Denson's Lawsuit Dismissed by Federal Judge

[smac97]

8 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

In my TBM days, no, I wouldn't have liked her doing that,

Yep.  The Golden Rule has some clear applicationhere.

Quote

but I also wouldn't have liked the men doing what they did.

Her behavior was planned and calculated to offend and disrupt.  The men charged with maintaining the decorum and reverence of the meeting were acting off-the-cuff.  A big difference, IMO.

Quote

McKenna has repeatedly been put last in the church's eyes.

Not sure what this means.

Quote

All those years they couldn't give her a straight answer.

I have some real question as to whether she was asking questions during "all those years."

Quote

Maybe if Bishop had been disciplined right at the beginning.

There is some fairly substantial evidence that the Church didn't know anything about her allegations until 2010.

Quote

But apparently some men in the church protected him. 

There is scant evidence of that.  That seems like almost pure conjecture on your part.

Quote

It's a pattern that has lasted far too long, the abused get the shaft, IMO. 

Again, the Church is not being given credit for its extensive and meaningful and effective efforts to improve its handling of abuse allegations.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited September 5, 2018 by smac97

[Tacenda]

While watching the video a man came up on the stand to tell the bishop who was speaking. As I watched the video a third time, I noticed it is the same man who was sitting next to Joseph Bishop. He rushes up at mark 00:28. And then the video shows him sitting by Bishop at mark 00:37. I believe this is a cut/paste part of the video. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOIxoEB0jBs

 

[Rain]

14 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

In my TBM days, no, I wouldn't have liked her doing that, but I also wouldn't have liked the men doing what they did. McKenna has repeatedly been put last in the church's eyes. All those years they couldn't give her a straight answer. Maybe if Bishop had been disciplined right at the beginning. But apparently some men in the church protected him. It's a pattern that has lasted far too long, the abused get the shaft, IMO. 

Thank you for trying to answer. 

[ttribe]

Not a fan of these antics.  I do believe she is an aggrieved victim, but I don't think this kind of action serves her cause well, or her personally, at all.  Teaming up with the likes of NNN is just the icing on the cake of her proverbial jump of the shark this last weekend.

[carbon dioxide]

33 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Scott, how would you feel if someone did that to you? How would it feel to have someone put their arms around you and their body tightly touching yours with their hand on your arm as if to take you against your will? I know she deserved to be told to leave the premises. And if she didn't then tell her they will have to call the police. I wouldn't say they assaulted her, they just made a terrible choice to put their hands on her. It appeared at the 1:17 mark in the video link below. That is when it got out of hand or crossed the line.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOIxoEB0jBs

 

She initiated the whole thing.  Had she acted better, then it never would have happened. 

[rockpond]

37 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Yes.  And he has stated that he did not tell anyone about Ms. Denson's claims.

I do not excuse that.  It was a serious error on his part.  But again, this has some rather important ramifications for people who want to fault "the Church" for failing to respond to Ms. Denson's allegations.  If Leavitt didn't tell anyone, then that is some fairly important context for why the Church did not do anything to help Ms. Denson.  

Don't get me wrong.  Ms. Denson clearly should have received pastoral care and attention.  But the failure of "the Church" to provide becomes less attributable to generalized neglect and disregard of her claims because the Church, other than her bishop, was not aware of them.

Well, yes and no. 

As a technical matter, the Church should have provided her with pastoral care.  But as a practical matter, it apparently was not aware of such a need until 2010.

Thanks,

-Smac

Yes, Leavitt erred at the time he was told by Denson (possibly Elder Asay - we only have conflicting testimony).  And other church leaders failed to provide pastoral care later on (post 2010).  This is my point - she should have been cared for by church leaders better than she was. 

[carbon dioxide]

7 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Not a fan of these antics.  I do believe she is an aggrieved victim, but I don't think this kind of action serves her cause well, or her personally, at all.  Teaming up with the likes of NNN is just the icing on the cake of her proverbial jump of the shark this last weekend.

