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

[rockpond]

Just now, Calm said:

 If you do a search on Temple in the transcript, if I recall correctly it says he gave her permission to go to the temple. It does sound there he was clearing her for a temple recommend,  but the draft makes it sound like it was for a special event for her personally. 

I remember that now... he was approving her for a special temple visit in which she could write a letter to her daughter, right?

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I remember that now... he was approving her for a special temple visit in which she could write a letter to her daughter, right?

Yes, just double checked.

[esodije]

I noted that Bishop mentions in the recording that President Kimball extended the call to him to be a mission president [in Argentina] “in special circumstances.”  It reminded me of something that an elder from Ogden whom I knew as a missionary in Chile told me one time. One of Bishop’s sons, Bob, served in our mission (he and I had the same trainer companion, at different times of course), and this other elder and I were discussing Elder Bishop’s farher’s having been president of WSC and, at that time (1979),  being a mission president in Argentina.  The elder said something cryptic about the father’s having been fortunate to receive the calling when he did, inasmuch as it got him out of Ogden a couple of steps ahead of some kind of investigation.  I didn’t ask about the details, but the “special circumstances” remark suggests that the church bailed him out of whatever problems he’d been facing in Ogden.

[Jeanne]

On 5/3/2018 at 8:24 PM, rockpond said:

I remember that now... he was approving her for a special temple visit in which she could write a letter to her daughter, right?

My stomach did a somersault on that piece of info.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, esodije said:

I noted that Bishop mentions in the recording that President Kimball extended the call to him to be a mission president [in Argentina] “in special circumstances.”  It reminded me of something that an elder from Ogden whom I knew as a missionary in Chile told me one time. One of Bishop’s sons, Bob, served in our mission (he and I had the same trainer companion, at different times of course), and this other elder and I were discussing Elder Bishop’s farher’s having been president of WSC and, at that time (1979),  being a mission president in Argentina.  The elder said something cryptic about the father’s having been fortunate to receive the calling when he did, inasmuch as it got him out of Ogden a couple of steps ahead of some kind of investigation.  I didn’t ask about the details, but the “special circumstances” remark suggests that the church bailed him out of whatever problems he’d been facing in Ogden.

Bishop adds this later in the transcript to indicate what he is talking about:

Quote

And I was told ... Told is th-e wrong word. This feeling came over me that he was going to be okay. I know, that the Lord answers prayers. That I know. I know that President Kimball was a prophet because of ... And I told him the story of how President Kimball had interviewed me and not said a word. I felt the questions. I felt the answers going out. We were there and he was holding me in his arms. Knowing like a veil came down around us and the people that were in the room were chatting and didn't know what was happening. Then the following Saturday, he called me on the phone and said, "I just want you to know I'm praying for you and that I love you." Then the following week I was called. It took me out of the situation I was presently to stand[sic, President of Weber State], and I had reorganized the knowledge [sic, college] because it needed to be reorganized. There was a lot of pain.

According to Jan Tyler's report, I believe the investigation was over wiretapping professors though .I may be mixing up her with another source I read.

https://cdm.weber.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/NEWS/id/10105/rec/95

https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/10396624/

also:

Quote

Bishop’s stint as president of Weber State — from 1972 to 1978 — preceded his time at the training center. In both jobs, Bishop held a position of power over men and women in their late teens and early 20s. But as far as today’s Weber State administration knows, there were no allegations of sexual misconduct against him during his tenure at the college. 

The Standard-Examiner reviewed 36 boxes of administrative documents left behind by Bishop after he left the post. The boxes are part of Weber State University’s presidential archives. Weber State’s document retention policy complies with the Utah Government Records Management Act. However, during Bishop’s tenure, presidents were not required to retain documents, and they chose what to send to the presidential archives, Weber State spokeswoman Allison Hess said. 

The documents show Bishop was a controversial figure at the public university. In 1980, Jan Tyler, former assistant dean of students, claimed Bishop’s way of handling situations and employees was “almost amoral.” Tyler recalled Bishop’s actions during an oral history interview with the university’s archivist John Sillito.

In the interview, Tyler said Bishop was condescending to her and that he had an enemy list in which her name appeared. She said she was the only woman on that list.

http://www.standard.net/Education/2018/03/24/Joseph-Bishop-LDS-mission-training-president-MTC-faced-lawsuit-controversies-at-Weber-State-college-university

Edited May 8, 2018 by Calm

[esodije]

It doesn’t surprise me that there are no sexual-abuse accusers from Bishop’s time at WSC, although he appears to have had serious shortcomings as a college administrator.  Most people, especially scientists, used to be guided by the general proposition that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”  Nowadays we strain to believe claims that we want to be true because they fit a narrative or worldview, incongruously requiring extraordinary evidence to disprove the claim (as if that were possible) and demonizing anyone who expresses the least amount of skepticism. In this case, Denson claims rape, and Bishop has confessed to being a perv, so what is there to question? It has to be true, right?

