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

[bluebell]

2 hours ago, ALarson said:

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.  

I can definitely see where you are coming from, but I don't know that it's a given.  Does a victim bear some responsibility to make sure the perpetrator can never hurt anyone again?  If the answer is yes, then that would seem to mean that a sexual assault victim that does not prosecute to the fullest extent possible is partially responsible for any other assault the criminal commits.  

I'm not comfortable making a sexual assault victim complicit (to any degree) with any other crimes their assailant commits after they were assaulted.

[JulieM]

1 minute ago, bluebell said:

I can definitely see where you are coming from, but I don't know that it's a given.  Does a victim bear some responsibility to make sure the perpetrator can never hurt anyone again?  If the answer is yes, then that would seem to mean that a sexual assault victim that does not prosecute to the fullest extent possible is partially responsible for any other assault the criminal commits.  

I'm not comfortable making a sexual assault victim complicit (to any degree) with any other crimes their assailant commits after they were assaulted.

No, but partially responsible for the abuser not being punished.  

I don’t see anyone saying partially responsible for more victim abuse.  Only the abuser is responsible for that.  100% responsible.

And this guys church leaders should have been made aware of this case.  

[ALarson]

35 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I can definitely see where you are coming from, but I don't know that it's a given.  Does a victim bear some responsibility to make sure the perpetrator can never hurt anyone again?  If the answer is yes, then that would seem to mean that a sexual assault victim that does not prosecute to the fullest extent possible is partially responsible for any other assault the criminal commits.  

I'm not comfortable making a sexual assault victim complicit (to any degree) with any other crimes their assailant commits after they were assaulted.

That's not what I said though.  I see Julie beat me to it and I agree with her.

Any assault victim is absolutely never at all responsible for their abuser making the choice to abuse again.  Not ever.  That choice is entirely on the shoulders of any repeat sexual assault perpetrator.  But yes, a victim does make the choice of whether or not to bring charges and to follow through with punishing the sexual abuser.  At the very least, in the story that smac related, there should have been church discipline followed through, IMO, or the Bishop should have informed church leaders of the abuser so it could have been looked into in order to protect future potential victims.

Edited April 28, 2018 by ALarson

[bluebell]

13 minutes ago, ALarson said:

That's not what I said though.  I see Julie beat me to it and I agree with her.

Any assault victim is absolutely never at all responsible for their abuser making the choice to abuse again.  Not ever.  That choice is entirely on the shoulders of any repeat sexual assault perpetrator.  But yes, a victim does make the choice of whether or not to bring charges and to follow through with punishing the sexual abuser.  At the very least, in the story that smac related, there should have been church discipline followed through, IMO, or at least the very least, the Bishop should have made church leaders aware of the abuser so it could have been looked into in order to protect future potential victims.

I was responding to where you said "Well, sure it is partially "on her."  Did I misunderstand you?  I know later in that post you clarify and say that she is partially responsible for him still being out there, but him being still out there is only a problem if he harms someone else.  

If he never hurts another person, then there isn't really anything 'on' the victim, is there?  It seems like there is only something 'on' her if he assaults again.

[Bernard Gui]

18 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Any assault victim is absolutely never at all responsible for their abuser making the choice to abuse again.  Not ever.  That choice is entirely on the shoulders of any repeat sexual assault perpetrator.

On the other hand, I as a public school teacher will face criminal prosecution if I become aware of abuse and fail to report it to proper authorities. The purpose is to get protection for the victim and to stop future abuses by the perpetrator.

[ALarson]

1 minute ago, bluebell said:

I was responding to where you said "Well, sure it is partially "on her."  Did I misunderstand you?

No, I stand by that.  "Partially on her" that her abuser went unpunished.  (That's what I was specifically responding to).  She had a choice whether or not to pursue punishing him and she chose not to.  So the result was that he went "unpunished".   Read my entire post again, maybe.

I would never blame her or hold her at all responsible for any future abuse that her sexual abuser commits.  That is his choice and his choice alone and he is the only person to blame for that.

[ALarson]

8 minutes ago, bluebell said:

If he never hurts another person, then there isn't really anything 'on' the victim, is there?  It seems like there is only something 'on' her if he assaults again.

That doesn't change that fact that he went "unpunished" for abusing her.  That's what I was referring to and specifically responding to.

Edited April 28, 2018 by ALarson

[bluebell]

33 minutes ago, JulieM said:

No, but partially responsible for the abuser not being punished.  

 

But what does that matter?  I mean, don't get me wrong, it supremely sucks when guilty people are not punished for their crimes, but what exactly would a victim be responsible for if an abuser isn't punished?

