Update on McKenna Denson Lawsuit

[Classicslover]

13 minutes ago, Calm said:

And she denied this happened.

 I think you need to watch the press conference

He tossed it to the police because it was admitting something sexual yet consensual and not something he could get arrested for. It was calculated because he knew she had the tape. So he was hoping they would believe him about that, and not try to charge him with rape.

She said, nope...didn't agree to show him my breasts. He raped me.

Did you really think he would lay claim to rape? Or do you think he would try to minimize as much as he could to get away clean?

[cdowis]

14 hours ago, Classicslover said:

Which is why I feel the whole  statute of limitations argument is not what the Lord would want. According to scripture. And He is the client.

Then you would feel confident the Lord will take care of it in his own time and way.  In the meantime, the courts will handle by the rule of law.

 

 

Edited June 14, 2018 by cdowis

[Calm]

19 hours ago, Classicslover said:

You do realize that years ago, she would have been satisfied with a Church disciplinary council for Bishop? It was only after years of nothing happening that she decided to take the case to court.

So the Church's "ignore it and it will go away plan" was an epic fail.

Which is why they asked for the Church to change the way it does things.

And the Church said that there were no negotiations while Denson's lawyer said he submitted whatever paperwork to the Church's lawyers to open negotiations. First step kind-of-thing. Anyway. there supposedly was no offer.

I believe you are correct on the offer, too lazy to look it up yet again (have spent days on researching sources, including comparing transcript to audio, a number of mistakes there that I have posted in other threads if you are curious).  However, they were never given the chance to make an offer before Denson put it into overdrive, so how can a judgment be made of what they were willing to do until put on defensive?

There is no evidence outside Denson's claim that Church leadership knew about a rape prior to 2010 when Bishop denied all charges.  The two opportunities we know Denson had to tell leaders about abuse, she states she said nothing as she didn't like the therapist, for the Monson interview she gave no details but they sent her back out to complete her mission...unlikely in my view if she had reported abuse as at the very least there was the risk of her sharing it with others (if you don't want to give the Church the benefit of the doubt and assume leadership was all about protecting Church rep) or having another breakdown.  She also stated she didn't talk about the rape in the alleged Asay interview, so even if Leavitt lied and he passed it up the chain, outside of inappropriate personal sessions, we cannot tell if she said anything (she stated in the press conference she didn't know what was in the videos, so if she is truthful there is no porn to tell about).

If they didn't know about any of his behaviour outside of inappropriate counseling sessions, how can they be said to ignore it?  Once they were told of the rape, they confronted him.  There was no evidence besides her word and they likely had the info of the false report on her mission and chances to report the rape without doing so.  

Let me know if you need sources for any of my statements,  I am assuming you are familiar with the case and just haven't watched the press conference.

Btw, I agree that Bishop has little credibility.  I have big doubts he confessed to Wells anything significant given he denied everything in 2010.  He also explained how Pres. Kimball "interviewed" him without any words, just holding his arms in the midst of a crowd, so I can imagine he thought up a similar type of confession for self justification if he thought calling that encounter an "interview" was appropriate..  

Denson apparently gave the tape out very close to the same time her lawyers opened negotiations given that Mormonleaks got info from BYU Police on January 11:

https://mormonleaks.io/wiki/index.php?title=File:2017-11-28-Brigham_Young_University_Police-Incident_Report_REDACTED-Pre_Audio_Leak.pdf

I have to wonder why she wasn't willing to wait to see what happened with her lawyers first.  That move coupled with the identity theft in February when she must have known she would be under scrutiny makes me wonder about her self control, which makes me wonder about her credibility.  Everything could be explained by pointing to traumatic abuse in her past, it can also be explained by pointing to her past criminal behaviour.  She has not painted a clear picture of victimhood with her own actions.

Which still leaves her more credible than Bishop, imo.

Edited June 14, 2018 by Calm

[Classicslover]

26 minutes ago, cdowis said:

Then you would feel confident the Lord will take care of it in his own time and way.  In the meantime, he courts will handle by the rule of law.

Nice try. The Lord stated specifically things to do in regards to rule of law. Which of course, deals in the here and now.

Besides, how are we to qualify to become as God is if we just wait for Him to fix everything for us later? No growth in that.

