Abuse Hotline Article

[changed]

10 minutes ago, Calm said:

.  The legal counsel---the ones who should be offering legal advice---are the ones who would know the laws, they work for the law firm, not the hotline.

Kirton McConkie's job is to protect the church, NOT the victim.  I do not think it would be in anyone's best interest to contact McConkie...

Local law enforcement - who are NOT affiliated with the church - for anyone out there who needs this info - is your best bet.  

Do NOT trust McConkie.  Collect all the evidence you can, it will be an uphill battle with no one to help you but yourself and other victims who have been through this hell too.  Stand up for yourself, collect evidence (video tapes work great!!) - do NOT remain silent.  Silence = more victims.  You contribute to the abuse of others by not stopping the abuse that has happened to yourself.  Your healing can start when they are in jail.  The church will NOT put them in jail - you have to do that on your own.  

 

That is right - it is common enough for the church to have forms for it (did the abuse happen by a high priest in leadership positions?  at a church activity?  in the church building?  etc. etc.) and yet - there are NO cases of the church actually putting an abuser in jail.  

The only abusers in jail were put there through privately funded trials - through secular routes.  The church has never paid the lawyer fees for a victim - has only paid to support abusers through court cases.

Edited May 5, 2019 by changed

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, changed said:

Kirton McConkie's job is to protect the church, NOT the victim.  I do not think it would be in anyone's best interest to contact McConkie...

So you claim.  The lawyers at Kirton McConkie from what I have heard from their friends and relatives and read from them themselves see it differently.

Edited May 5, 2019 by Calm

[changed]

35 minutes ago, Calm said:

So you claim.  The lawyers at Kirton McConkie from what I have heard from their friends and relatives and read from them themselves see it differently.

 

Then show me - show me a case where McConkie paid the fees of a victim, and helped send a high priest to jail rather than protecting them... 

Here are some names to google (your tithing dollars at work)
Jeremiah Scott
Timothy McCleve
Lon Kennard, Sr.
Michael Jensen
Todd Michael Edwards
church-owned pineapple farm in Maui
Michael Wayne Coleman
Erik Hughes
Darran Scott
Joseph Bishop
The list goes on and on and on…. Want more?  
there is that 316 page long document of records from 1959 to 2017 that was leaked… read Sam Young's collection...
 

McConkie pays out hush money... lots of "witness tampering" accounts with them...

but then if the church admits there are problems with their "divinely called"  bishops it has to either admit that 1) callings are not from God, the church is not led by God or 2) have a discussion that God calls people like Judas (in which case no one is under any obligation to follow or agree with church leadership).

I think their best bet is #2... apostles like Judas open the door for every individual to find their own personal testimony without feeling like they have to rely on arms of flesh middle-men when it comes to God... could be a really beautiful thing for everyone if leaders were to admit their faults... but it seems like the church is too prideful for that to happen which is really sad.  There are some great members in the church - great people in the church, but the leadership and structure are not something I can put my faith in.  

 

Fallible leaders - but you will almost never hear a leader apologize, or admit making a mistake. The original apostles in the NT - made mistakes all the time, they apologized, they recorded their misunderstandings, record how ashamed they were -  and it was a great way for everyone to learn and grow - that is why we love the original apostles and the NT - because they admitted being imperfect, admitted being human, so we empathize with them, and love their honesty.  Modern church leaders do not do this. Church leaders need to be allowed to admit making mistakes or the whole organization is a very dangerous place to be in.  

True apostles preach repentance by repenting themselves - by admitting mistakes.  

Edited May 5, 2019 by changed

[Calm]

Why do you think such cases would be publicized so the general public would hear about them?

2 hours ago, changed said:

 

Then show me - show me a case where McConkie paid the fees of a victim, and helped send a high priest to jail rather than protecting them...

At most we might hear that a bishop was somehow involved in the reporting, I suspect, like in this case, where apparently even the parents didn't know until the abuser confessed to his bishop and agreed to go with the bishop to turn himself in.

https://pamplinmedia.com/wbi/152-news/254634-124882-nmhs-grad-pleads-to-sex-crimes?wallit_nosession=1

And there is a good chance this bishop contacted the hotline for information, but also unlikely he would share this with media or media would be very interested in it in cases where everyone is satisfied with the process working.

Bishops might be able to give vague details, but it would be inappropriate for them to share the Church was paying for therapy for victims and I suspect many/most abuse victims would prefer not to publicize their abuse and need for therapy, etc. and thus would not share this info either except perhaps anonymously, which cannot be used as solid evidence.

