Did Mckenna Denson Meet With Thomas S. Monson After MTC?

[smac97]

.

Edited April 27, 2018 by smac97

[Tacenda]

4 minutes ago, Exiled said:

Of course not. That is for BYU to do.

Luckily I think they're changing their ways, thank goodness!

[Calm]

5 minutes ago, SJR3t2 said:

I already did withdraw my claims, but I'll do it again, I made mistake, and I'm sorry.

Bit slow in catching up.  (The emojis got changed in the latest update, don't see a thumbs up.....or my zombies!)

Edited April 27, 2018 by Calm

[smac97]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

Quote

No, lauding their choice to remain silent as being courageous somehow, in order to benefit an organization that doesn't like victims asserting rights, is where it is wrong.

And who is doing that?

Nobody. 

[Calm]

Just now, smac97 said:

Nobody. 

Yep...

[SJR3t2]

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

Bit slow in catching up.  (The emojis got changed in the latest update, don't see a thumbs up.....or my zombies!)

understand the thread is a noisy and hard to follow everything, and although I read the rules, I'm learning some of the exact details that I just did not notice.

[Exiled]

29 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Ignorantly and publicly criticizing a victim of sexual assualt is well past disgusting.

You should be ashamed.

You are speaking from ignorance.

Haven't you been questioning Ms. Denson in each and every facet of every minute detail of what she has said? I think someone is projecting and that isn't me. Then you trot out this victim so you can make a point that silence is a great alternative for victims (the exact opposite of what society should be encouraging). And then you feign disgust when called out on your tactics. You only brought up the silent victim because you thought it useful for your silence is golden branch of victims' rights you conveniently want to push. I wonder how prosecutors view victims remaining silent? Do you think they support it or do you think encouraging speaking out is more what they like? What say ye counselor?

Edited April 27, 2018 by Exiled

[smac97]

1 minute ago, Exiled said:

Haven't you been questioning Ms. Denson in each and every facet of every minute detail of what she has said?

To some extent, yes.

But I haven't been publicly criticizing her for not reporting her claims of sexual assault.  

1 minute ago, Exiled said:

I think someone is projecting and that isn't me.

You are publicly criticizing the survivor of a sexual assault.  You are publicly calling her "weak."  You are publicly accusing her of lacking courage.  Because her chosen response to her assault does not comport with your expectations.

And you are doing these things while knowing virtually nothing about her or her circumstances.

1 minute ago, Exiled said:

Then you trot out this victim so you can make a point that silence is a great alternative for victims (the exact opposite of what society should be encouraging).

Bull.  I have done no so thing.  My point was nothing like this.

1 minute ago, Exiled said:

And then you feign discust when called out on your tactics.

No, I'm not feigning.  I am well and truly disgusted at what you are doing.

I am also disgusted with myself.  I hadn't thought that a person on this board would do . . . what you're doing.  I way over-estimated you.  My bad.  I regret it.

1 minute ago, Exiled said:

You only brought up the silent victim because you thought it useful for your silence is golden branch of victims' rights you conveniently want to push.

Bull.  I did nothing of the sort.  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."

I honestly did not think that someone on this board would come along and . . . second guess this woman, ignore her wishes, and fault her for how she has decided to proceed.

As I said, I way over-estimated you.  

Lesson learned.

1 minute ago, Exiled said:

I wonder how prosecutors view victims remaining silent?

I think prosecutors are generally far more informed than you are.

I also think prosecutors generally do not bully the victims of sexual assault, as you are doing.  They don't publicly accuse them of being "weak," as you are doing.  They don't publicly declare them to be lacking in courage, as you are doing.

1 minute ago, Exiled said:

Do you think they support it or do you think encouraging speaking out is more what they like? What say ye counselor?

I say your treatment of this issue is disgusting.

-Smac

[Exiled]

39 minutes ago, smac97 said:

To some extent, yes.

But I haven't been publicly criticizing her for not reporting her claims of sexual assault.  

