smac97 Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 (edited) 12 minutes ago, rockpond said: Quote 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. And if the allegation of abuse had been against the bishop? If a counselor receives information about abuse, he is supposed to report it to the bishop and let him handle it. If the bishop is the subject of the allegation, then the counselor could go to the stake president. Quote It seems I would need to know about the hotline. No, not really. Counselors have no business being involved in handling allegations of abuse. That is what bishops are for. Quote I performed countless interviews and, as you know, at times had to act as Bishop when he was not there. Perfunctory interviews, yes. But if questions of worthiness or other serious issues arise, the interview with a counselor ends and the individual is referred to the bishop. Quote It's fine, our experiences in the bishopric differ. That's my point. You are suggesting extraordinary circumstances. I am not. Quote I don't think the Church has addressed this as well as it should. Wow! Rockpond finding fault with the LDS Church? What. A. Surprise. Quote 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. All they need to know is "If you are aware of any abuse or allegations of abuse, immediately notify the bishop." That's all the training that is required. -Smac Edited May 1, 2018 by smac97
rockpond Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 1 minute ago, smac97 said: If a counselor receives information about abuse, he is supposed to report it to the bishop and let him handle it. If the bishop is the subject of the allegation, then the counselor could go to the stake president. No, not really. Counselors have no business being involved in handling allegations of abuse. That is what bishops are for. Perfunctory interviews, yes. But if questions of worthiness or other serious issues arise, the interview with a counselor ends and the individual is referred to the bishop. You are suggesting extraordinary circumstances. I am not. Wow! Rockpond finding fault with the LDS Church? What. A. Surprise. All they need to know is "If you are aware of any abuse or allegations of abuse, immediately notify the bishop." That's all the training that is required. -Smac I'm saying that there is room for improvement. Do you think that we are, as a church, where we should be on this matter? Do you think that attitudes like that of Bishop Leavitt back in 1984 no longer exist among church members? Based on the actions of the BYU PD this month, I would say we have more work to do. 1
smac97 Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 16 minutes ago, rockpond said: I didn't say anything about rape or attempted rape. Denson is saying that. 16 minutes ago, rockpond said: 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. Because you are privileging Denson's claims and discounting Leavitt's. Because you are baselessly questioning Leavitt's honesty while ignoring the many, many red flags about Denson's honesty. 16 minutes ago, rockpond said: CFR that Denson leaked the audio transcripts to media outlets. Here you go. It came up during her news conference. Her own attorney admitted it. Thanks, -Smac
Danzo Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 5 minutes ago, rockpond said: No. We were required to watch videos on handling tithing funds. Nothing on child abuse. There is a church video that was put out for leaders (It was definitely produced before the public events we are discussing). I was under the impression that it was for church leaders (although our leadership decided to show it to everyone 12+ in the ward). Bishop's instructions to the ward was, if you know about abuse report it to the police, and if it involves a church member to inform the bishop so he could make sure the ward was protected by limiting access to children, etc. 1
rockpond Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 18 minutes ago, smac97 said: Denson is saying that. Because you are privileging Denson's claims and discounting Leavitt's. Because you are baselessly questioning Leavitt's honesty while ignoring the many, many red flags about Denson's honesty. Here you go. It came up during her news conference. Her own attorney admitted it. Thanks, -Smac I am not privileging either Denson or Leavitt over each other.
Calm Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 (edited) Weird question... would missionaries have to enter the restrooms with their companions? I am trying to think of any opportunities Denson had to meet privately with the other sister and can't think of any. Is there sneaking around at night? Surely there must be some. Denson said she never went to another session with Bishop, never even talked to him, avoided looking at him in the 12/6 rough draft iirc, so there would have been no counseling sessions where one might have said something to Bishop in the presence of the other or if they left at the same time, talked to each other about the abuse. So if there was any communication prior to Denson leaving the MTC, it likely would have been an accidental encounter in a private area (restrooms perhaps) or a clandestine meeting (one sneaking out at night to find the other's dorm room). Edited May 1, 2018 by Calm
Calm Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 18 minutes ago, Danzo said: There is a church video that was put out for leaders (It was definitely produced before the public events we are discussing). I was under the impression that it was for church leaders (although our leadership decided to show it to everyone 12+ in the ward). Bishop's instructions to the ward was, if you know about abuse report it to the police, and if it involves a church member to inform the bishop so he could make sure the ward was protected by limiting access to children, etc. I like your bishop.
rockpond Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 21 minutes ago, Danzo said: Bishop's instructions to the ward was, if you know about abuse report it to the police, and if it involves a church member to inform the bishop so he could make sure the ward was protected by limiting access to children, etc. Wouldn't be bad advice for the prophet to repeat to the church.