[bluebell]

3 minutes ago, ALarson said:

No, I stand by that.  "Partially on her" that her abuser went unpunished.  (That's what I was specifically responding to).  She had a choice whether or not to pursue punishing him and she chose not to.  So the result was that he went "unpunished".   Read my entire post again, maybe.

I would never blame her or hold her at all responsible for any future abuse that her sexual abuser commits.  That is his choice and his choice alone and he is the only person to blame for that.

But what does it matter if he goes unpunished?  

[ALarson]

Just now, bluebell said:

But what does it matter if he goes unpunished?  

I think it is unfortunate he went unpunished (which was my original statement).  He sexually abused someone and I like to see justice served and the perpetrator held accountable.

It might not matter to you (and that's fine if you feel that way), but it does to others.  My work is with abuse victims and I know each case is individually unique.  Each victim has to do what is best for them and their healing.  I just personally believe anyone who commits sexual abuse on a child or youth (or anyone else) should be held accountable.

[ALarson]

20 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

On the other hand, I as a public school teacher will face criminal prosecution if I become aware of abuse and fail to report it to proper authorities. The purpose is to get protection for the victim and to stop future abuses by the perpetrator.

Yes, I'm aware of the laws in place.  And, I agree. 

But, that doesn't mean a victim is ever responsible for the sexual abuser committing more abuse.

Edited April 28, 2018 by ALarson

[california boy]

16 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

On the other hand, I as a public school teacher will face criminal prosecution if I become aware of abuse and fail to report it to proper authorities. The purpose is to get protection for the victim and to stop future abuses by the perpetrator.

And in that case, you are neither the abuser or the victim.  You do have a responsibility to notify the authorities.  Those that sexual abuse is reported to, should notify the authorities as far as I am concerned.  

[Calm]

12 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I think it is unfortunate he went unpunished (which was my original statement).  He sexually abused someone and I like to see justice served and the perpetrator held accountable.

It might not matter to you (and that's fine if you feel that way), but it does to others.  My work is with abuse victims and I know each case is individually unique.  Each victim has to do what is best for them and their healing.  I just personally believe anyone who commits sexual abuse on a child or youth (or anyone else) should be held accountable.

If the issue is punishment for a crime, seems to me the victim who was damaged should have the say on if that individual should be punished or not since they are the one the predator hurt.

And while victims can influence prosecution, they can't ensure the case is followed up on.  That is the choice of law enforcers, not victims.

[bluebell]

9 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I think it is unfortunate he went unpunished (which was my original statement).  He sexually abused someone and I like to see justice served and the perpetrator held accountable.

It might not matter to you (and that's fine if you feel that way), but it does to others.  My work is with abuse victims and I know each case is individually unique.  Each victim has to do what is best for them and their healing.  I just personally believe anyone who commits sexual abuse on a child or youth (or anyone else) should be held accountable.

So she's partially responsible for the negative feelings of those outside of the case?  

(I'm not trying to be argumentative or snarky so I hope it's not coming across that way.  I'm looking at this from a pragmatic perspective.  If you are going to lay partial responsibility for something on a victim then i'm trying to understand what that means in a practical sense.  It seems like what you are saying is that the victim is partially responsibly for you and others not having the outcome you want.  Is that it?)

[ALarson]

10 minutes ago, Calm said:

If the issue is punishment for a crime, seems to me the victim who was damaged should have the say on if that individual should be punished or not since they are the one the predator hurt.

And while victims can influence prosecution, they can't ensure the case is followed up on.  That is the choice of law enforcers, not victims.

Yes, and that's why I used the word "partially".  Others are involved too.  It definitely makes a difference in a case if the victim wants to press charges or not.  There are also other ways to hold the perpetrator accountable (civil cases which are her choice or through church courts as well).  Punishment does not just refer to criminal punishment.  Bottom line is that each victim needs to do what they feel is best for their own healing.  But that doesn't change the role they share in whether or not their abuser is held accountable or punished for his abuse inflicted on her.  

And now, I've off of here for the day....

I've said what I feel and stand by it and don't really have much more to add to it anyway.  I'm fine if there are differing opinions and I respect those too.

Edited April 28, 2018 by ALarson

[Calm]

This is what I was responding to with the victim and prosecution:

" She could have made sure the case was not dropped"

I don't believe that is true.

Edited April 28, 2018 by Calm

[ALarson]

11 minutes ago, bluebell said:

So she's partially responsible for the negative feelings of those outside of the case?  