Yep.  I am sure she is a victim but that does not entitle her to interrupt a meeting filled with innocent people who have nothing to do with what happened to her.  I have a little less respect and sympathy for her. 

[Rain]

I have very mixed feelings on McKenna being touched. In no way did I find it threatening. I totally understand why the bishop would handle it as he did. His movements seemed to be the movements of a gentle, concerned man. Much like my husband.

My husband is 6'6" and has wide shoulders. He is gentle and sweet. I am very aware though that he intimidates others with his size. There have been times when I have gently and hopefully secretly pulled him to the back or to the side because I could tell a woman we are talking with is feeling uncomfortable. He gets this and appreciates it and understands he often doesn't see those cues.

So while this man was not as big to McKenna as my husband is to me I get why it would make her feel uncomfortable. I think we need to be aware that this may feel intimidating to some people. 

Still it irritates me that this man was put in that position and I don't have a problem with how he handled it. 

[sunstoned]

3 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

She initiated the whole thing.  Had she acted better, then it never would have happened. 

I think we need to keep in mind when we judge her actions that she was raped by a MTC President.  Let that sink in for a minute.  Nothing was done to correct this.  The man continued on his path of high church callings.  Latter when this finally came to light the church victim shamed her to the point that her daughter's sealed adoption records were released to the public.   Clearly not the church's finest hour.  

How she behaved  in the F&T was not right, but I can see from the history of this whole thing how she could get to the point of acting out in this way. Also, I suspect that NNN probably encouraged her, and might have come up with the idea in this first place. 

[carbon dioxide]

36 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

In my TBM days, no, I wouldn't have liked her doing that, but I also wouldn't have liked the men doing what they did. McKenna has repeatedly been put last in the church's eyes.

Would you have preferred them to taser her or perhaps pepper spray?  What really could they have done to get her to leave?  She had an agenda and was not going to stop until that was done.  Perhaps a couple of female bouncers should have taken her out but overall I thought their response was appropriate.  I would have done the same thing. 

[Tacenda]

36 minutes ago, Rain said:

Thank you for trying to answer. 

(bold mine)

I know I sure had troubles didn't I!?!

I deleted the majority of my response. And by doing that it came off badly. I cut out the part that in my mindset now, with the knowledge of abuse in the church, I have some different feelings, a feeling that we need to be loud and clear if we've been abused. And I know that as a TBM I had no idea the amount of abuse in the church. And how could I, the church lawyers usually pay off these victims before it hits the news. And the church for years has told the bishops not to report it to the police, even those that have been abused, of course this has been in the past, and maybe individual cases where a bishop made an executive decision, per se. I've heard that from the lawyer that represented the victims because he said that the helpline for the bishops is a phone number directly to a church lawyer. https://www.deseretnews.com/article/421854/LDS-HOTLINE-TO-HELP-LEADERS-DEAL-WITH-ABUSE.html.

You could say my level of trust in the church has hit an all time low. So that is where I'm at. And for Joseph Bishop to be able to proceed to be a mission president even after confessing to Elder Wells? He admitted that he confessed to McKenna when she interviewed him under false pretenses, it's on the tape and here in the timeline. 

https://medium.com/@davidscoville/timeline-of-the-joseph-bishop-sexual-abuse-scandal-77f39be1ef3a

Edited September 5, 2018 by Tacenda

[carbon dioxide]

21 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

I think we need to keep in mind when we judge her actions that she was raped by a MTC President.  Let that sink in for a minute.  Nothing was done to correct this.  The man continued on his path of high church callings.  Latter when this finally came to light the church victim shamed her to the point that her daughter's sealed adoption records were released to the public.   Clearly not the church's finest hour.  

How she behaved  in the F&T was not right, but I can see from the history of this whole thing how she could get to the point of acting out in this way. Also, I suspect that NNN probably encouraged her, and might have come up with the idea in this first place. 