[Calm]

45 minutes ago, Classicslover said:

He tossed it to the police because it was admitting something sexual yet consensual and not something he could get arrested for. It was calculated because he knew she had the tape. So he was hoping they would believe him about that, and not try to charge him with rape.

She said, nope...didn't agree to show him my breasts. He raped me.

Did you really think he would lay claim to rape? Or do you think he would try to minimize as much as he could to get away clean?

Bishop has no credibility in my view (I am guessing he is a narcissistic sociopath with tendencies to tell self aggrandizing stories and place the blame on the women in his life based on the recording), but that still doesn't prove rape since there is no evidence she spoke of it prior to 2010 and quite a  bit of evidence from herself that she didn't.

You are confusing my attempts to be accurate about claims with defending Bishop.  I have no desire to defend Bishop.  That he resigned to avoid excommunication after admitting to asking the sister to expose herself says it all...though he said plenty other stuff as well.

Edited June 14, 2018 by Calm

[Classicslover]

20 minutes ago, Calm said:

Bishop has no credibility in my view (I am guessing he is a narcissistic sociopath with tendencies to tell self aggrandizing stories and place the blame on the women in his life based on the recording), but that still doesn't prove rape since there is no evidence she spoke of it prior to 2010 and quite a  bit of evidence from herself that she didn't.

You are confusing my attempts to be accurate about claims with defending Bishop.  I have no desire to defend Bishop.  That he resigned to avoid excommunication after admitting to asking the sister to expose herself says it all...though he said plenty other stuff as well.

I know of a few others who have tried to get some sort of help - justice - taking responsibility and holding people accountable over many years...so when Denson spoke of that, it all rang true to me. 

[Calm]

18 hours ago, Classicslover said:

I know of a few others who have tried to get some sort of help - justice - taking responsibility and holding people accountable over many years...so when Denson spoke of that, it all rang true to me. 

Personal experience plays a huge part in how we interpret things.

I have seen both poor support and wonderful support of abuse victims over the years from church leaders.  I suppose that is why I am open to both possibilities that some church leaders are lying or Denson is lying...or even both are.  Or maybe some weird really crappy miscommunication happened prior to 2010 and all involved got the wrong idea about what the other said or expected.  I have seen people walk away from what I think would be an easy understanding---for example, do they need to pay rent by the end of the month---with opposite interpretations of what was just discussed (owner---pay or get the home sold out from under you, renter---try and if you can't, we will have another discussion about how to do so), so I allow for a lot when it comes to faulty communication (put everything in writing is my rule now).

I have also known an abuse victim who kept expanding her story, getting more detail (not just her uncle as it was when I first knew her, but eventually every man who she had a relationship with) and you could follow it by knowing what others had told her of their own lives.  She also 'attempted' suicide many times, I put attempt in '' because it was always timed so she would be rescued before she was in major danger plus others would step in to take care of stuff she didn't want to do herself (and no obligation because she didn't ask for the help).  I can recognize her instability was most likely a result of the childhood abuse and the refusal of her family to believe her (not LDS), but that doesn't change that she lied and committed fraud at times to get people to take care of her, give her money, etc.

Denson appears to have done some similar things with her criminal activity,  and that obscures our ability to judge the truthfulness of her claims, imo.

Edited June 14, 2018 by Calm

[Classicslover]

8 minutes ago, Calm said:

Personal experience plays a huge part in how we interpret things.

I have seen both poor support and wonderful support of abuse victims over the years from church leaders.  I suppose that is why I am open to both possibilities that some church leaders are lying or Denson is lying...or even both are.  Or maybe some weird really crappy miscommunication happened prior to 2010 and all involved got the wrong idea about what the other said or expected.  I have seen people walk away from what I think would be an easy understanding---do they need to pay rent by the end of the month---with opposite interpretations of what was just discussed (for example, owner---pay or get the home sold out from under you, renter---try and if you can't, we will have another discussion about how to do so), so I allow for a lot when it comes to faulty communication (put everything in writing is my rule now).

Yep. Good rule.  And yes, personal experience is huge. As a mixed race visible minority, my experience is not like that of my entirely white ward members. Okay...actually...the sisters in the Church can relate quite a bit. Because often their concerns and opinions are treated dismissively as well.