You are publicly criticizing the survivor of a sexual assault.  You are publicly calling her "weak."  You are publicly accusing her of lacking courage.  Because her chosen response to her assault does not comport with your expectations.

And you are doing these things while knowing virtually nothing about her or her circumstances.

Bull.  I have done no so thing.  My point was nothing like this.

No, I'm not feigning.  I am well and truly disgusted at what you are doing.

I am also disgusted with myself.  I hadn't thought that a person on this board would do . . . what you're doing.  I way over-estimated you.  My bad.  I regret it.

Bull.  I did nothing of the sort.  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."

I honestly did not think that someone on this board would come along and . . . second guess this woman, ignore her wishes, and fault her for how she has decided to proceed.

As I said, I way over-estimated you.  

Lesson learned.

I think prosecutors are generally far more informed than you are.

I also think prosecutors generally do not bully the victims of sexual assault, as you are doing.  They don't publicly accuse them of being "weak," as you are doing.  They don't publicly declare them to be lacking in courage, as you are doing.

I say your treatment of this issue is disgusting.

-Smac

I think it's obvious your ploy to claim silence is a great alternative for victims doesn't work. You can invent false accusations of bullying to misdirect the real issue, but it won't work. You brought up the silent victim story in order to show that silence is a viable option for victims and that to bolster your point, you feign outrage when someone questions your motives as to why you used this victim's story for your own benefit in the first place. 

You are the one who should be ashamed of using the obviously private story for your benefit and any disgust should be directed at you. I'm sure you didn't even ask for permission from the victim prior to trotting out your latest defense (that is if it is really even a real story).

Exiled has been banned from the thread for repeated unsupported accusations that another poster is lying.  ~Mods

[ALarson]

On 4/26/2018 at 1:31 PM, smac97 said:

I have an attorney friend who had a client (also a personal friend) who was sexually assaulted by a member of the Church.  There was pretty solid forensic evidence.  The prosecutor initially pressed felony charges, but then let the case drag, and ultimately dropped the charges.  The client was initially very upset, but decided she wants to proceed with her life.  So she's letting it go.  No civil suit.  Just moving on.

My friend spoke with the client's mother (in his capacity as a friend, rather than an attorney) about whether the client has considered reporting the sexual assault to the Church.  He suggested that notifying the Church might reduce the risk of the perp assaulting someone else.  The answer came back: No, she wants to get on with life.

I can certainly understand why she'd feel like this, but it's really unfortunate that a sexual assaulter went unpunished.  I hope he didn't go on to assault other women.  If so, I hope he's been punished or been held accountable by now and is not still out there.

It sounds to me as if the prosecutor was negligent....dragging it out and then dropping the charges.  Any idea why he would have done that if (as you stated), "there was pretty solid forensic evidence"?  Kind of strange that the charges were dropped.

On 4/26/2018 at 1:31 PM, smac97 said:

Should we second-guess this woman?  Ignore her wishes?  Fault her for how she has decided to proceed? 

Not at all....never.... as long as they truly were "her wishes", then we have to respect them and never find fault regarding that.  I just hope it was not something she was talked into or that she was discouraged from making sure her assaulter was punished and held accountable....especially if this would have helped her heal.

This is a tough, emotional topic and I do believe there is no cut and dried, perfect response.  Each victim has to do what is best for them.  That's for sure. 

[Marginal Gains]

4 hours 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.

Jesus would have been easy to find - can’t have been many 6 foot white Bee Gee lookalikes in Jerusalem at that time.

Eve disobeyed God’s explicit commandment, but Mormons see that as making the right decision....now that’s an interesting precedent don’t you think?

[smac97]

20 hours ago, Exiled said:

I think it's obvious your ploy to claim silence is a great alternative for victims doesn't work.

Again, this is bull.  I have said nothing about silence being "a great alternative."

CFR, if you please, as wo there I have "claim[ed] silence is a great alternative for victims" (or something substantially to that effect).  If you don't respond, I'll report you to the mods.  This stuff is getting old.

Quote

You can invent false accusations of bullying to misdirect the real issue, but it won't work.