[rockpond]

1 hour ago, esodije said:

It doesn’t surprise me that there are no sexual-abuse accusers from Bishop’s time at WSC, although he appears to have had serious shortcomings as a college administrator.  Most people, especially scientists, used to be guided by the general proposition that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”  Nowadays we strain to believe claims that we want to be true because they fit a narrative or worldview, incongruously requiring extraordinary evidence to disprove the claim (as if that were possible) and demonizing anyone who expresses the least amount of skepticism. In this case, Denson claims rape, and Bishop has confessed to being a perv, so what is there to question? It has to be true, right?

esodije,

1.  I haven't noted anyone making the assumption that JLB is guilty of rape.  Have I missed that?

2.  l believe that there is enough credibility to the allegations (via corroborating witnesses and JLB's confessions) that many church members are rightfully disappointed that JLB was serving as MTC president.

 

[smac97]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

esodije,

1.  I haven't noted anyone making the assumption that JLB is guilty of rape.  Have I missed that?

From Cinepro:

Quote

I was alive in 1984, and while I was young, it is my recollection that we all thought MTC Presidents shouldn't have secret rooms where they take mentally fragile Sister Missionaries and ask them to expose themselves or try and rape them.

But that was in California, so maybe someone from Provo can chime in and let us know if it was a local thing to be more accepting of MTC Presidents sexually assaulting their charges. 

From Rockpond:

Quote

Why did Carlos Asay not speak with Bishop or do something with the allegations received from the woman? (I know I'm making an assumption here but everything else she said in that recording is turning out to be verified.)

From Analytics:

Quote

Calling 911 is best. Sure. But missionaries aren't allowed to use the telephone without permission. So how does a trainee at the MTC go about getting permission from their priesthood authority figures to call 911 and report that the president of the MTC attempted to rape you?

From ttribe:

Quote

And, you think a reasonable person defense would apply to a failure to report an alleged rape, or attempted rape?  Really?

From Cinepro (again):

Quote

It's always awkward when someone accuses you of abuse and you just can't remember which one they are.

No, "awkward" is too nice of a word.  It's just rude.  If someone is going to go through the effort of trying to rape someone, the least they can do is remember their victim and give them the dignity of not just being "someone I tried to rape" but being "______, the woman I tried to rape." 

Once you forget that the people you're raping are actual people, it really dehumanizes them. 

From Omni:

Quote

So why does he repeatedly apologize for such a serious accusation?  

I realize he may not remember the alleged rape attempt, but it appears he feels he was capable of such actions based on other sexual indiscretions he's committed.

From Rockpond (again):

Quote

It's interesting to me that so many people will assume he is innocent and just suffering from dementia (which IS a possible conclusion) but they won't give the same benefit of the doubt to the woman and accept that her version of events could be true.

Some of these may be intended as purely hypothetical, but some of them seem to presume Bishop's guilt.

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

2.  l believe that there is enough credibility to the allegations (via corroborating witnesses and JLB's confessions) that many church members are rightfully disappointed that JLB was serving as MTC president.

Agreed.  His admission to BYU police is particularly disturbing.

Thanks,

-Smac

[ttribe]

3 minutes ago, smac97 said:

From Cinepro:

From Rockpond:

From Analytics:

From ttribe:

From Cinepro (again):

From Omni:

From Rockpond (again):

Some of these may be intended as purely hypothetical, but some of them seem to presume Bishop's guilt.

Agreed.  His admission to BYU police is particularly disturbing.

Thanks,

-Smac

Play fair, Spencer. I didn't assume guilt. The comment of mine you linked was in the context of reporting requirements and I specifically mentioned that it was an allegation. 

[smac97]

7 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Play fair, Spencer. I didn't assume guilt.

I was trying to play fair.  That's why I noted that some of the quotes "may be intended as purely hypothetical."

7 minutes ago, ttribe said:

The comment of mine you linked was in the context of reporting requirements and I specifically mentioned that it was an allegation. 

Okay.  I apologize.

Thanks,

-Smac

[rockpond]

11 minutes ago, smac97 said:

From Cinepro:

From Rockpond:

From Analytics:

From ttribe:

From Cinepro (again):

From Omni:

From Rockpond (again):

Some of these may be intended as purely hypothetical, but some of them seem to presume Bishop's guilt.