If it was a few days ago or a few weeks ago I would fully understand that.  The emotional trauma and not being able to handle emotions is understandable.  However this happened DECADES ago and she has had plenty of time to work through this.  I am sure she still feels trauma BUT at some point she needs to act like an adult.  She interrupted a meeting filled with people who have NOTHING to do with what happened to her.  She imposed her problems on them when she had no right to do such a thing and it was all done willfully and was planned in advance.  She has had a platform to get her story out.  She has social media and the press.  She is trying to legal process.  Yet apparently that is not enough for her.   Her actions I would expect from a teenager but not something her age.  People just need to be more respectful to others.  We all have problems but we should not try to impose them on others.  There is a time and place for everything.  THat was not the right place to do it.

The Church may have done her wrong in some ways so I do have sympathy but actions like this makes it harder to maintain that.

Edited September 5, 2018 by carbon dioxide

[sunstoned]

2 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

If it was a few days ago or a few weeks ago I would fully understand that.  The emotional trauma and not being able to handle emotions is understandable.  However this happened DECADES ago and she has had plenty of time to work through this.  I am sure she still feels trauma BUT at some point she needs to act like an adult.  She interrupted a meeting filled with people who have NOTHING to do with what happened to her.  She imposed her problems on them when she had no right to do such a thing and it was all done willfully and was planned in advance.  She has had a platform to get her story out.  She has social media and the press.  She is trying to legal process.  Yet apparently that is not enough for her.   Her actions I would expect from a teenager but not something her age.

While I hear where you are coming from.  However, none of us get to judge how long a rape victim needs to take to work through it.

[carbon dioxide]

1 minute ago, sunstoned said:

While I hear where you are coming from.  However, none of us get to judge how long a rape victim needs to take to work through it.

Of course not.  Everyone is different but there is good, ways and not so good ways.  I am not saying she should get over it.  That would be insane but time does allow people to focus their trauma in more productive ways.  She did fine up to this point.  Going to the media and seeking legal redress is the right thing.  This however was very wrong.

[Rivers]

14 hours ago, JAHS said:

Woman who accused former MTC president of rape confronts his LDS Church ward in Arizona

"The woman who alleges the former president of the Missionary Training Center of raped her in 1984 brought her battle to an LDS ward in Arizona Sunday, and a video of her repeating her accusations there has been posted on YouTube."

She was removed form the podium under protest and several people in the audience were recording it. I wonder if it is better to just let someone finish what they are saying and clean up afterwards, or to ask them and/or physical help them leave the podium?  

 

If it were me I would explain that it is an appropriate and wrap it up quickly.  Physically grabbing her wasn't very classy.

[Abulafia]

Smack, I feel very uncomfortable with your continuing attempts to malign McKenna by listing her past criminal record.  I mean, it's clever, but sad. She is having people come over to her Facebook page, crazy people, who are absolutely attacking her for it. 

You would know, since you seem to be an expert on rape and abuse, that having a criminal record is par for the course according to sociological studies.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3636417/

Also, your details of events in terms of who knew what and when, is wildly off. It will be interesting to see what the Provo Police Dept have.

 

As for the correctness of McKenna's actions in facing her abuser in a public space, I don't think for one minute, it was to get members who are entrenched in the system on her side. It was a personally empowering act to someone who was historically ignored. It has also highlighted the very much bigger issue of the perception that the church will protect high ranking and high utility men, whilst almost certainly booting out people like Sam Young. 

 

The take away from this, whether fair or not, is that the church has more tolerance for testimony holding rapists and child abusers than it does for someone calling them out on it. And in media terms, that doesn't look good.  Same with the Catholic Church. 

 

At some point, the church needs to apologise where it is negligent, not involve itself in NDAs which protect them not the abused, and take legal responsibility. 

 

False reporting is always a possibility, but the occasions are rare. 

I should link to the 7 points I would plead for the brethren to consider.  McKenna is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to historic and current wrongdoing.  