But I have also experienced having my membership records sent out of the ward...having more than one racist bishop and stake president deliberately mess up my romantic relationships with white women. Including wreaking my marriage.

Over the years all of my letters faxes emails and phone calls to Church headquarters fell on deaf ears. Or blind eyes.

The local leaders even refused to send in mission papers for me because they knew the "Only marry a returned missionary" mantra that LDS females learn in the womb.

I'm one of those who is in the Church because I REALLY know it's true.

In spite of the idiots.

[sunstoned]

6 hours ago, Thinking said:

The thing that saddens me is that there are some who are more concerned with the statute of limitations than finding out the truth of what happened.

It also saddens me how this lady has been victim shamed. It saddens me that someone who wrote a letter to a CES Director and wanted answers got excommunicated instead while this sexual predictor is still a member.  

Edited June 14, 2018 by sunstoned

[Calm]

16 hours ago, sunstoned said:

It also saddens me how this lady has been victim shamed. It saddens me that someone who wrote a letter to a CES Director and wanted answers got excommunicated instead while this sexual predictor is still a member.  

He is not a member.  He resigned to avoid excommunication.  Discussed in older threads.

As far as shaming her, she did nothing wrong that could lead to possibly justifying the sexual abuse by Bishop, whatever happened.  Bishop is fully accountable for that, imo.  And Leavitt has a lot to answer for when he ignored her report (assuming he is not lying now; if he is, it muddies the water even more given Denson said she did not tell Asay of the rape, so it is very confusing what she is claiming the Church leadership knew).

But that does not make the separate occurrences of criminal frauds of her former employer and her boyfriend disappear somehow if they actually happened (and given there was no denial by her lawyer or corrections by media that could check out the reports themselves, it seems highly probable that they occurred).  If it is wrong to ignore abuse, isn't it also wrong to ignore fraud?  They were  not victimless crimes.

add-on:  I believe that investigations should start from the position victims should be believed as that leads to actual investigation rather than dismissal (as shown in studies).  Also fraudulent claims of sexual assault are low (generally reported from 2-8% iirc), though they do occur.  One consistent marker is a history of fraudulent claims.  I just don't see how that history should be ignored in this case anymore than the known history of Church responses (which seem completely wrong to me in the case of Leavitt and possibly insufficient in the 2010 reports, but I would need more details---which I shouldn't get imo due to confidentiality of the second victim who appears to want privacy since she hasn't come forward---to fairly judge, imo).

Edited June 14, 2018 by Calm

[Kenngo1969]

18 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

... I have some tolerance with those who don’t occupationally rely on written communication skills for their livelihood, but to be a lawyer, don’t you have to be a pretty good writer? ...

Ah, well!  I suppose I'll simply have to settle for one-out-of-two!   

[smac97]

11 hours ago, Classicslover said:

You do realize that years ago, she would have been satisfied with a Church disciplinary council for Bishop?

Sounds like you're speculating.  Moreover, I have some doubts that "she would have been satisfied."

11 hours ago, Classicslover said:

It was only after years of nothing happening that she decided to take the case to court.

With respect, you don't know that.  

11 hours ago, Classicslover said:

So the Church's "ignore it and it will go away plan" was an epic fail.

The Church didn't "ignore it."  The Church didn't know anything about it until 2010, at which point it investigated the matter.

11 hours ago, Classicslover said:

Which is why they asked for the Church to change the way it does things.

They "asked?"  As in "filed a lawsuit in federal court?"

That part of Denson's lawsuit is the one that is guaranteed to fail.  Federal courts lack authority to dictate how religious organizations handle disciplinary matters.

Moreover, I strongly suspect that Denson's lawyers' original plan involved only going after money damages.  "Asking" the Church "to change the way it does things" was not going to be part of the equation.  Just money.

11 hours ago, Classicslover said:

And the Church said that there were no negotiations while Denson's lawyer said he submitted whatever paperwork to the Church's lawyers to open negotiations. First step kind-of-thing. Anyway. there supposedly was no offer.

The negotiations were destroyed by Denson.

11 hours ago, Classicslover said:

And people who are abused often turn to drink or drugs or promiscuity or even crime as a way to dull the pain or forget.