Edited May 6, 2019 by Calm

[SeekingUnderstanding]

3 hours ago, changed said:

 

Most of the fellow victims I know have also left the church.  One person I know who has stayed - is married to a convict... so yes, if you are willing to stay married to the person who repeatedly abused your kids, that is the example I have of someone who stayed.  

It would be nice to think people can get over their problems, but the sex-crime recidivism rates tell a much different story...  

https://psmag.com/news/whats-the-real-rate-of-sex-crime-recidivism

”Ellman contrasts that statement with the numbers from an authoritative 2014 meta-analysis of 21 recidivism studies by a team of leading scholars. It found that 32 percent of sex offenders assessed as a high risk to re-offend did so within 15 years. For offenders judged low risk, the number was 5 percent. And for high-risk offenders who made it 16 years with no re-offenses, their re-offense rate thereafter was zero.”

entire article is worth a read. 

[Wade Englund]

8 hours ago, changed said:

The #1 goal should be to call the sinner to repentance 

That is your gospel, NOT Christ's. See the story of the woman taken in adultery.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Tacenda]

Why is the church paying out millions of dollars to the victims, by all means I don't mind, they deserve it. But why is the church involved and not the police in several past and current cases? Can anyone tell me why the church is paying out this money, is it as some say, hush money? To make sure to keep up appearances?

[Wade Englund]

28 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Why is the church paying out millions of dollars to the victims, by all means I don't mind, they deserve it. But why is the church involved and not the police in several past and current cases? Can anyone tell me why the church is paying out this money, is it as some say, hush money? To make sure to keep up appearances?

I can't say because I am well outside the loop of people who should or need to know, and so it is none of my business. The fact that you need to ask suggest the same is, or ought to be, true for you.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[changed]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Why do you think such cases would be publicized so the general public would hear about them?

 

 

Why do sex-registry lists exists?

Why would other parents whose children were also exposed want to know?

No choice in my case - it was all over the newspapers... but then it is good to talk about it.  Silence perpetuates problems.  It is only when everyone can openly talk about problems that they are fixed.

[changed]

1 hour ago, Wade Englund said:

That is your gospel, NOT Christ's. See the story of the woman taken in adultery.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

 

Christ did not preach repentance?  hahaha ...  good one.

[changed]

1 hour ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

https://psmag.com/news/whats-the-real-rate-of-sex-crime-recidivism

”Ellman contrasts that statement with the numbers from an authoritative 2014 meta-analysis of 21 recidivism studies by a team of leading scholars. It found that 32 percent of sex offenders assessed as a high risk to re-offend did so within 15 years. For offenders judged low risk, the number was 5 percent. And for high-risk offenders who made it 16 years with no re-offenses, their re-offense rate thereafter was zero.”

entire article is worth a read. 

Yes - there is an entire rainbow of colors out there - and I am sure the inspired leaders of the church have always correctly discerned who should be officially reported, and who should not when it comes to pedophiles.  

[Wade Englund]

Just now, changed said:

 

Christ did not preach repentance?  hahaha ...  good one.

Who said anything about him not preaching repentance? Certainly not me. Do you not understand the difference between "the #1 goal" and "preaching'? Fools mock...

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[changed]

12 minutes ago, Wade Englund said:

Who said anything about him not preaching repentance? Certainly not me. Do you not understand the difference between "the #1 goal" and "preaching'? Fools mock...

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Do you understand the difference between enabling someone and stopping harmful behavior?  My kids were abused because people in the LDS addiction recovery groups the abuser went to did nothing to stop him.  Years and years and years - child after child after child - and NO ONE STOPPED IT.  

https://www.openbible.info/topics/repentance

[Vellichor]

10 hours ago, changed said:

just an experiment - 

go to: https://addictionrecovery.churchofjesuschrist.org/find-a-meeting?lang=eng

then post how many support groups there are for abusers and addicts, vs. how many support groups there are for friends and family.

In my area, there are 9 groups to support abusers, and only 3 groups to support victims.  I never attended a group as the few groups in my area met while I was at work, and were too far away.  

 

I suggested to our stake president that if they were interested in helping victims (more than abusers - which is what is happening right now), they would ask anyone showing up to the addicts group to voluntarily release the info of those they had hurt in any way, so that the stake could reach out to victims.  Our stake refused to incorporate this into the meetings.  Their #1 goal is to make abusers feel supported and good about themselves, NOT to reach out and help victims at all.