 

 

So, none of us should be surprised. 

 

 

[carbon dioxide]

2 minutes ago, Rivers said:

If it were me I would explain that it is an appropriate and wrap it up quickly.  Physically grabbing her wasn't very classy.

The thing is you don't know their motives and what they plan to do.  One can assume she would finish up in 30 seconds but she might go on for 10 minutes.  I don't fault what they did to her as they probably did not have much time to plan out what they were going to do and think about the pros and cons of how to handle the situation.  They were just in the moment trying to resolve the problem so they could get back to the meeting.  Perhaps training on this should occur because when people are allowed to get up, anything can happen.

[Rain]

52 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

(bold mine)

I know I sure had troubles didn't I!?!

I deleted the majority of my response. And by doing that it came off badly. I cut out the part that in my mindset now, with the knowledge of abuse in the church, I have some different feelings, a feeling that we need to be loud and clear if we've been abused. And I know that as a TBM I had no idea the amount of abuse in the church. And how could I, the church lawyers usually pay off these victims before it hits the news. And the church for years has told the bishops not to report it to the police, even those that have been abused, of course this has been in the past, and maybe individual cases where a bishop made an executive decision, per se. I've heard that from the lawyer that represented the victims because he said that the helpline for the bishops is a phone number directly to a church lawyer. https://www.deseretnews.com/article/421854/LDS-HOTLINE-TO-HELP-LEADERS-DEAL-WITH-ABUSE.html.

You could say my level of trust in the church has hit an all time low. So that is where I'm at. And for Joseph Bishop to be able to proceed to be a mission president even after confessing to Elder Wells? He admitted that he confessed to McKenna when she interviewed him under false pretenses, it's on the tape and here in the timeline. 

https://medium.com/@davidscoville/timeline-of-the-joseph-bishop-sexual-abuse-scandal-77f39be1ef3a

I don't have a problem standing up for yourself or others as long as it is not mob justice (which often isn't justice at all).  I just don't know how much of her story to believe and I don't believe that hurting those who are innocent can right a wrong done.

Edited September 5, 2018 by Rain

[mormondialoguethrowaway]

Abulafia,

Imagine tomorrow you were served with a lawsuit that some woman claimed you raped her.  And she is suing you.  You knew it wasn't true.  As part of the legal discovery process, you find out she has a history of making false rape accusations before, as well as setting up other scams in the hope of suing for money.  Further, she has teamed up with noted church antagonists to do everything she can to receive non-stop attention and praise from fellow church critics.

How charitable are you going to be to this woman doing this to you?   Should the rest of us lead a mob with pitchforks and assume the worst? 

 

 

 

 

 

[rockpond]

1 minute ago, mormondialoguethrowaway said:

Abulafia,

Imagine tomorrow you were served with a lawsuit that some woman claimed you raped her.  And she is suing you.  You knew it wasn't true.  As part of the legal discovery process, you find out she has a history of making false rape accusations before, as well as setting up other scams in the hope of suing for money.  Further, she has teamed up with noted church antagonists to do everything she can to receive non-stop attention and praise from fellow church critics.

How charitable are you going to be to this woman doing this to you?   Should the rest of us lead a mob with pitchforks and assume the worst? 

 

 

 

 

 

You left out one key element:  Bishop confessed to sexually assaulting Denson. 

[carbon dioxide]

1 minute ago, Rain said:

I don't have a problem standing up for yourself or others as long as it is not mob justice that often isn't justice at all.  I just don't know how much of her story to believe and I don't believe that hurting those who are innocent can right a wrong done.

She is getting some bad advice from somebody.  I don't see how she won anyone over to her cause but perhaps lost a few people.  I don't think anyone in the congregation that was on the fence decided to come to her side because she made a decision to make a scene in sacrament meeting.

[Hamba Tuhan]

54 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

I think we need to keep in mind when we judge her actions that she was raped by a MTC President.

