Calm Posted January 27 Author Share Posted January 27 (edited) 4 hours ago, smac97 said: am not sure why a bishop would write such a thing in the first place. Tim Ballard wanted to attend BYU? (joking of course) Quote Huh? "Ballard's former bishop asker her to testify that she 'pre-loaded' sexual messages onto Ballard's phone"? This is hearsay, and it's pretty weird. Why would a bishop make any such request in relation to a membership council? My guess is that is what Ballard told the bishop and the bishop was not asking her to testify, but asking if she confirmed or denied it. How do membership councils work? Do they have witnesses testify as opposed to having just been questioned earlier and then their comments are reported? Edited January 27 by Calm Link to comment
Tacenda Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 4 hours ago, The Nehor said: 99% sure he is black and white. Gotta love his denunciations of porn and then sending her porn and the endless orgasm emojis. Also “joking” to anyone reading this that this is just the two of them getting into character. He also takes shots at Fast & Testimony meetings and they coordinate together to hide what they are doing from someone who is presumably her husband. All while talking about praying and serving God while talking about her Brazilian wax and using cheesy sex euphemisms. I wasn't able to trudge through those, glad you saved me the trouble!! Link to comment
smac97 Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 (edited) 20 hours ago, Calm said: Quote Quote Borys said she was asked to testify at an LDS Church disciplinary hearing on September 25, 2023. She stated Ballard’s former bishop asked her to testify that she “pre-loaded” sexual messages onto Ballard’s phone for him to send to OUR employees as part of an undercover tactic or training designed to save children from human trafficking. She declined to testify. Huh? "Ballard's former bishop asker her to testify that she 'pre-loaded' sexual messages onto Ballard's phone"? This is hearsay, and it's pretty weird. Why would a bishop make any such request in relation to a membership council? My guess is that is what Ballard told the bishop and the bishop was not asking her to testify, but asking if she confirmed or denied it. Okay. Something is getting lost in the translation, then. We're dealing with multiple hearsay, so that's not surprising. "Borys said she was asked to testify at an LDS Church disciplinary hearing." "She stated Ballard’s former bishop asked her to testify..." "She declined to testify." 20 hours ago, Calm said: How do membership councils work? Do they have witnesses testify as opposed to having just been questioned earlier and then their comments are reported? What councils don't involve is the bishop acting in some sort of quasi-attorney or quasi-private investigator function, gathering documentation or evidence for the person whose membership is under review (such as, for example, asking so-and-so to testify at the council). The council for Tim Ballard would almost certainly be at the stake level, so the bishop would have little or no role to play. When the misconduct of the individual is not in question (and this is so for the vast majority of councils), there is no need for the members of the council to evaluate evidence or hear testimony from witnesses. However, in those rare circumstances where evidence and witnesses are needed, the procedural rules governing such things are included in Section 32 of the Handbook. Section 32.10.3 includes the parts about which you are asking. An excerpt (emphasis added) : Quote The bishop or stake president conducts the council in a spirit of love, as outlined below. He invites someone to offer an opening prayer. He states the reported misconduct. He gives the person (if present) an opportunity to confirm, deny, or clarify this statement. If the member confirms the misconduct, the bishop or stake president proceeds to number 5 below. If the member denies it, the bishop or stake president presents information about it. This may include presenting reliable documents and reading aloud any written statements from victims (see 32.10.2). If he reads such a statement, he protects the identity of the victim. If the member denies the misconduct, he or she may present information to the council. This could be written. Or the member may ask persons who could provide relevant information to speak to the council, one at a time. Such persons should be Church members unless the bishop or stake president has determined in advance that a nonmember may attend. They wait in a separate room until they are asked to speak. Each person leaves the council room when he or she is finished. They must be willing to comply with the respectful nature of the council, including its procedures and confidentiality. Members may not have legal counsel present. Nor may they have supporters beyond those referred to in the second paragraph in this section. The bishop or stake