No inventing necessary.  Your disgusting words are posted in this thread.

And I have no need to misdirect.

Quote

You brought up the silent victim story in order to show that silence is a viable option for victims

It is not for me to publicly criticize the victim of sexual assault for choosing to get on with her life.  That's what you are doing.  You are accusing her of being "weak."  Of lacking "courage."

Disgusting comments, these.  You should be ashamed.

Quote

and that to bolster your point, you feign outrage

It's not feigned.  I am truly disgusted with what you are doing.

Quote

when someone questions your motives as to why you used this victim's story for your own benefit in the first place. 

Bull.  I didn't use this story for my "benefit."  

You are raving.

Quote

You are the one who should be ashamed of using the obviously private story for your benefit and any disgust should be directed at you.

I am ashamed.  Honestly.  I didn't think a person like you would do . . . what you have done.

I way over-estimated you.  

-Smac

Tone it down.

[smac97]

5 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I can certainly understand why she'd feel like this, but it's really unfortunate that a sexual assaulter went unpunished. 

Yes.  But that's not on her.

5 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I hope he didn't go on to assault other women. 

Same here.

5 minutes ago, ALarson said:

If so, I hope he's been punished or been held accountable by now and is not still out there.

He's still out there.  

5 minutes ago, ALarson said:

It sounds to me as if the prosecutor was negligent....dragging it out and then dropping the charges. 

Perhaps.  There are all sorts of reasons why these sorts of charges don't make it to trial.

5 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Any idea why he would have done that if (as you stated), "there was pretty solid forensic evidence"?  Kind of strange that the charges were dropped.

Yes, I have more information.  But given Exiled's behavior, I don't think I should make further comment.

I regret bringing this story up.

5 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Quote

Should we second-guess this woman?  Ignore her wishes?  Fault her for how she has decided to proceed? 

Not at all....never.... as long as they truly were "her wishes", then we have to respect them and never find fault regarding that. 

Well, tell Exiled that.  He's the one publicly accusing her of being "weak" and lacking "courage."

5 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I just hope it was not something she was talked into or that she was discouraged from making sure her assaulter was punished and held accountable....especially if this would have helped her heal.

This is a tough, emotional topic and I do believe there is no cut and dried, perfect response.  Each victim has to do what is best for them.  That's for sure. 

Not according to Exiled.  It's his way or the highway.  Sexual assault survivors who do not do what he expects them to do are - as he put it - "weak" and lacking in "courage."

-Smac

[JulieM]

On 4/26/2018 at 1:31 PM, smac97 said:

My friend spoke with the client's mother (in his capacity as a friend, rather than an attorney) about whether the client has considered reporting the sexual assault to the Church.  He suggested that notifying the Church might reduce the risk of the perp assaulting someone else. 

Wasn’t he a Bishop?   Wouldn’t he have taken action to at least hold a church court on the perpetrator?

[smac97]

23 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Quote

My friend spoke with the client's mother (in his capacity as a friend, rather than an attorney) about whether the client has considered reporting the sexual assault to the Church.  He suggested that notifying the Church might reduce the risk of the perp assaulting someone else. 

Wasn’t he a Bishop?   Wouldn’t he have taken action to at least hold a church court on the perpetrator?

That would be up to the perp's stake president.  My friend being a bishop was just a coincidence.  He had no jurisdiction over his friend or the perp.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Marginal Gains]

23 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Wasn’t he a Bishop?   Wouldn’t he have taken action to at least hold a church court on the perpetrator?

Aren’t Bishops obligated to report suspected abuse to the police?

[smac97]

1 minute ago, Marginal Gains said:

Aren’t Bishops obligated to report suspected abuse to the police?

Yes.  But the matter had already been reported to the police.  The matter was being prosecuted by the time the bishop found out about it.

Is there any time at which you could possibly give Mormons the benefit of the doubt?

-Smac

[Marginal Gains]

8 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Yes.  But the matter had already been reported to the police.  The matter was being prosecuted by the time the bishop found out about it.