You are only one of several posters on this forum who make this statement as if it's a statement of fact. It's not.

We have a woman in my ward who likewise claims that she was raped by a Church leader. As soon as it was reported to the then stake presidency, police were notified. A thorough investigation was completed. In the end, the authorities found no evidence that a rape had occurred.

The sister in my ward has refused to accept this outcome, possibly because it's false. The problem is, no one has sufficient evidence that it is. If we had that evidence, the man whom she claims raped her would be in gaol. He's not.

This absolutely drives her mad. She has stopped coming to church, and she has banned her husband and children from attending. She tells everyone who will listen to her that our current stake presidency are harbouring a rapist. We aren't. We are attempting to protect a man who has been accused and then cleared of rape charges.

But no. We're actually part of an evil institution that won't believe women or treat them with respect or listen to them. We're part of an 'old boys' priesthood network. We're literally everything that people in this and other threads have levelled at current Church leaders in America.

Except that we aren't. In order to satisfy this woman's demands, we would have to excommunicate a man who has been cleared of the very act that she wants -- demands! -- that we excommunicate him for.

To be on the safe side, he's been relieved of all Church responsibilities. This is not enough. The cry is for figurative blood, and nothing else will suffice.

Is this madness because this woman was indeed raped? Maybe. Is it because she's mad? Maybe. Who knows?

Thankfully, stake members here seem to understand the concept of innocent until proven guilty better than half the posters in this thread. 

Edited September 5, 2018 by Hamba Tuhan

[Tacenda]

7 minutes ago, Rain said:

I don't have a problem standing up for yourself or others as long as it is not mob justice that often isn't justice at all.  I just don't know how much of her story to believe and I don't believe that hurting those who are innocent can right a wrong done.

True..

[mormondialoguethrowaway]

2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

You left out one key element:  Bishop confessed to sexually assaulting Denson. 

Yes, but the rape claim is new.  It's fabricated for attention and for grounds to attempt to sue.  The original abuse would not have worked as a lawsuit.

The only witness who is alive and can recall any of this, Ron Leavitt, said in 1987 that there was no claim of rape when McKenna met with him. 

[carbon dioxide]

2 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

You are only one of several posters on this forum who make this statement as if it's a statement of fact. It's not.

We have a woman in my ward who likewise claims that she was raped by a Church leader. As soon as it was reported to the then stake presidency, police were notified. A thorough investigation was completed. In the end, the authorities found no evidence that a rape had occurred.

The sister in my ward has refused to accept this outcome, possibly because it's false. The problem is, no one has sufficient evidence that it is. If we had that evidence, the man whom she claims raped her would be in gaol. He's not.

This absolutely drives her mad. She has stopped coming to church, and she has banned her husband and children from attending. She tells everyone who will listen to her that our current stake presidency are harbouring a rapist. We aren't. We are attempting to protect a man who has been accused and then cleared of rape charges.

But no. We're actually part of an evil institution that won't believe women or treat them with respect or listen to them. We're part of an 'old boys' priesthood network. We're literally everything that people in this and other threads have levelled at current Church leaders in America.

Except that we aren't. In order to satisfy this woman's demands, we would have to excommunicate a man who has been cleared of the very act that she wants -- demands! -- that we excommunicate him for.

To be on the safe side, he's been relieved of all Church responsibilities. This is not enough. The cry is for figurative blood, and nothing else will suffice.

Is this madness because this woman was indeed raped? Maybe. Is it because she's mad? Maybe. Who knows.

Thankfully, stake members here seem to understand the concept of innocent until proven guilty better than half the posters in this thread. 

It is very possible that a rape did occur but rape is often hard to prove.  I can see her not wanting to go to the same ward as the accused.  That makes perfect sense but the Church can not simply punish members because of allegations made by other members.  There is a view in the legal system to better let a guilty man go unpunished then punish an innocent man.  It has to be that way in the Church. God knows the truth and in the end, that is when real justice is dispensed if there is justice to be done.