Agreed.  His admission to BYU police is particularly disturbing.

Thanks,

-Smac

 Asking a valid question is not assuming guilt. Discussing evidence is not assuming guilt.  You know this. 

[smac97]

6 minutes ago, rockpond said:

 Asking a valid question is not assuming guilt. Discussing evidence is not assuming guilt.  You know this. 

Yes, I know this.  That's why I said: "Some of these may be intended as purely hypothetical..."

I was responding to this inquiry: "I haven't noted anyone making the assumption that JLB is guilty of rape.  Have I missed that?"

When you said "Why did Carlos Asay not speak with Bishop or do something with the allegations received from the woman? (I know I'm making an assumption here but everything else she said in that recording is turning out to be verified.)," you expressly admit to making an assumption.  An assumption of . . . what?  I took it as an assumption of Denson's allegations being true.  Her allegations include that Bishop raped her.

When you said "It's interesting to me that so many people will assume he is innocent and just suffering from dementia (which IS a possible conclusion) but they won't give the same benefit of the doubt to the woman and accept that her version of events could be true.," you seem to be advocating the idea that we give Denson the "benefit of the doubt" that "her version of events [which include allegations of rape] could be true."  An assumption ("benefit of the doubt") that Denson's accusations "could be true" seem to be pretty close to an assumption that Bishop is guilty of rape (since that is her accusation).

Omni's and Cinepro's statements seem to be a bit more assumptive of Bishop's guilt.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited May 8, 2018 by smac97

[rockpond]

8 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Yes, I know this.  That's why I said: "Some of these may be intended as purely hypothetical..."

I was responding to this inquiry: "I haven't noted anyone making the assumption that JLB is guilty of rape.  Have I missed that?"

When you said "Why did Carlos Asay not speak with Bishop or do something with the allegations received from the woman? (I know I'm making an assumption here but everything else she said in that recording is turning out to be verified.)," you expressly admit to making an assumption.  An assumption of . . . what?  I took it as an assumption of Denson's allegations being true.  Her allegations include that Bishop raped her.

When you said "It's interesting to me that so many people will assume he is innocent and just suffering from dementia (which IS a possible conclusion) but they won't give the same benefit of the doubt to the woman and accept that her version of events could be true.," you seem to be advocating the idea that we give Denson the "benefit of the doubt" that "her version of events [which include allegations of rape] could be true."  An assumption ("benefit of the doubt") that Denson's accusations "could be true" seem to be pretty close to an assumption that Bishop is guilty of rape (since that is her accusation).

Omni's and Cinepro's statements seem to be a bit more assumptive of Bishop's guilt.

Thanks,

-Smac

Rape is just one of the allegations being made.  I think many here (myself included) assume that JLB is guilty of some level of misconduct (based on confessions and corroborating testimonies).  But I do not assume that he is guilty of rape nor do I see such an assumption (referring specifically to rape, as I wrote to esodije) in the quotes you provided. 

[smac97]

3 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Quote

Yes, I know this.  That's why I said: "Some of these may be intended as purely hypothetical..."

I was responding to this inquiry: "I haven't noted anyone making the assumption that JLB is guilty of rape.  Have I missed that?"

When you said "Why did Carlos Asay not speak with Bishop or do something with the allegations received from the woman? (I know I'm making an assumption here but everything else she said in that recording is turning out to be verified.)," you expressly admit to making an assumption.  An assumption of . . . what?  I took it as an assumption of Denson's allegations being true.  Her allegations include that Bishop raped her.

When you said "It's interesting to me that so many people will assume he is innocent and just suffering from dementia (which IS a possible conclusion) but they won't give the same benefit of the doubt to the woman and accept that her version of events could be true.," you seem to be advocating the idea that we give Denson the "benefit of the doubt" that "her version of events [which include allegations of rape] could be true."  An assumption ("benefit of the doubt") that Denson's accusations "could be true" seem to be pretty close to an assumption that Bishop is guilty of rape (since that is her accusation).

Omni's and Cinepro's statements seem to be a bit more assumptive of Bishop's guilt.

Thanks,

-Smac

Rape is just one of the allegations being made.  

It is the primary and central allegation.  In the recording.  In her lawsuit.

3 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I think many here (myself included) assume that JLB is guilty of some level of misconduct (based on confessions and corroborating testimonies).  

So do I.

3 minutes ago, rockpond said:

But I do not assume that he is guilty of rape nor do I see such an assumption (referring specifically to rape, as I wrote to esodije) in the quotes you provided. 