president may ask questions of the member in a polite and respectful way. He may also ask questions of other persons the member has asked to provide information. Counselors in the bishopric or stake presidency may also ask questions. Any questions should be brief and limited to the essential facts. After all relevant information has been presented, the bishop or stake president excuses the member from the room. The clerk is also excused, unless the high council has participated in a stake membership council. If the member’s bishop is present for a stake membership council, he is excused. If the Relief Society president or the elders quorum president is attending to provide support, she or he is also excused. The bishop or stake president asks for comments or insights from his counselors. If the high council has participated in a stake membership council, he asks for their comments and insights. With his counselors, the bishop or stake president prayerfully seeks the Lord’s will about the matter. Only the stake president and his counselors or the bishop and his counselors should be in the room during this time. If a stake membership council includes the high council, the stake presidency usually goes to the stake president’s office. The bishop or stake president tells his counselors of his decision and asks them to sustain it. If a stake membership council includes the high council, the stake presidency returns to the room and asks the high council to sustain it. If a counselor or high councilor has a different opinion, the bishop or stake president listens and seeks to resolve the differences. Responsibility for the decision rests with the presiding officer. He invites the person back into the room. If the clerk was excused, he is also invited into the room. If the member’s bishop is present for a stake membership council, he is also invited into the room. If the Relief Society president or elders quorum president is attending to provide support, she or he is also welcomed back. The bishop or stake president shares the council’s decision in a spirit of love. If the decision is to formally restrict the person’s Church membership privileges or withdraw membership, he explains the conditions (see 32.11.3 and 32.11.4). He also explains how to overcome the restrictions and gives other instruction and counsel. A bishop or stake president may adjourn a council for a time to seek more guidance or information before making a decision. In that case, he explains this. He explains the person’s right to appeal (see 32.13). He invites someone to offer a closing prayer. Whether the person is present or not, the bishop or stake president notifies him or her of the decision as explained in 32.12.1. What is described in the news item seems pretty far removed from how a bishop normally acts in this context. Thanks, -Smac Edited January 28 by smac97 1 Link to comment
Calm Posted January 28 Author Share Posted January 28 26 minutes ago, smac97 said: What is described in the news item seems pretty far removed from how a bishop normally acts in this context. Then it is probably a misunderstanding on her part. Link to comment
teddyaware Posted February 4 Share Posted February 4 (edited) Tim Ballard isn’t going down without a fight. The following is an excerpt from a recent 2KUTV news article (linked below) that summarizes Ballard’s countersuit against Celeste Borys… “In the filing, Ballard's attorney characterized the Boryses' complaint as part of an "orchestrated media campaign" aimed at damaging Ballard’s reputation and pressuring him to pay money.” ”‘This response is just the beginning of our work to expose the false claims and financial motivation of Celeste and Michael Borys and reclaim the reputation Tim Ballard earned as a leader in the fight to protect women and children from trafficking," the statement read. https://kutv.com/news/local/our-founder-tim-ballard-attorney-address-allegations-amidst-series-of-lawsuits-operation-underground-railroad-celeste-michael-borys-financial-misconduct-exploitation-complaint Edited February 4 by teddyaware Link to comment
The Nehor Posted February 4 Share Posted February 4 4 hours ago, teddyaware said: Tim Ballard isn’t going down without a fight. The following is an excerpt from a recent 2KUTV news article (linked below) that summarizes Ballard’s countersuit against Celeste Borys… “In the filing, Ballard's attorney characterized the Boryses' complaint as part of an "orchestrated media campaign" aimed at damaging Ballard’s reputation and pressuring him to pay money.” ”‘This response is just the beginning of our work to expose the false claims and financial motivation of Celeste and Michael Borys and reclaim the reputation Tim Ballard earned as a leader in the fight to protect women and children from trafficking," the statement read. https://kutv.com/news/local/our-founder-tim-ballard-attorney-address-allegations-amidst-series-of-lawsuits-operation-underground-railroad-celeste-michael-borys-financial-misconduct-exploitation-complaint That is not a countersuit. That is a response to the allegations. As far as I am aware Ballard’s only countersuit is claiming Celeste Borys violated an NDA and a non-disparagement clause. That is not exactly coming out swinging. ”You sexually assaulted me.” ”You said mean things when you promised you wouldn’t.” 4 Link to comment