Whether Denson was abused is an open question.  What sort of abuse she purportedly suffered is an open question.  And the Church apparently knew nothing about Denson's allegations until 2010.

11 hours ago, Classicslover said:

They begin to heal when they get justice.

My sense is that Denson is a very troubled person.  She apparently had a horrendous childhood which involved extensive abuse.  She had a child out of wedlock, possibly the result of rape.  Then she joined the Church and wanted to serve a mission.  While at the MTC in the 1980s something very bad happened.  Denson now claims that she was forcibly raped by Joseph Bishop, the MTC president, and for evidence points to a recording she made of an "interview" with Bishop under false pretenses, which recording was made two days after Bishop had undergone heart surgery, which recording shows numerous instances of Bishop being confused - including at least one demonstrably false confession.  Bishop denies that he raped her, but has admitted to BYU police that he aske Denson to show him her breasts (Denson denies that, which creates some further concern about the overall reliability of the recording).  Denson's post-mission bishop is on record as saying

1. that Denson made allegations that Bishop took her "and I think another sister missionary down to the basement and showed them some pornography";
2. that Denson did not use the words rape or attempted rape, instead describing other misconduct, and
3. that he (Leavitt) did not report this to the Church or to the police ("'I didn't think it had much credence. I wasn't going to risk sullying the reputation of someone based on that kind of a report, Leavitt said.").

The Church states that it did not know about Denson's allegations until 2010.  Denson has made unsubstantiated claims that she contacted the Church "approximately ten times" between returning from her mission and and prior to December 2017.  However, I think the only substantiated contacts are A) her disclosure to her bishop after she returned from her mission in 1987 (the substance of what she disclosed is disputed), B) her over-the-phone statement to the Church and subsequent statements to police in Pleasant Grove in 2010, and C) her statement to a stake president in Pueblo, Colorado in 2016.

While on her mission (she was sent to work in Washington D.C. until her visa came through), she falsely claimed that she was raped (she says did so as a coping mechanism for an anxiety attack).  She was sent back to Utah, where she met with a therapist, and also with an apostle (Thomas S. Monson), and was then sent back out to complete her mission, but to Wisconsin instead of overseas.  Denson makes no claim that she told the therapist or then-Elder Monson about Bishop's misconduct.

Denson's post-mission life was apparently very troubled.  She has a fairly extensive criminal history.  She has accused her ex-husband of serious abuse.  He, in turn (with another family member), states that she has made "at least two" false rape allegations (one of which was likely the one she admits to making while serving as a missionary in Washington D.C.).  She has had multiple run-ins with the law, including identity theft involving her boyfriend, and also false claims against her former employer of being "pistol-whipped" in the employer's parking lot (apparently an insurance fraud scheme).  So her credibility is not very good.

So we have a complex story being told by one side of it.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

9 hours ago, sunstoned said:

It also saddens me how this lady has been victim shamed. 

Nobody has "victim shamed" Denson.

9 hours ago, sunstoned said:

It saddens me that someone who wrote a letter to a CES Director and wanted answers got excommunicated instead while this sexual predictor is still a member.  

He was not excommunicated.  He resigned.

And his letter was not a good faith effort.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Danzo]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Nobody has "victim shamed" Denson.

He was not excommunicated.  He resigned.

And his letter was not a good faith effort.

Thanks,

-Smac

Do you have a reference to him resigning? Not that I disbelieve you, just want to make sure I can back it up if I repeat it.

[smac97]

19 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Do you have a reference to him resigning? Not that I disbelieve you, just want to make sure I can back it up if I repeat it.

We're talking about Jeremy Runnells, correct?  Here you go.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

13 hours ago, Classicslover said:

He tossed it to the police because it was admitting something sexual yet consensual and not something he could get arrested for. It was calculated because he knew she had the tape. So he was hoping they would believe him about that, and not try to charge him with rape.

That's just speculation on your part.

13 hours ago, Classicslover said:

She said, nope...didn't agree to show him my breasts.  He raped me.

Actually, she hasn't said that she "didn't agree" to Bishop's request that she show him her breasts.  She said that the event never happened to her.  See here:

Quote

Thursday McKenna Denson spoke to media about her experience as a missionary under the authority of then MTC president Joseph L. Bishop. She said Thursday he made her feel special, interviewed her about highly sensitive sexual topics, groomed and eventually raped in a basement of the Missionary Training Center in Provo, Utah.