Is there any time at which you could possibly give Mormons the benefit of the doubt?

-Smac

Most Mormons I know locally are great people. And I’m sure that’s true the world over.

Edited April 27, 2018 by Marginal Gains

[smac97]

7 minutes ago, Marginal Gains said:

Quote

Quote

Aren’t Bishops obligated to report suspected abuse to the police?

Yes.  But the matter had already been reported to the police.  The matter was being prosecuted by the time the bishop found out about it.

Is there any time at which you could possibly give Mormons the benefit of the doubt?

Most Mormons I know locally are great people. And I’m sure that’s true the world over.

And yet here you are, with a knee-jerk suspicion that the bishop screwed up.  

I don't understand people like you.  

-Smac

Edited April 27, 2018 by smac97

[JulieM]

15 minutes ago, smac97 said:

That would be up to the perp's stake president.  My friend being a bishop was just a coincidence. 

Did he make sure the proper church authorities were aware of this sexual abuser so he wouldn’t be put into callings or situations where he was with youth or children?

[smac97]

Just now, JulieM said:

Did he make sure the proper church authorities were aware of this sexual abuser so he wouldn’t be put into callings or situations where he was with youth or children?

Given Exiled's disgusting treatment of this matter, I'm reluctant to provide further details.  

The bishop is both an attorney and a father to daughters.  Suffice it to say that he has done everything he can do.

Thanks,

-Smac

[JulieM]

6 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Given Exiled's disgusting treatment of this matter, I'm reluctant to provide further details.  

The bishop is both an attorney and a father to daughters.  Suffice it to say that he has done everything he can do.

Thanks,

-Smac

Ok.  But you stated he couldn’t get her to notify church authorities.  I would hope he did.  He wouldn’t have had to give her identity to them and it would be negligent (I think) if he didn’t do this so others wouldn’t be abused.  He should have received church discipline and had measures put in place to keep him away from youth and children (no callings over them).

Edited April 27, 2018 by JulieM

[JulieM]

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

He's still out there.  

That’s too bad.  

But please tell me his church leaders were made aware of the danger and this case (with strong forensic evidence).  If her bishop knew, he should have notified the church leaders himself and this man’s bishop too.  He’s a sexual predator.

Was that done?

Edited April 28, 2018 by JulieM

[ALarson]

16 hours ago, smac97 said:

Yes.  But that's not on her.

Well, sure it is partially "on her".  And, no...I'm not victim blaming as you like to immediately accuse anyone of doing who questions this story.  She is not at all to blame or at all responsible for her being sexually abused.   And, she very definitely should have done what was best for her and what she felt she needed to do to move on and heal.  I don't believe anyone is blaming her for that.  But of course, that he is still out there, is partially "on her".  She could have made sure the case was not dropped (which is an extremely odd part of this story if the prosecutor had "pretty solid forensic evidence", he does not need the victim to push forward, he would have done that).  I am not questioning that she did what was best for her, but the facts are the facts.   If a victim does not make sure their abuser is punished she does share a part of the responsibility for him still being out there.  He'd most likely been behind bars if what you state is true about the evidence they had.  But to me, it sounds like she did want him punished and the prosecutor dropped the ball.  This story is pretty bizarre, IMO.

At the very least, his church leaders should have been notified (even if she declined to do that).  Others have asked this too.  Her Bishop knew of the abuse.  Were his leaders and church leaders notified?  Was a church court held for him?  Do his church leaders know he's dangerous and a sexual abuser?  If not, there's a lot to this story that simply makes no sense and I'm also wondering why you'd even bring it into this thread as it has nothing to do with Mckenna Denson and her case.  

No one should question how Denson has handled her abuse any more than what you're upset over regarding what you think others are doing to the victim in your story.  

Edited April 28, 2018 by ALarson

[Tacenda]

RadioFreeMormon podcast is going to have some new information this Sunday. Some redacted things in the police report etc. Definintely think this is the tip of the iceberg for what is going to come out that the church has kept underwraps in this case and others. 

The church can come clean and then the healing can begin and then move forward.