Okay.  I accept your statement.  It sounds like you and I are more or less on the same page (at least as far as withholding judgment on the rape claim).

Thanks,

-Smac

[rockpond]

5 minutes ago, smac97 said:

It is the primary and central allegation.  In the recording.  In her lawsuit.

So do I.

Okay.  I accept your statement.  It sounds like you and I are more or less on the same page (at least as far as withholding judgment on the rape claim).

Thanks,

-Smac

Yes... I certainly do NOT want to be considered as assuming JLB is guilty of rape.  And, I thought that feeling was prevalent among those who are participating on this thread.  Perhaps I am wrong but that was my impression.

[smac97]

3 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Yes... I certainly do NOT want to be considered as assuming JLB is guilty of rape. 

Well, Jeanne has accused me of "defending Bishop" because I have not assumed his guilt (see here).  And Honorentheos seems to be presuming his guilt (see here ("She keeps coming back to the explanation that for him to not remember must mean there were multiple others since raping one person really ought to stand out in a person's history.")).

3 minutes ago, rockpond said:

And, I thought that feeling was prevalent among those who are participating on this thread.  Perhaps I am wrong but that was my impression.

I think the general consensus is that Bishop likely did do some things which were very wrong, but which may or may not be "rape."

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

21 hours ago, rockpond said:

Yes... I certainly do NOT want to be considered as assuming JLB is guilty of rape.  And, I thought that feeling was prevalent among those who are participating on this thread.  Perhaps I am wrong but that was my impression.

I think there has been a diversity of conclusions about Joseph Bishop.  Some people think he is likely guilty of rape, some think he is likely guilty of something morally repugnant and represensible, but not rape (such as, for example, what Leavitt says Denson reported to him), and some are not committing to any particular conclusion.

I'm in the middle group, though I'm not committed to it.

Thanks,

-Smac

[esodije]

I momentarily went to the dark side and listened to one of “consiglieri’s” podcasts over on Mormon Discussions.  (Think he knows that “consiglieri” is the plural form of “consigliere,” or is he given to using the “royal we”?) I had to laugh at his characterizing as “rock-solid corroboration” the supposed fact that an anonymous former MTC employee “confirmed” the existence of Bishop’s naughty room at the MTC and that one of Denson’s teachers “confirmed” that Bishop called Denson out of class on multiple occasions.  It’s sort of hard to elicit testimony from someone who won’t reveal his/her identity, and whereas Denson may well have been pulled out of class, it doesn’t explain why she presumably broke MTC rules and went without her companion.  There is a lot better evidence for the proposition that Denson is mental: (1) the sheer implausibility of the claim; (3) the lack of accusers against Bishop from any period of his professional life except from the MTC (a relatively difficult place for a sexual predator to operate compared to, say, Weber State, the BAN Mission, BYU, or even Happy Acres in Chandler; 3) the fact that Denson’s ex-husband and a relative have strongly implied they don’t believe her claims, (4) the fact that at least two missionaries who knew Denson in the MTC described her on DN fora as worldly and particularly prone to hitting on male missionaries; (5) her history of criminal conduct involving fraudulent intent; (6) her aggressive behavior toward Bishop at the time of the recording (I could not imagine this woman not kicking the crap out of any male attacker, at this or any previous time of her life); and (7) the fact that any delusional person may easily pass a polygraph about falsehoods that he/she sincerely believes are true.

Having had to deal with and humor people closely related to me who lacked contact with reality, I wonder I 

[esodije]

Sorry—dozed off there.  What I was going to say is that I’ve dealt with delusional (but otherwise highly intelligent) people who firmly believe in past events that I know never happened, and Denson’s voice on the audio recording had an oddly familiar ring to it.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, esodije said:

Sorry—dozed off there.  What I was going to say is that I’ve dealt with delusional (but otherwise highly intelligent) people who firmly believe in past events that I know never happened, and Denson’s voice on the audio recording had an oddly familiar ring to it.

And the second victim?  And Bishop's confession?  What do you think of those?

Edited May 10, 2018 by Calm

[smac97]

2 minutes ago, Calm said:

And the second victim?  And Bishop's confession?  What do you think of those?

And Leavitt's statement.  I think that is a piece of competent, probative and admissible evidence.

