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

[smac97]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

CFR she fabricated a rape claim in the mission field. 

See here.

Thanks,

-Smac

[provoman]

5 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Let's review:

Denson told her Bishop, Elder Asay, her Stake President, and BYU PD.  She called church headquarters.

If she had a stewardship responsibility to me, or the membership of the church, your bizarre claim here could have some merit.  But she doesn't.  This is a ridiculous claim you are making that Denson was somehow involved in the cover up.

 

If negotiations are a cover up, then all parties are guilty of the cover up.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

My comments weren't meant to "convict" Leavitt.  I agree with him that such accusations would be tough to believe.  The problem is that the Church needs to figure out a way to prevent that kind of response in the future.  That's not an easy task.

They did.  They put in a hotline and made it mandatory.

[rockpond]

1 minute ago, smac97 said:

Okay.

But it's more than that.  She says that she disclosed to Ron Leavitt, that Ron Leavitt arranged for her to meet with Elder Asay, and also that Ron Leavitt would corroborate her statement on this point ("The Colorado woman told The Tribune she reported her sexual-assault allegation to her LDS singles ward bishop in Utah County in 1987, after serving a mission.  She offered the bishop as a corroborating witness, saying he arranged for her to speak with Asay, a member of the Quorum of the Seventy."). 

Leavitt, however, denies reporting anything to the Church (which, I think, necessarily includes her claim that "he arranged for her to speak with Asay").

So he has a potential motive to lie.  I get that.

But couldn't you say the same thing about Denson?  She is pursuing money damages against the deep-pocketed LDS Church.

Moreover, what about her "proclivities" as to honesty?  She is already on record as fabricating a rape claim while she was a missionary in D.C.  And her ex-husband and another family member also say there is yet another rape claim beyond that one.

And what about these incidents:

What do you make of Denson's recent arrest in New Mexico for identity theft?  Her 1999 case where she (falsely, it seems) claimed she had been "pistol-whipped and locked in the trunk of a car by two men outside a restaurant where she had worked," except that police "learned she had been fired shortly before the incident and had made inquiries about the restaurant's security liability" and concluded that her report was "unfounded?"

How do you factor these into gauging Denson's honesty?  Why do you privilege her say-so over Leavitt's, particularly when she encouraged the Salt Lake Tribune to listen to Leavitt?

CFR, if you please.

Denson spoke with her attorneys many times "prior to speaking to the media."  Does that make her untrustworthy?

Why?

Well, no.

Denson's attorneys were the ones who approached the Church and initiated confidential negotiations.  Legal disputes involving sensitive matters are routinely settled confidentially, particularly where there is a victim of sexual abuse involved (that would be . . . Denson).

So the LDS Church complies with Denson's attorneys request for confidential discussions, and this is - in your view - a "cover up."

The mind reels.  It is absurd stuff like this that make it difficult for people like me to put much stock into the neverending faultfinding by critics and opponents of the Church.  

Thanks,

-Smac

As I said, Leavitt has shown a proclivity to protect church leaders over the victim.  I don't know have any reason to believe he has changed.

Denson, while not entirely trustworthy, has shown to have been accurate about all of her claimed meetings with church leaders.  The Asay claim seems believable to me for reasons I have noted.

Do we have corroboration on Greg Bishop's claims against Denson?

CFR that Leavitt spoke with church headquarters several times?  He mentions it in his interview with the media.

And, no, it isn't a cover up because the church was involved in negotiations with Denson's attorney.

[rockpond]

Just now, Calm said:

They did.  They put in a hotline and made it mandatory.

I served as a counselor in a bishopric for almost 5 years and was never instructed on this or informed of a hotline.

[smac97]

On 5/1/2018 at 2:14 PM, rockpond said:

Quote

she was involved in negotiations and kept quiet....she was a party to your alleged cover up

Let's review:

Yes.  Let's.

Quote

Denson told her Bishop,

No, she didn't.  Not according to Leavitt.  She reported misconduct, but not rape or attempted rape.

Quote

Elder Asay,

Again, not according to Leavitt.  He says he never told the Church, and axiomatically never arranged any meeting with Elder Asay.

Quote

her Stake President, and BYU PD. 

Yes.  Many years after the fact.

And the Church investigated.

So the LDS Church has an affirmative duty to publish to the world any and all allegations of sexual misconduct.  Failure to do so is - in your view - a "cover up."

The mind reels.

Quote

She called church headquarters.

If so, it was many years after the fact.

Quote

If she had a stewardship responsibility to me, or the membership of the church, your bizarre claim here could have some merit. 

Yours is the "bizarre claim."

Failure to publish unsubstantiated and decades-old claims of abuse to the world = "cover up"?

Gimme a break.

Quote

But she doesn't.  This is a ridiculous claim you are making that Denson was somehow involved in the cover up.

