinary course of responding to such requests.They are redactions church officials would likely make in order to protect what the church considers to be sensitive information. I suspect the LDS Church is the one behind these redactions and they are using the BYU Police as their front men. What do you think? bolding added.
provoman Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 Just now, SJR3t2 said: He did rape. He admitted telling church leaders. When looked at what the church has done it shows it. How else do you suppose he would have gotten the sealed records the church had? CFR. That means "call for reference". So please provide the exact admission of rape, and we can even use the Utah definition. So if the admission is in the transcript, please copy and paste it and provide the page number. If the rape admission is elsewhere please provide the verifiable reference. 1
SJR3t2 Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 1 minute ago, provoman said: here is another from consig where his conspiracy about the police reports is made clear bolding added. I agree with the conclusion.
bluebell Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 1 minute ago, SJR3t2 said: He did rape. He admitted telling church leaders. When looked at what the church has done it shows it. How else do you suppose he would have gotten the sealed records the church had? Can you provide his statement where he admitted to rape and also told church leaders that he raped or sexually abused someone? I've read the transcript of the recording and the BYU police one but maybe i missed something.
bluebell Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 3 minutes ago, provoman said: here is another from consig where his conspiracy about the police reports is made clear bolding added. Does he have any evidence to support his accusations or is his opinion is sole support? 1
provoman Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 1 minute ago, bluebell said: Does he have any evidence to support his accusations or is his opinion is sole support? There are four redacted copies in the public view - or at least two redacted version. He claims to have four and has done a comparison. Otherwise the "who" that is the cause of the differing redactions is his opinion. Just for information, BYU PD is currently under a lawsuit regarding GRAMA (Utah public records release law) wherein BYU PD claims it is exempt. A Judge has opined that BYU PD could be subject to GRAMA, and it appears a ruling will not be out until May 14 2
smac97 Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 47 minutes ago, Exiled said: So, do you think this woman is a good example of what should happen in these cases? As I said before: "Should we second-guess this woman? Ignore her wishes? Fault her for how she has decided to proceed? No. Not at all. There is no script, no correct answer. We cannot walk in her shoes, nor can we dictate to her what is the 'right' response to what happened to her." 47 minutes ago, Exiled said: Would you say she was brave to not do anything? It certainly was her choice to not do anything. Yes. And I will not second-guess her decision. 47 minutes ago, Exiled said: However, I don't think her weakness should not be held up as an example of what should happen in these cases. It's comments like this the inhibit victims of sexual assault from speaking out. You should be ashamed. 47 minutes ago, Exiled said: Criminals ought to be punished Yes. But the criminal justice system can only work within its consitutional constraints. So what "ought to" happen often fails to happen. 47 minutes ago, Exiled said: and if this perp does something similarly criminal in the future, perhaps your friend's "brave" inaction will be partly responsible for it? It's comments like this the inhibit victims of sexual assault from speaking out. You do not have all the facts, yet you are publicly criticizing a victim of sexual assault for not reacting the way you would. You have not walked in her shoes. You should be ashamed. 47 minutes ago, Exiled said: It's understandable that someone wouldn't want to step forward. Indeed it is. Would a victim of sexual assault want some anonymous jerk calling her "weak" for not responding to a sexual assault in a prescribed way? Do you even see what you are doing here? 47 minutes ago, Exiled said: Lawsuits are time-consuming and reliving the experience through the process would be excruciating. And yet you are publicly accusing a sexual assault victim of being "weak" for not wanting to endure this "excruciating" ordeal. And you are publicly faulting her while hiding behind an online pseudonym. You should be ashamed. 47 minutes ago, Exiled said: However, I think she and others similarly situated should think of other potential victims and do what they can to stop these actions from happening in the future. "Metoo" needs to continue on and those who choose to not come forward are doing a disservice to other future victims. The mind reels. -Smac 2
stemelbow Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 29 minutes ago, bluebell said: Well, she's assuming that everything her mother told her is the truth, for example (just like Greg Bishop has done with everything his dad told him). That's completely understandable and I think I would do the same in her situation. It's just, from an outsider's view, accusations that are based only on someone's word or opinion and that aren't supported by evidence are weak. Some of the accusations she levels that have no evidence except her mother's say-so or her own personal feelings are: "she was raped by Joseph Bishop, the MTC President" "Joseph Bishop had had previously sexually assaulted women and the church knew this fact" "The church heard the tape and as an attempt to keep my birth mother quiet they compiled a dossier filled with any dirt they could gather." "My name was then given to Joseph Bishop’s son Greg Bishop and leaked to the media which I believe was not only an intimidation tactic to scare my birth mother but also a warning to other victims to demonstrate what would happen if they decide to come forward as well." I would suggest there's good evidence for anyone to logically conclude they are true statements. in some cases they might not hold up in a court of law, and it may be that someone else in another position may disagree with the conclusion, but I don't think the evidence is weak. If I were to be in her shoes, I too would think these statements are facts. In my own shoes I think they are all pretty close to being facts.