bluebell Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 18 minutes ago, Smiley McGee said: That’s not surprising really. I’m guessing, with all the new information that’s come out about Ballard’s actions, that he’s not feeling nearly as comfortable (and lauded) as he used to in the church. 1 Link to comment
ttribe Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 2 hours ago, bluebell said: That’s not surprising really. I’m guessing, with all the new information that’s come out about Ballard’s actions, that he’s not feeling nearly as comfortable (and lauded) as he used to in the church. He's a conman and he needed a new religious group to manipulate. 4 Link to comment
The Nehor Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 1 hour ago, ttribe said: He's a conman and he needed a new religious group to manipulate. Hopefully they will treat him the same way they treated Roger Stone. On 2/3/2024 at 7:27 PM, teddyaware said: Tim Ballard isn’t going down without a fight. The following is an excerpt from a recent 2KUTV news article (linked below) that summarizes Ballard’s countersuit against Celeste Borys… “In the filing, Ballard's attorney characterized the Boryses' complaint as part of an "orchestrated media campaign" aimed at damaging Ballard’s reputation and pressuring him to pay money.” ”‘This response is just the beginning of our work to expose the false claims and financial motivation of Celeste and Michael Borys and reclaim the reputation Tim Ballard earned as a leader in the fight to protect women and children from trafficking," the statement read. https://kutv.com/news/local/our-founder-tim-ballard-attorney-address-allegations-amidst-series-of-lawsuits-operation-underground-railroad-celeste-michael-borys-financial-misconduct-exploitation-complaint 2 Link to comment
Popular Post MiserereNobis Posted March 29 Popular Post Share Posted March 29 8 hours ago, Smiley McGee said: Can’t you just keep him? Please? 12 Link to comment
The Nehor Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 (edited) 7 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said: Can’t you just keep him? Please? I doubt he will last long with his narcissistic streak. I doubt the Catholics will lick his boots the way some in our church did. I can’t see Tim Ballard making pope any more than I could see him making apostle. His ambitions will probably mean starting his own little cult or taking over some minor faith if he stays with the religion schtick. Edited March 29 by The Nehor 4 Link to comment
Popular Post bluebell Posted March 29 Popular Post Share Posted March 29 45 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said: Can’t you just keep him? Please? It's your turn. 5 Link to comment
Popular Post MiserereNobis Posted March 29 Popular Post Share Posted March 29 I poked around the Catholics for Catholics website. American Christian Nationalism is usually very protestant, which makes since sense the US was primarily founded by protestants and had an anti-Catholic bias (JFK for president, for example). It's weird to see its Catholic form, since Catholic roots way pre-date the US (think how America was being colonized at the same time protestantism was getting going). I'm used to seeing Eurocentric Catholicism, not Americentric MAGA Catholicism. I know it's always been there, it's just feels so weird. It's also a weird name, since it is definitely Catholics for Trump, who isn't Catholic and doesn't have Catholic sensibilities at all (and I don't just mean morality, but worldview). I did a very cursory google search for an equivalent LDS organization's website, but didn't find one. Anyways, I know this is veering into political territory, so let's just leave it at that. May God bless you on this Good Friday and during this Easter Triduum. (an interesting liturgical note for non-Catholics. Today, Good Friday, is the only day when Mass is not celebrated). +PAX+ Jesse 5 Link to comment
Smiley McGee Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 6 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: I did a very cursory google search for an equivalent LDS organization's website, but didn't find one. Just go to the Facebook group of any ward in the intermountain west. Link to comment
Calm Posted March 30 Author Share Posted March 30 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Smiley McGee said: Just go to the Facebook group of any ward in the intermountain west. Funny, funny No politics allowed on our website…or if there is, no one wants to post about such. Mostly about unofficial gettogethers or some project someone is doing or if anyone needs help. I found the girls who come clean for me this way as well as handed off some furniture no longer needed to homeschoolers in the ward. Edited March 30 by Calm Link to comment