JulieM Posted May 1, 2018 Author Posted May 1, 2018 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Calm said: Weird question... would missionaries have to enter the restrooms with their companions? I am trying to think of any opportunities Denson had to meet privately with the other sister and can't think of any. Is there sneaking around at night? Surely there must be some. Denson said she never went to another session with Bishop, never even talked to him, avoided looking at him in the 12/6 rough draft iirc, so there would have been no counseling sessions where one might have said something to Bishop in the presence of the other or if they left at the same time, talked to each other about the abuse. So if there was any communication prior to Denson leaving the MTC, it likely would have been an accidental encounter in a private area (restrooms perhaps) or a clandestine meeting (one sneaking out at night to find the other's dorm room). Maybe she was one of the other girls in the small group who’d been formerly sexually abused that was called into Bishop’s office (with Denison). Maybe they had that connection and found an opportunity to talk. Do we know if she was one of the others in that group? Is it that odd for two sister missionaries to have a chance to talk alone (who aren’t companions) while in the MTC? Edited May 1, 2018 by JulieM
Calm Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 Do counselors have access to the Church Handbook? My husband had it at home when he was clerk or executive sec or something. I had read it before, but I took the opportunity to read it cover to cover. It was probably around ten years ago, so I may be wrong, but I could swear the hotline info is in the Handbook, Vol 1.
smac97 Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 5 minutes ago, rockpond said: I am not privileging either Denson or Leavitt over each other. Right: Quote 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. And here: Quote I'm not inclined to believe Leavitt over Denson. He has already shown a proclivity to protect church leaders. We know he spoke to someone in church headquarters on three occasions prior to speaking to the media. We don't know what was discussed in those phone calls but for me, the sum total of what Leavitt has said does not lead me to place a great deal of trust in him. Care to walk back the "I am not privileging either Denson or Leavitt over each other" claim? It appears that is exactly what you are doing. As between Denson and Leavitt, which one A) admitted to fabricating a claim of rape? B) publicly faked surprise and consternation over the audio recording being "leaked," only to turn out to have been the source of the leak? C) was arrested in February for identity theft? D) made "unfounded" claims in 1999 (according to investigating detectives) of having 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"? Let me know if you are unclear on the answers to any of these. Meanwhile, you are questioning the honesty of Ron Leavitt because . . . he called the LDS Church prior to speaking to the media about the Denson matter. But you are not "privileging either Denson or Leavitt over each other." Got it. -Smac 2
rockpond Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 1 minute ago, smac97 said: Right: And here: Care to walk back the "I am not privileging either Denson or Leavitt over each other" claim? It appears that is exactly what you are doing. As between Denson and Leavitt, which one A) admitted to fabricating a claim of rape? B) publicly faked surprise and consternation over the audio recording being "leaked," only to turn out to have been the source of the leak? C) was arrested in February for identity theft? D) made "unfounded" claims in 1999 (according to investigating detectives) of having 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"? Let me know if you are unclear on the answers to any of these. Meanwhile, you are questioning the honesty of Ron Leavitt because . . . he called the LDS Church prior to speaking to the media about the Denson matter. But you are not "privileging either Denson or Leavitt over each other." Got it. -Smac As you note from my comments I identify reasons to doubt and trust both of them. But I am not favoring one over the other.