Bishop denied those allegations to BYU police, who interviewed him in December 2017. Police reports show that Bishop admitted to police that he asked her to expose her breasts. Denson said Thursday that didn't happen to her and said it was evidence that there were other victims. 

"Denson said [] that [the event Bishop described to BYU Police] didn't happen to her and said it was evidence that there were other victims."

More here:

Quote

Joseph Bishop admits to some sexual abuse in an interview with Brigham Young University Police. “Joseph told detectives that he went with the woman to a small ‘preparation room’ in the cafeteria area of the MTC” and asked her to show him her breasts.

And here:

Quote

In documents obtained by 2News, a former LDS official admitted to Brigham Young University police that he took a female missionary into a private room in the Missionary Training Center and asked her to expose her breasts.

Joseph L. Bishop, former president of the LDS Church's MTC in Provo, Utah, was recently accused of attempted rape in a recording made by a woman who claimed to be a victim while she was a missionary under his supervision in 1984. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints responded to the recording and transcript of that conversation with a statement.

According to a police report from Dec. 2017, as part of an investigation of the alleged rape, Joseph told detectives that he went with the woman to a small "preparation room" in the cafeteria area of the MTC "and while talking with her, asked her to show him her breasts, which she did."

The police report said the alleged victim's account lined up with Bishop's account of events, except for the rape. When police asked Bishop why those details were different, he said "he either can't remember it or that [name redacted] was exaggerating her account."

The woman also reported the room had a bed, TV and VHS tapes but Bishop told police it didn't.

So we have Bishop denying Event X (rape or attempted rape in a basement room at the MTC), but admitting to Event Y (Bishop asking Denson to show him her breasts in a room by the cafeteria at the MTC).

We have Denson claiming Event X (rape or attempted rape in a basement room at the MTC), but denying Event Y (Bishop asking Denson to show him her breasts in a room by the cafeteria at the MTC).

So Event Y appears to be altogether off the table.  But it nevertheless provides information about some things.  There was another victim.  And Bishop has indeed admitted to some serious misconduct while functioning as president of the MTC.  But he seems to not be very lucid, as evidenced by his partially false confession to the BYU Police (he confessed to Event Y, but was confused as to who was involved), and by his various less-than-lucid statements made in Denson's recording of him.

Denson claims that she reported Bishop's misconduct toward her to her bishop, Ron Leavitt, in 1987.  She even went so far as to tell the Tribune that her bishop would be a corroborating witness to her claim.  And yet Leavitt is on record as saying that

1. Denson made allegations that Bishop took her "and I think another sister missionary down to the basement and showed them some pornography" 
2. Denson did not use the words rape or attempted rape, instead describing other misconduct," and
3. That he (Leavitt) did not report this to the Church or to the police ("'I didn't think it had much credence. I wasn't going to risk sullying the reputation of someone based on that kind of a report, Leavitt said.").

When we do as Denson recommended to the Tribune, and look to Leavitt a "corroborating witness," we find that he sort of undermines several key elements of her narrative (that she reported a rape, that he arranged for her to meet with Elder Asay, etc.).

13 hours ago, Classicslover said:

Did you really think he would lay claim to rape? 

If you had been falsely accused of rape, would you "lay claim" to it?  And would you be okay with others taking your denial as some sort of tacit admission?

We don't know what Bishop did.  On balance, I think the best explanation of the evidence was that he A) took Denson and perhaps another sister missionary to the basement room and showed them some pornography, and B) that at another time he asked a sister missionary to show him her breasts.  

13 hours ago, Classicslover said:

Or do you think he would try to minimize as much as he could to get away clean?

I think we can't assume his guilt (as to the rape claim) and then use that assumption as the lens through which we review his statements.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Danzo]

24 minutes ago, smac97 said:

We're talking about Jeremy Runnells, correct?  Here you go.

Thanks,

-Smac

OK, I thought you were talking about Bishop. 

[Danzo]

9 hours ago, Calm said:

He is not a member.  He resigned to avoid excommunication.  Discussed in older threads.

 

Are you talking about Bishop?

if so, do you have any reference that he resigned?