Her own attorneys approached the Church and requested confidential negotiations.  So if we go by your absurd reasoning, yes, she was "involved in the cover up" because she was complicit with not publishing her accusations to the world.

Until, of course, she did.  She "leaked" the audio transcript to media outlets, and in so doing undermined her attorneys efforts at getting a negotiated settlement on her behalf.

And then she materially misled the public by feigning surprise about the "leak."

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited July 25, 2018 by smac97

[rockpond]

7 minutes ago, provoman said:

Something tells me that negotiations are "kept secret".

And who or what entity is keeping "it a secret"? Are you referring to the redactions - are you saying the Church is at fault for the redactions; even though rfm makes no definitive statement about who is responsible?

I'm saying that the Church has been less than forthcoming in their statements (and lack of statements).  And that the church owned BYU PD has sought to hide evidence.

[rockpond]

6 minutes ago, provoman said:

If negotiations are a cover up, then all parties are guilty of the cover up.

Negotiations are not a cover up.

[smac97]

2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I served as a counselor in a bishopric for almost 5 years and was never instructed on this or informed of a hotline.

Perhaps because the hotline is not for counselors.  It's for bishops.

Counselors have no business being involved in the types of issues that the hotline is intended to address, so it's not really surprising that they may not know about it.

And FWIW, I too have spent years as a counselor in a bishopric, and I knew about the hotline.  It's not a secret at all.  The Church has publicly referenced it many times.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited May 1, 2018 by smac97

[smac97]

On 5/1/2018 at 2:27 PM, rockpond said:

Negotiations are not a cover up.

Then the LDS Church cannot be accused of a "cover up" when all it did was comply with Denson's attorneys request for confidential negotiations.

-Smac

Edited July 25, 2018 by smac97

[Danzo]

2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I served as a counselor in a bishopric for almost 5 years and was never instructed on this or informed of a hotline.

Our whole ward has been told about the hotline, several times in the last year. Over the pulpit

 

[rockpond]

2 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Yes.  Let's.

No, she didn't.  Not according to Leavitt.  She reported misconduct, but not rape or attempted rape.

Again, not according to Leavitt.  He says he never told the Church, and axiomatically never arranged any meeting with Elder Asay.

Yes.  Many years after the fact.

And the Church investigated.

So the LDS Church has an affirmative duty to publish to the world any and all allegations of sexual misconduct.  Failure to do so is - in your view - a "cover up."

The mind reels.

If so, it was many years after the fact.

Yours is the "bizarred claim."

Failure to publish unsubstantiated and decades-old claims of abuse to the world = "cover up"?

Gimme a break.

Her own attorneys approached the Church and requested confidential negotiations.  So if we go by your absurd reasoning, yes, she was "involved in the cover up" because she was complicit with not publishing her accusations to the world.

Until, of course, she did.  She "leaked" the audio transcript to media outlets, and in so doing undermined her attorneys efforts at getting a negotiated settlement on her behalf.

And then she materially misled the public by feigning surprise about the "leak."

Thanks,

-Smac

I didn't say anything about rape or attempted rape.

Leavitt and Denson has conflicting claims.  We've both agreed to that, I'm not sure why you feel the need to keep mentioning it.

No, the church does not have an affirmative duty to publish to the world any and all allegations of sexual misconduct.  I've never said that.  You can address what I have actually written or I'll just ignore the bizarre spin you put on my words.

CFR that Denson leaked the audio transcripts to media outlets.

[rockpond]

2 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Perhaps because the hotline is not for counselors.  It's for bishops.

Counselors have no business being involved in the types of issues that the hotline is intended to address, so it's not really surprising that they may not know about it.

And FWIW, I too have spent years as a counselor in a bishopric, and I knew about the hotline.  It's not a secret at all.  The Church has publicly referenced it many times.

Thanks,

-Smac

And if the allegation of abuse had been against the bishop?  It seems I would need to know about the hotline.  I performed countless interviews and, as you know, at times had to act as Bishop when he was not there.

It's fine, our experiences in the bishopric differ.  That's my point.  I don't think the Church has addressed this as well as it should.  I'm not saying that it hasn't been addressed at all, just that there is more to be done.

Everyone in the ward council, and beyond, should know about the hotline and be trained in how to handle such accusations.

[rockpond]

4 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Our whole ward has been told about the hotline, several times in the last year. Over the pulpit

 

Ours has not.

[rockpond]

5 minutes ago, smac97 said:

The the LDS Church cannot be accused of a "cover up" when all it did was comply with Denson's attorneys request for confidential negotiations.

-Smac

 Again, this is not what I have said.  Please do not put words in my mouth.

[Calm]

38 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Denson stated that she was taken into Bishop's office AND the "preparation" room.  Bishop has confessed that he took her there alone (both to Denson and the BYU PD.