smac97 Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 21 minutes ago, SJR3t2 said: He did rape. CFR. 21 minutes ago, SJR3t2 said: He admitted telling church leaders. CFR. I'm going to hold you to this. If you don't respond with specific references, I am going to report you to the board. This kind of crappy, reckless rhetoric is not good. 21 minutes ago, SJR3t2 said: When looked at what the church has done it shows it. CFR. -Smac 1
SJR3t2 Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 5 minutes ago, smac97 said: CFR. CFR. I'm going to hold you to this. If you don't respond with specific references, I am going to report you to the board. This kind of crappy, reckless rhetoric is not good. CFR. -Smac https://mormondiscussionpodcast.org/2018/03/radio-free-mormon-28-church-sex-scandal-cover/
clarkgoble Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 10 hours ago, Marginal Gains said: Except being crucified was all part of the plan, so he needed someone to betray him. In many respects (as Mormon teachings on the topics go), Judas was used the same way Eve was. They were both required to do something wrong to facilitate the desired outcome of the plan. What they did wrong, was actually right. Apparently. I think most Mormons take Eve as making the right decision and Judas a bad decision. Of course the idea that Judas was part of the plan (it wouldn't have worked without him) makes free will deeply problematic. I think Jesus would have been arrested with or without Judas - Judas just made it easy to find Jesus. 1
provoman Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 (edited) 22 minutes ago, SJR3t2 said: https://mormondiscussionpodcast.org/2018/03/radio-free-mormon-28-church-sex-scandal-cover/ Yeah, that does not cut it, and since I also have a CFR, I will join smac in reporting you for the same reason; "This kind of crappy, reckless rhetoric is not good." Edited April 27, 2018 by provoman 1
bluebell Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 20 minutes ago, SJR3t2 said: https://mormondiscussionpodcast.org/2018/03/radio-free-mormon-28-church-sex-scandal-cover/ Board rules are very strict regarding CFR's. You can't just paste a link, you have to actually provide the statements you are asked for. Not providing statements when a CFR has been issued can be grounds for being banned from the board permanently. The link above doesn't satisfy Smac's CFR. 1
SJR3t2 Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 3 minutes ago, provoman said: Yeah, that does not cut it, and since I also have a CFR, I will join smac in reporting you. It is for sure we have a different opinion, and I'll be leaving this thread now, I only joined because someone asked me to quote something here, I shouldn't have said anything else other than that.
bluebell Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 14 minutes ago, clarkgoble said: I think most Mormons take Eve as making the right decision and Judas a bad decision. Of course the idea that Judas was part of the plan (it wouldn't have worked without him) makes free will deeply problematic. I think Jesus would have been arrested with or without Judas - Judas just made it easy to find Jesus. I agree. I've never seen it taught or even implied in the the church that it was a good thing that Judas betrayed Christ for money.
SJR3t2 Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 Just now, bluebell said: Board rules are very strict regarding CFR's. You can't just paste a link, you have to actually provide the statements you are asked for. Not providing statements when a CFR has been issued can be grounds for being banned from the board permanently. The link above doesn't satisfy Smac's CFR. I'll remember that for next time, I'm sorry that I did not have the all the rules memorized, and I'll make sure not to bring things up in the future unless I have a timestamp or text, thanks for letting me know and the mercy you extended unlike others on the forum. 1
bluebell Posted April 27, 2018 Posted April 27, 2018 Just now, SJR3t2 said: It is for sure we have a different opinion, and I'll be leaving this thread now, I only joined because someone asked me to quote something here, I shouldn't have said anything else other than that. Because you're new I want to make sure you understand what will happen if you just leave the thread but don't answer the CFR. You'll probably be banned from the entire board, which may not be what you want to have happen. Why not just provide the statements you claim you have?
Recommended Posts