 

The church supports abusers.  They do NOT support victims.

Church support groups are created according to demand and number of participants. They need a certain number of people in order to create a viable group. 

Your comment seems to suggest that most people with addictions are abusers. Bear in mind that the groups are for all kinds of addictions: food, shopping, gambling, porn, alcohol, etc. There is no evidence to suggest that most participants are abusers.

 

[Wade Englund]

2 minutes ago, changed said:

Do you understand the difference between enabling someone and stopping harmful behavior?  My kids were abused because people in the LDS addiction recovery groups the abuser went to did nothing to stop him.  Years and years and years - child after child after child - and NO ONE STOPPED IT.  

https://www.openbible.info/topics/repentance

Why are you asking me?  I am in no way involved in your case or any of the other alleged abuse cases mentioned here. It is, and they are, none of my business or anyone else on this board except, to some degree, you. We aren't in an authoritative position to rightly and properly judge.  Attempting to do so here amounts to gossip and mob rule. There are appropriate  venues for these kinds of things. Please take your grievances there.  Your actions, while perhaps somewhat understandable, are highly irresponsible and threaten to to do unwarranted harm to others--i.e. they have the potential of being abusive, themselves, if that hasn't happened already.

What may have started out as justifiable indignation on your part appears to have devolved into obsessive and toxic angst that is doing you and all parties harm. Please, for your sake and others, get counseling. This is a kindly suggestion, not a command.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Calm]

58 minutes ago, changed said:

 

Why do sex-registry lists exists?

Why would other parents whose children were also exposed want to know?

No choice in my case - it was all over the newspapers... but then it is good to talk about it.  Silence perpetuates problems.  It is only when everyone can openly talk about problems that they are fixed.

Again, I am not talking about the abuser, but the abused.  A criminal can be arrested, charged, and listed on sex registries without details about a victim's therapy and who is paying for it or even how it was reported coming out.  A victim shouldn't be forced to publicize their private life if that is not their choice.

[MiserereNobis]

10 hours ago, Wade Englund said:

That is your gospel, NOT Christ's. See the story of the woman taken in adultery.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

He didn't condemn her, but he certainly called her to repentance ("go your way and sin no more").

[ALarson]

10 hours ago, Wade Englund said:

That is your gospel, NOT Christ's. See the story of the woman taken in adultery.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I'm not sure why you'd use that story as an example.  Christ very much was calling her to repentance.  What do you think he meant when he said, "Go and sin no more"?

[ALarson]

9 hours ago, changed said:

Do you understand the difference between enabling someone and stopping harmful behavior?  My kids were abused because people in the LDS addiction recovery groups the abuser went to did nothing to stop him.  Years and years and years - child after child after child - and NO ONE STOPPED IT.  

https://www.openbible.info/topics/repentance

changed, do not let anyone here silence you.  Your voice is important.  What happened to you and your family was a travesty and should never happen again.  You should never have been treated like you were doing something wrong.  Leaders need more training and so far, I'm not seeing much happen.  Steps have been taken....but still not much more specific training.  Abuse needs to be reported to the authorities and the abuser needs to be held accountable.  If it embarrasses the family and church, so what (IMO).  

The feelings and concerns for the person who abused and hurt a child (or anyone else) cannot EVER come before the feelings and concerns for the abused.  NEVER.

And when a family comes to a church leader for help after abuse, that leaders first reaction has always got to be to protect the victim from potential further abuse and report it.  Until that happens, the church will continue to have what happened to you repeated over and over again.  The church will continue to be discussed as it is in this HBO report and will receive more horrible PR when cases continue to emerge from the past.

We can't change the past, but we need to change the future and make sure we learn from our past.  That's why you speaking out is important to do.

(And I definitely do not believe this is only a problem for our church....it's one that needs to be addressed and corrected by many.)

Edited May 6, 2019 by ALarson

[SeekingUnderstanding]

14 hours ago, changed said:

It would be nice to think people can get over their problems, but the sex-crime recidivism rates tell a much different story...  

 

11 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

https://psmag.com/news/whats-the-real-rate-of-sex-crime-recidivism

”Ellman contrasts that statement with the numbers from an authoritative 2014 meta-analysis of 21 recidivism studies by a team of leading scholars. It found that 32 percent of sex offenders assessed as a high risk to re-offend did so within 15 years. For offenders judged low risk, the number was 5 percent. And for high-risk offenders who made it 16 years with no re-offenses, their re-offense rate thereafter was zero.”

entire article is worth a read. 