However, to be precise, Denson said his PD confession applied to the other victim.

Edited May 1, 2018 by Calm

[provoman]

6 minutes ago, rockpond said:

 

CFR that Denson leaked the audio transcripts to media outlets.

Her attorney stated as much during the press conference

[rockpond]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

However, to be precise, Denson said his PD confession applied to the other victim.

Okay... are you disputing that Bishop took Denson alone into the preparation room?

[rockpond]

Just now, provoman said:

Her attorney stated as much during the press conference

Well, then, I guess she wasn't part of the cover up. 

[Calm]

7 minutes ago, rockpond said:

.

CFR that Denson leaked the audio transcripts to media outlets.

It is in the press conference.  Her lawyer states it that she gave it out to media as well as others.

Do you need me to find the time stamp?

[smac97]

5 minutes ago, rockpond said:

As I said, Leavitt has shown a proclivity to protect church leaders over the victim. 

Baloney.  

5 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Denson, while not entirely trustworthy, has shown to have been accurate about all of her claimed meetings with church leaders. 

Baloney.  There is a material dispute about what she disclosed to Ron Leavitt.

There is a material dispute about whether she even met with Elder Asay at all.

"Has shown to have been accurate?"  Not even close.

5 minutes ago, rockpond said:

The Asay claim seems believable to me for reasons I have noted.

"Seems believable" is one thing.  "Has shown to have been accurate" is plainly false.

Denson claims Leavitt referred her to Elder Asay.  She told the Tribune that this claim would be corroborated by another witness . . . Leavitt.  Leavitt disputed the claim, and said he never told the Church.  

"Has shown to have been accurate?"  Not even close.

5 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Do we have corroboration on Greg Bishop's claims against Denson?

They aren't Greg Bishop's claims. He just passed on the findings about Denson that he had been given.  One of those findings was that she had fabricated a rape claim while she was a missionary.  That is what her ex-husband and another family member have said about her.  So there are two people corroborating that claim.  And there is a separate form of corroboration . . . from Denson herself.  She admits in the recording to fabricating a rape claim while she was a missionary.

5 minutes ago, rockpond said:

CFR that Leavitt spoke with church headquarters several times?  He mentions it in his interview with the media.

Okay.  Denson spoke with her attorneys many times "prior to speaking to the media."  Does that make her untrustworthy?

5 minutes ago, rockpond said:

And, no, it isn't a cover up because the church was involved in negotiations with Denson's attorney.

There was no cover up.  It's an absurd claim of your own contrivance.

-Smac

[rockpond]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

It is in the press conference.  Her lawyer states it that she gave it out to media as well as others.

Do you need me to find the time stamp?

I believe you.  Did she leak the transcript to media outlets before or after MormonLeaks published the recording?

[Calm]

27 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Okay... are you disputing that Bishop took Denson alone into the preparation room?

Disputing in the sense of insisting he didn't, no.  I believe he did.  

There is also the possibility Leavitt remembers the story as the two sisters going at the same time rather than it being two victims at two different times, one each...so it is possible that she went there, but not alone.

I am just saying I don't think the evidence is solid on that point and could be challenged as it appears she has some knowledge of the other victim in the transcript and she may have heard it from her.

It is also a little strange that Bishop negates the presence of the bed, etc.  He could be conflating it with his other office due to his reported and evidenced memory issues, he could be intentionally removing items that lean towards potential sexual activity, he could be correct and the bed and items were added later by someone else and attributed to him when the MTC employee heard about them or the MTC employee knew of the office, but added details to back up Denson's story.

There is also a big conflict with Leavitt's story because she states in the press conference she didn't see any porn, she saw video in their cases, but had no knowledge of what they were.

So either she is repeating what the other woman told her about the room in regards to the porn if she is right...which does not preclude she went down there herself, or she just made that part up if we take her as accurate now.

I can't remember if she states she did not tell any sister missionaries.  I have the impression she did in both the transcript and press conference.

I have read the transcript stuff specifically to see if it requires her to have spoken at any time to the other victim and it doesn't.  She was aware of grooming, but this could be because she saw the victim in the group sessions, apparently had a counseling session with Bishop with the addition of the second sister (12/6 rough draft)...which is likely why she remembered her name...and may have been told by Bishop that he was seeing her privately too.  She says nothing about the other two, no names even were redacted out as far as I could tell.

Otoh, she knew the other victim's name and them both coming forward in 2010 hints of them getting together and giving each other moral support (if this happened, if I were them I would come forward separately to give greater impact) so she may have learned additional details about the second office at that time.

Edited May 1, 2018 by Calm

[Danzo]

7 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Ours has not.

Did they show you the training video on child abuse?

[rockpond]

1 minute ago, Danzo said:

Did they show you the training video on child abuse?

No.  We were required to watch videos on handling tithing funds.  Nothing on child abuse.