I never stated that (?).  You're really stretching here, IMO, bluebell.  Read over what I actually stated as I stand by those.

[Calm]

33 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I never stated that (?).  You're really stretching here, IMO, bluebell.  Read over what I actually stated as I stand by those.

But it is implied.

Why is it wrong that justice isn't done?  Because much of society wants justice and is upset when it doesn't occur.

-----

Like Bluebell I am trying to understand the reasoning.  Having it in abstract terms detracts from that imo, so I am using a real life situation.

Is McKenna Denson partially responsible for Bishop not being punished because she chose not to go to the police until 2017?

I don't remember her saying her YSA bishop discouraged her from reporting to the police and she says she didn't tell the mental health specialist just because she didn't like him (transcript) even though he apparently pushed her to do so (paraphrase because I can't copy / paste:  he kept saying to me you have a secret, damn right I had a secret but I wasn't telling him.  I didn't like him.  I would have told him if I liked him)

pg 43, language

https://www.scribd.com/document/374544769/2017-Joseph-L-Bishop-Transcript

Edited April 28, 2018 by Calm

[JulieM]

13 minutes ago, Calm said:

But it is implied.

Why is it wrong that justice isn't done?  

I haven’t seen anyone do that.  On the contrary, people have repeatedly stated that each victim has to make the choice that is right for them.  But they are still involved somewhat in whether or not punishment is sought out.  There’s no question about that.  I think it’s just human nature that when someone has been hurt or abused, we want to see the person who inflicted the pain punished accordingly and stopped.  But no one is claiming there’s definitely a right or wrong way for a victim to react.

[Calm]

11 minutes ago, JulieM said:

I haven’t seen anyone do that.  On the contrary, people have repeatedly stated that each victim has to make the choice that is right for them.  But they are still involved somewhat in whether or not punishment is sought out.  There’s no question about that.  I think it’s just human nature that when someone has been hurt or abused, we want to see the person who inflicted the pain punished accordingly and stopped.  But no one is claiming there’s definitely a right or wrong way for a victim to react.

So it isn't right or wrong, but the victim is still accountable in part if the predator goes unpunished?

Edited April 28, 2018 by Calm

[JulieM]

16 minutes ago, Calm said:

So it isn't right or wrong, but the victim is still accountable in part if the predator goes unpunished?

This is what I’ve see stated here:

The victim “plays a role” in and is “partially” responsible for making a choice of whether or not punishment is pursued (and there are choices about each method of punishment to pursue).  That’s the truth and no blaming the victim has gone on here as to whether or not the abuser goes on to abuse another.  That’s a separate issue and only the abuser makes that choice.

Edited April 28, 2018 by JulieM

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, JulieM said:

This is what I’ve see stated here:

The victim “plays a role” in and is “partially” responsible for making a choice of whether or not punishment is pursued (and there are choices about each method of punishment to pursue).  That’s the truth and no blaming the victim has gone on here as to whether or not the abuser goes on to abuse another.  That’s a separate issue and only the abuser makes that choice.

So McKenna Denson is partially responsible that Bishop was unpunished because she chose not to go to the police?

Edited April 28, 2018 by Calm

[bluebell]

Just now, ALarson said:

I never stated that (?).  You're really stretching here, IMO, bluebell.  Read over what I actually stated as I stand by those.

I'm not trying to stretch, i'm trying to understand the practical outcome of what you are saying.  

 

 

 

 

[bluebell]

21 minutes ago, Calm said:

So it isn't right or wrong, but the victim is still accountable in part if the predator goes unpunished?

If that's what Julie is saying then that doesn't make sense to me.  If something is neutral (neither right or wrong) then you can't hold anyone accountable for it.  You can't be held accountable for something that doesn't matter; there is nothing to be accountable for.

[JulieM]

25 minutes ago, bluebell said:

If that's what Julie is saying then that doesn't make sense to me.  If something is neutral (neither right or wrong) then you can't hold anyone accountable for it.  

Just read what I’ve stated.  You’re making this into a meaning that no one is saying:

My quote with how I feel:

“The victim “plays a role” in and is “partially” responsible for making a choice of whether or not punishment is pursued (and there are choices about each method of punishment to pursue).  That’s the truth and no blaming the victim has gone on here as to whether or not the abuser goes on to abuse another.  That’s a separate issue and only the abuser makes that choice.“

No one is stating the victim is 100% accountable.  Not even close.  But everyone is accountable for their own decisions.   Some will feel it was the wrong decision and others will feel it’s right, either way the one who makes the decision is accountable for it.

Edited April 28, 2018 by JulieM