provoman Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 21 minutes ago, Calm said: Do counselors have access to the Church Handbook? My husband had it at home when he was clerk or executive sec or something. I had read it before, but I took the opportunity to read it cover to cover. It was probably around ten years ago, so I may be wrong, but I could swear the hotline info is in the Handbook, Vol 1. 1995 article about the hotline https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.deseretnews.com/article/421854/LDS-HOTLINE-TO-HELP-LEADERS-DEAL-WITH-ABUSE.amp 2
smac97 Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 (edited) 19 minutes ago, rockpond said: As you note from my comments I identify reasons to doubt and trust both of them. But I am not favoring one over the other. Your assessment of Leavitt: "Leavitt has shown a proclivity to protect church leaders over the victim. ... The sum total of what Leavitt has said does not lead me to place a great deal of trust in him." Your assessment of Denson: "Denson, while not entirely trustworthy, has shown to have been accurate about all of her claimed meetings with church leaders..." You don't "place a great deal of trust in" Leavitt, but you also claim that Denson "has been shown to have been accurate." And you are not "favoring one over the other." Got it. -Smac Edited May 1, 2018 by smac97
Calm Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 (edited) 37 minutes ago, JulieM said: Do we know if she was one of the others in that group? It is pretty clear she was if you combine the transcript and the 12/6 rough draft. It also sounds as if it was just the two in a few meetings, but that would have been before the alleged attacks on either. Denson clearly had no idea anything untoward was going on before she went down to the basement (assuming this is true, which I do), so any sharing could not have occurred when meeting Bishop or before or after the meetings. Cant copy paste the rough draft on my iPad and won't link to it because it still reveals personal names and info. Honor quoted the info iirc earlier, two or three pages back...last night. she relates one meeting with four sisters, intimate details of their lives and abuse were pushed to be shared by Bishop asking questions of them (just so wrong, apart from the abuse, this makes me angry at church leadership who left abuse counseling in the hands of an amateur) she relates one specific time along with two more meetings that were just held with the other victim. They only spoke of childhoods in these. There appear to be a minimum of three more occasions Denson met alone with Bishop, including the one visit to the basement. It was during this time she reports he shared the sexual stories about the hot tub/springs and his wife, so there can be no definite confirmation he told these stories to Denson herself. Bishop didn't add any details to either story in the transcript, but did correct her hot tub/hot springs by saying it was a similar situation, no hot tub, and in Utah, originally he states he didn't remember the hot tub story and replies "I don't know" to either or both questions of if it happened at all and why he would he tell her about it; he also asks her why he was telling her these stories which implies to me he didn't remember doing it, so there is a possibility both stories were Denson's creation...he later says it did happen, but the audio needs to be checked because of the contradiction because the transcript has some glaring errors. There is 54 seconds listed as inaudible where he might be adding details about the second story or denying it, there are times you can understand what is being said...they must have had lousy speakers, so I should probably look at my notes or listen to that section again. If the second victim states that she was told them pretty solid foundation imo. Edited May 1, 2018 by Calm
JulieM Posted May 1, 2018 Author Posted May 1, 2018 4 minutes ago, Calm said: It is pretty clear she was if you combine the transcript and the 12/6 rough draft. It also sounds as if it was just the two in a few meetings, but that would have been before the alleged attack. Denson clearly had no idea anything untoward was going on before she went down to the basement (assuming this is true, which I do), so any sharing could not have occurred when meeting Bishop or before or after the meetings. Cant copy paste the rough draft on my iPad and won't link to it because it still reveals personal names and info. she relates one meeting with four sisters, intimate details of their lives and abuse were pushed to be shared by Bishop asking questions of them (just so wrong, apart from the abuse, this makes me angry at church leadership who left abuse counseling in the hands of an amateur) she relates one specific time along with two more meetings that were just held with the other victim. They only spoke of childhoods in these. There appear to be a minimum of three more occasions Denson met alone with Bishop, including the one visit to the basement. It was during this time she reports he shared the sexual stories about the hot tub/springs and his wife, so there can be no definite confirmation he told these stories to Denson herself. Bishop didn't add any details to either story in the transcript, but did correct her hot tub/hot springs by saying it was a similar situation, no hot tub, and in Utah, originally he states he didn't remember the hot tub story and replies "I don't know" to either or both questions of if it happened at all and why he would he tell her about it; he also asks her why he was telling her these stories which implies to me he didn't remember doing it, so there is a possibility both stories were Denson's creation...he later says it did happen, but the audio needs to be checked because of the contradiction because the transcript has some glaring errors. There is 54 seconds listed as inaudible where he might be adding details about the second story or denying it, there are times you can understand what is being said...they must have had lousy speakers, so I should probably look at my notes or listen to that section again. If the second victim states that she was told them pretty solid foundation imo. Thanks for the additional info, Calm. You’re amazing with all this!!! It would seem that these two girls would have a connection and trust between them (possibly) enough to find an opportunity to talk. It would be interesting to know more though.