Smiley McGee Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 (edited) 6 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: Anyways, I know this is veering into political territory, so let's just leave it at that. Okay; then I won’t try to bait you by mentioning that they feature an endorsement from Steve Bannon on their website…😊. MODs: that was a light hearted joke and I’m done. No need for another thread ban. Edited March 30 by Smiley McGee Link to comment
bluebell Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 10 hours ago, Smiley McGee said: Just go to the Facebook group of any ward in the intermountain west. Our facebook gets about 2 posts a month and they are all announcements for the ward. 2 Link to comment
Stargazer Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 (edited) On 3/29/2024 at 9:47 PM, The Nehor said: I can’t see Tim Ballard making pope any more than I could see him making apostle. And it is easier to become an apostle than a pope. Well, maybe not, but... Edited April 3 by Stargazer 2 Link to comment
LoudmouthMormon Posted April 10 Share Posted April 10 (edited) On 3/29/2024 at 4:26 PM, bluebell said: On 3/29/2024 at 3:40 PM, MiserereNobis said: Can’t you just keep him? Please? It's your turn. lol 44 pages later, I'll always be grateful that Tim Ballard and his movie got people yelling at each other about child sex trafficking, which gave me opportunities to raise awareness about what it really looks like. (It looks like this, and you should read it if you haven't already. https://www.5280.com/girls-next-door/ ) That said, we Mormons are a generous and sharing people. We don't want to hog all the Tim Ballard church membership. Edited April 10 by LoudmouthMormon 3 Link to comment
Okrahomer Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 (edited) There was “news” tonight regarding the lawsuit against Tim Ballard. It alleges that leaders of the Church encouraged Ballard to write a book declaring that the Word of Wisdom is not true. ““Ballard was, fortuitously given his command to write a book for the Mormon Church declaring that the Word of Wisdom was not true doctrine, thus allowing him to consume excessive amounts of alcohol (tequila) of his own volition,” the lawsuit says.” This is so far from believable it makes me question everything else about the lawsuit. Edited April 30 by Okrahomer To add link 2 Link to comment
Calm Posted April 30 Author Share Posted April 30 (edited) Where did you see this? (Link or description please) Is this claiming Ballard made the claim or the Church actually did this? Edited April 30 by Calm Link to comment
Okrahomer Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Calm said: Where did you see this? (Link or description please) Is this claiming Ballard made the claim or the Church actually did this? Apologies. Typing from my phone and thought I had inserted the link. it was reported just now on ABC4 News. This also sounds crazy: ”Additionally, the amendments to the lawsuit claim that President Ballard used the same psychic as Tim Ballard — Janet Russon, who is also listed as a defendant — to advise him on how to proceed “in all aspects” of his life.” “Some witnesses have claimed that Janet Russon was President Ballard’s personal psychic, and that President Ballard vouched for her psychic powers,” the lawsuit says.” Edited April 30 by Okrahomer 1 Link to comment
Okrahomer Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 10 minutes ago, Calm said: Is this claiming Ballard made the claim or the Church actually did this? If I’m understanding correctly, it has been added to the lawsuit — so the plaintifs are making these claims. 1 Link to comment
Calm Posted April 30 Author Share Posted April 30 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Okrahomer said: Apologies. Typing from my phone and thought I had inserted the link. You had, I just missed it (the hyperlink “news”). The WoW claim is so far out there the credibility of the claims against Tim Ballard himself, including the sexual assaults, is taking a big hit for me. Not saying I am convinced yet, but closest I have been since the news came out. The Church leaders would be stupid to have a nonleader attack the truthfulness of the WoW as it would affect their credibility and the Church’s own credibility. It would make more sense to simply announce it was time to move back to leaving it to members to determine how they interpreted and lived the WoW. @smac97 or other lawyers….. ”upon information and belief” means no actual firsthand evidence iirc? Would someone use this legal phrase if the secondhand knowledge was pretty strong or is this more like signaling ‘I want to make this claim/accusation/excuse, but I can’t prove it at all’? Edited April 30 by Calm 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now