 

9 hours ago, changed said:

Yes - there is an entire rainbow of colors out there - and I am sure the inspired leaders of the church have always correctly discerned who should be officially reported, and who should not when it comes to pedophiles.  

Peace, changed. I don’t think church leaders have the gift of discernment, and I believe that teaching that they do is damaging. It makes leaders and members trust in cases where they should not. All abuse crimes should be promptly reported. People who abuse should not be able to hide behind addiction labels, heck I don’t even believe that porn or sex addiction is a real thing (check the DSM) (note to others reading this reply, I am not interested in debating this in this thread, I understand many people believe otherwise). I also am a firm believer in keeping children safe and believe that we need to keep close tabs on those that have abused (sexually or otherwise) minors so that more victims are not created. 

My one and only point is that your comment on recidivism rates is likely based on often repeated bad data. 

[Robert F. Smith]

On 5/4/2019 at 6:28 PM, Calm said:

Found this...there is a wiki for practically everything it seems:

http://defensewiki.ibj.org/index.php/Priest-Penitent_Privilege#Priest-Penitent_Privilege_in_Federal_Court

Very interesting.  Thanks, Calm.  With six Roman Catholic justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, I wonder what their reaction would be to a test case?

[MiserereNobis]

9 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Very interesting.  Thanks, Calm.  With six Roman Catholic justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, I wonder what their reaction would be to a test case?

That would be interesting from a legal point-of-view. What would be even more interesting is how many priests would choose jail over excommunication. If the US were to rule that there was no priest-penitent privilege, that still wouldn't change the Catholic position that the priest cannot violate the confessional seal. Again, the Church is very clear -- the priest is to suffer death before divulging what is said in the confessional.

[Robert F. Smith]

12 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Why is the church paying out millions of dollars to the victims, by all means I don't mind, they deserve it. But why is the church involved and not the police in several past and current cases? Can anyone tell me why the church is paying out this money, is it as some say, hush money? To make sure to keep up appearances?

These are civil suits, and the LDS Church only pays out money when it appears that the case against them is strong -- in which the LDS leaders did not perform due diligence, or in which they actually did harm.  It is standard procedure to avoid expensive trials, in which the result cannot always be predicted anyhow, so that settlements are often reached, and judges actually prefer settlements out of court.

The police have nothing to do with civil suits.  The police and prosecutors file criminal charges, which can result in jail and prison time and registration as a sex offender.  Civil suits are normally filed only after the criminal process is over.

[Robert F. Smith]

4 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

That would be interesting from a legal point-of-view. What would be even more interesting is how many priests would choose jail over excommunication. If the US were to rule that there was no priest-penitent privilege, that still wouldn't change the Catholic position that the priest cannot violate the confessional seal. Again, the Church is very clear -- the priest is to suffer death before divulging what is said in the confessional.

What is at stake if often not the secrecy of the confessional, but the claimed secrecy of all sorts of files (as claimed unsuccessfully by the Los Angeles Archdiocese).  Then too, what we have been discussing here has often been the report by a victim of abuse to local clergy.  At that point, confidentiality does not apply to the abuser, who can immediately be reported to the police, if not by the priest, then at least by the victim.

In cases where a cleric has abused, and where his superiors knowing this have deliberately moved him to new venues (where they knew that the abuse continued), this constitutes a continuing criminal conspiracy which confidentiality does not protect.  In such cases, we need long prison sentences for both abuser and for those who shielded him and allowed him to continue abusing.  I liked the zero tolerance policy originally adopted by the U.S. Conference of Bishops.

[MiserereNobis]

2 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

What is at stake if often not the secrecy of the confessional, but the claimed secrecy of all sorts of files (as claimed unsuccessfully by the Los Angeles Archdiocese).  Then too, what we have been discussing here has often been the report by a victim of abuse to local clergy.  At that point, confidentiality does not apply to the abuser, who can immediately be reported to the police, if not by the priest, then at least by the victim.

In cases where a cleric has abused, and where his superiors knowing this have deliberately moved him to new venues (where they knew that the abuse continued), this constitutes a continuing criminal conspiracy which confidentiality does not protect.  In such cases, we need long prison sentences for both abuser and for those who shielded him and allowed him to continue abusing.  I liked the zero tolerance policy originally adopted by the U.S. Conference of Bishops.

Agreed.