rockpond Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 5 minutes ago, smac97 said: Your assessment of Leavitt: "Leavitt has shown a proclivity to protect church leaders over the victim. ... The sum total of what Leavitt has said does not lead me to place a great deal of trust in him." Your assessment of Denson: "Denson, while not entirely trustworthy, has shown to have been accurate about all of her claimed meetings with church leaders..." You don't "place a great deal of trust in" Leavitt, but you also claim that Denson "has been shown to have been accurate." And you are not "favoring one over the other." Got it. -Smac I wrote that she has been accurate "about all of her claimed meetings with church leaders". That is just one specific aspect of her overall testimony. I'm sure you realize that, so please don't twist my words.
smac97 Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 5 minutes ago, rockpond said: I wrote that she has been accurate "about all of her claimed meetings with church leaders". That is just one specific aspect of her overall testimony. I'm sure you realize that, so please don't twist my words. Fair enough. I apologize. I think your disparagement of Leavitt's statement is unfounded, but I've said my piece. Thanks, -Smac
Tacenda Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 1 hour ago, smac97 said: See here. Thanks, -Smac Thanks
Calm Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 (edited) 47 minutes ago, provoman said: 1995 article about the hotline https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.deseretnews.com/article/421854/LDS-HOTLINE-TO-HELP-LEADERS-DEAL-WITH-ABUSE.amp I also cheated and found a Handbook 1 online because the next comment I make is a strong criticism and I wanted to see the info with my own eyes before I made it. Handbook 1s are to be given to every member in a bishopric. This means counselors have them as well. This is at the beginning of the Handbook. section 17.3.2 (as listed in Handbook 2 available online in the selected church policies section under Abuse) lists the hotline number though it states that it is to be used by bishops and stake presidents. My criticism: If a counselor post 2010 (at the very least, I don't know of previous editions) who does not know of the existence of the hot line, it is his own fault. Unless he has a rogue bishop who didn't let him have a Handbook for some bizarre reason...but in that case I think they should be going to the SP to report it. Edited May 1, 2018 by Calm
Calm Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 30 minutes ago, JulieM said: Thanks for the additional info, Calm. You’re amazing with all this!!! It would seem that these two girls would have a connection and trust between them (possibly) enough to find an opportunity to talk. It would be interesting to know more though. I am also getting nothing else done...besides taking my daughter to ECT and both of us preparing and recovering from that. Tomorrow, I have got to get back to the real world....of video games and Netflix.
Calm Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 33 minutes ago, rockpond said: I wrote that she has been accurate "about all of her claimed meetings with church leaders". That is just one specific aspect of her overall testimony. I'm sure you realize that, so please don't twist my words. But you don't know that since we have neither confirmation for a meeting with Monson (though that seems highly likely given the procedure for 1st Pres approval for exceptional cases) and the meeting with Asay...absolutely no confirmation at all. 3
smac97 Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 6 minutes ago, Calm said: I also cheated and found a Handbook 1 online because the next comment I make is a strong criticism and I wanted to see the info with my own eyes before I made it. Handbook 1s are to be given to every member in a bishopric. This means counselors have them as well. This is at the beginning of the Handbook. section 17.3.2 (as listed in Handbook 2 available online in the selected church policies section under Abuse) lists the hotline number though it states that it is to be used by bishops and stake presidents. My criticism: If a counselor post 2010 (at the very least, I don't know of previous editions) who does not know of the existence of the hot line, it is his own fault. Unless he has a rogue bishop who didn't let him have a Handbook for some bizarre reason...but in that case I think they should be going to the SP to report it. Members of the bishopric also have access to Handbook 1 online. FWIW. Thanks, -Smac
Calm Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 24 minutes ago, smac97 said: Members of the bishopric also have access to Handbook 1 online. FWIW. Thanks, -Smac Thanks, that pretty much removes any excuse for not knowing about the existence of the hotline or the actual number.
Danzo Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 56 minutes ago, rockpond said: Wouldn't be bad advice for the prophet to repeat to the church. Or, Perhaps He could tell the church to create an informational Film and have it shown to the church leadership.
Recommended Posts