[Tacenda]

I think Joseph L. Bishop is in denial. He expressed that it was not in the basement but near the cafeteria? And doesn't remember the rape happening. He only remembers the less damaging parts. 

BTW, McKenna in her older age doesn't look much like the one in the photo from her MTC days. And I don't think McKenna is the one who was shown porn in the room in the basement, nor was she the one he asked to see her breasts. Seems this gets lost in translation quite a bit. 

[bluebell]

36 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Are you talking about Bishop?

if so, do you have any reference that he resigned?

Yes, that's what is being reported.  Calm might have a reference.

[smac97]

13 hours ago, Calm said:

There is no evidence outside Denson's claim that Church leadership knew about a rape prior to 2010 when Bishop denied all charges.  The two opportunities we know Denson had to tell leaders about abuse, she states she said nothing as she didn't like the therapist, for the Monson interview she gave no details but they sent her back out to complete her mission...unlikely in my view if she had reported abuse as at the very least there was the risk of her sharing it with others or having another breakdown.  

Quite so.  I was a bit surprised to hear that she was sent back out despite having fabricated a rape claim.  That seems to speak to either a marked lack of judgment, or substantial mental health issues, or both.  But I wonder if she really, really wanted to serve, and so was allowed to return to the field.  I don't think this would happen today (or would at least require some substantial therapy prior to going back out).

13 hours ago, Calm said:

She also stated she didn't talk about the rape in the alleged Asay interview, so even if Leavitt lied and he passed it up the chain, outside of inappropriate personal sessions, we cannot tell if she said anything (she stated in the press conference she didn't know what was in the videos, so if she is truthful there is no porn to tell about).

Well, the "pornography" mentioned by Leavitt could have been magazines instead of videos.

13 hours ago, Calm said:

Btw, I agree that Bishop has little credibility.  I have big doubts he confessed to Wells anything significant given he denied everything in 2010.  He also explained how Pres. Kimball "interviewed" him without any words, just holding his arms in the midst of a crowd, so I can imagine he thought up a similar type of confession for self justification if he thought calling that encounter an "interview" was appropriate..  

That's a fair point.

13 hours ago, Calm said:

Denson apparently gave the tape out very close to the same time her lawyers opened negotiations given that Mormonleaks got info from BYU Police on January 11:

https://mormonleaks.io/wiki/index.php?title=File:2017-11-28-Brigham_Young_University_Police-Incident_Report_REDACTED-Pre_Audio_Leak.pdf

I have to wonder why she wasn't willing to wait to see what happened with her lawyers first.  

Hard to say.  Anger and poor impulse control, perhaps.  I hope she wasn't looking for notoriety.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

20 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I think Joseph L. Bishop is in denial. He expressed that it was not in the basement but near the cafeteria?

I think he is not altogether lucid.  He is conflating events and persons.

20 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

And doesn't remember the rape happening. He only remembers the less damaging parts. 

Or "the less damaging parts" were what happened, rather than rape or attempted rape as alleged by Denson.  This would account for Leavitt's statement about what she disclosed to him.

20 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

BTW, McKenna in her older age doesn't look much like the one in the photo from her MTC days.

Okay.  Not sure of the relevance...

20 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

And I don't think McKenna is the one who was shown porn in the room in the basement, nor was she the one he asked to see her breasts. Seems this gets lost in translation quite a bit. 

Yep.  We all have ample grounds to be a bit skeptical about both Denson's claims (which were possibly embellished so as to give her leverage against the Church and negotiate a hefty settlement) and Bishop's denials (he clearly engaged in some serious misconduct).

Thanks,

-Smac

[provoman]

50 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Are you talking about Bishop?

if so, do you have any reference that he resigned?

I am pretty sure the source is an anonymous reddit user.

[Danzo]

30 minutes ago, provoman said:

I am pretty sure the source is an anonymous reddit user.

So it is a rumor.  

We should stop referring it to as a fact until we have other confirmation from at least a somewhat credible source

too much speculation as it is.

 

[juliann]

1 hour ago, Danzo said:

So it is a rumor.  

We should stop referring it to as a fact until we have other confirmation from at least a somewhat credible source

too much speculation as it is.

 

I heard it from a source I consider credible. He would be stupid not to, an excommunication would support the idea he did something very wrong.