[stemelbow]

5 hours ago, esodije said:

I momentarily went to the dark side and listened to one of “consiglieri’s” podcasts over on Mormon Discussions.  (Think he knows that “consiglieri” is the plural form of “consigliere,” or is he given to using the “royal we”?) I had to laugh at his characterizing as “rock-solid corroboration” the supposed fact that an anonymous former MTC employee “confirmed” the existence of Bishop’s naughty room at the MTC and that one of Denson’s teachers “confirmed” that Bishop called Denson out of class on multiple occasions.  It’s sort of hard to elicit testimony from someone who won’t reveal his/her identity, and whereas Denson may well have been pulled out of class, it doesn’t explain why she presumably broke MTC rules and went without her companion.  There is a lot better evidence for the proposition that Denson is mental: (1) the sheer implausibility of the claim; (3) the lack of accusers against Bishop from any period of his professional life except from the MTC (a relatively difficult place for a sexual predator to operate compared to, say, Weber State, the BAN Mission, BYU, or even Happy Acres in Chandler; 3) the fact that Denson’s ex-husband and a relative have strongly implied they don’t believe her claims, (4) the fact that at least two missionaries who knew Denson in the MTC described her on DN fora as worldly and particularly prone to hitting on male missionaries; (5) her history of criminal conduct involving fraudulent intent; (6) her aggressive behavior toward Bishop at the time of the recording (I could not imagine this woman not kicking the crap out of any male attacker, at this or any previous time of her life); and (7) the fact that any delusional person may easily pass a polygraph about falsehoods that he/she sincerely believes are true.

Having had to deal with and humor people closely related to me who lacked contact with reality, I wonder I 

So when you lay this out and say you don't believe her, what exactly are you claiming you don't believe about her claims?  The claim that he ripped the buttons off her blouse, bruised her and then attempted to penetrate?  If so, I think your in league with Smac, for one, and others.  I'm not sure it's all that important how far it went.  I think in the original recording as she unveils that she was a missionary at the time he was the president, as she started in on how she doesn't blame him and he quickly interjects with "you should"....at about that time, I think it's pretty clear something ugly happened, he knows it and he at this time wishes he didn't do anything.  I think there's nothing but credibility to the notion that he'd lie at any point without any sense of shame.  Apparently he lived a life of lying.  He even seems to admit to that much.  And about that time he tells her how he, in the context of him mistreating women, says he cleared that all up with priesthood authority before he was a Mission President in Argentina, about that time...well, I think he clearly indicts himself and brings the Church in with him.  I dont' need a full confession from him, at this point.  he said enough for me.  But then you add to that that he also admits he molested another girl...well...to come up with your points of contention after that clearly shows you are missing the obvious.  

I'm not court of law.  I realize some sneak-filled lawyers will poke holes in the story.  But sometimes I'm just left to the simplest conclusions.  I think your conclusion and Smac's for that matter, are clearly wrong.  Your numbered points above, for the most part, barely register as any part of this to me.  Corroborating elements clearly defeat your position.  You seem far more concerned about supporting your dislike for Denson then you seem concerned about the facts laid out.  But I realize you won't be convinced. 

[stemelbow]

On ‎5‎/‎8‎/‎2018 at 1:00 PM, smac97 said:

Well, Jeanne has accused me of "defending Bishop" because I have not assumed his guilt (see here).  And Honorentheos seems to be presuming his guilt (see here ("She keeps coming back to the explanation that for him to not remember must mean there were multiple others since raping one person really ought to stand out in a person's history.")).

I think the general consensus is that Bishop likely did do some things which were very wrong, but which may or may not be "rape."

Thanks,

-Smac

Well "very wrong" is enough for me.  I wonder what it would be like to be accused of raping someone and then coming to the conclusion that it could have happened...I wouldn't put it past myself--which he essentially does.  I know you want to make a case about whether or not he really took it far enough to be considered rape, but that really just comes off as trying to weasel out of this on the grounds of technicality.  I mean no offense on that.  Just point out the weakness of your position.  

[ALarson]

6 hours ago, esodije said:

 I had to laugh at his characterizing as “rock-solid corroboration” the supposed fact that an anonymous former MTC employee “confirmed” the existence of Bishop’s naughty room at the MTC and that one of Denson’s teachers “confirmed” that Bishop called Denson out of class on multiple occasions.

I do think both of those have been confirmed (an ex employee confirming a secret room in the basement and her Spanish teacher confirming her being pulled out of class).

Why would you laugh that he states the same?

[ALarson]

6 hours ago, esodije said:

(6) her aggressive behavior toward Bishop at the time of the recording (I could not imagine this woman not kicking the crap out of any male attacker, at this or any previous time of her life)

Well, she did threaten his life.  Also, victims have varying reactions to coming face to face with their alleged rapist.  We shouldn't judge the victim.