Hmmm…The Tithing List Plot Thickens

[Rain]

On 11/15/2023 at 11:14 AM, Craig Speechly said:

Calm with all due respect to you. You’ve questioned my claims which is your right, you’ve asked for CFR’s, which is your right and in doing so have questioned my integrity.

 

CFRs are not about questioning your integrity, though truthfully some will use it that way.  They are about verifying the claim and giving more understanding to it.

It's not a problem with your integrity if the evidence proves your claim right. It's not a problem if it proves your claim wrong, but you misunderstood the evidence or forgot about what it said.  It's only a problem with your integrity if you lied about it. 

Rather than take it personal it helps to just follow the board standard and either provide the actual evidence for the CFR or retract the claim. 

On 11/15/2023 at 11:14 AM, Craig Speechly said:

I’ve now found where I read those accusations and while they may not satisfy you,  it is testimony that supports my initial assertions. Out of respect, I’ve offered to accept your consternation and have my integrity impugned and not provide the testimony that supports my assertions out of respect. By providing you with the evidence that supports my assertions , it serves no purpose other than to benefit me at Elder Ballards expense. I would prefer not to do that again out of respect. 
 

I’ve also on more than one occasion made mention that I have firsthand experience of Elder Ballard soliciting funds for both private aka family & organizational purposes from wealthy members. But I am under strict NDA regarding those matters so can not share those details. However this is why these so called vulgar accusations do not come as a surprise to me. 
 

Im willing to walk away from this subject out of respect. 

 

Edited November 16, 2023 by Rain

[InCognitus]

On 11/15/2023 at 11:14 AM, Craig Speechly said:

Calm with all due respect to you. You’ve questioned my claims which is your right, you’ve asked for CFR’s, which is your right and in doing so have questioned my integrity.

I can see why it is easy to take a request for CFR personally, but we all say or repeat things we may hear that may or may not be supportable by facts.  The internet today is full of information and misinformation, and I see the CFR rule as a healthy way for all of us to sift the truth from error.  Why not just use a request for CFR as an opportunity to set things straight, whatever the outcome may be?   

[bluebell]

6 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

I can see why it is easy to take a request for CFR personally, but we all say or repeat things we may hear that may or may not be supportable by facts.  The internet today is full of information and misinformation, and I see the CFR rule as a healthy way for all of us to sift the truth from error.  Why not just use a request for CFR as an opportunity to set things straight, whatever the outcome may be?   

And sometimes we say things in an absolute way when we might not have meant it that way.  It can be common to say things like "always" or "never" when we don't really mean either, or to forget to use a "probably" or "in my opinion" when posting a reply.  Things can come out as statements of fact when we never meant to imply anything more than our opinion.

Nothing wrong with a CFR to give us the chance to restate something in the way that we actually meant it.

[Calm]

6 hours ago, InCognitus said:

I can see why it is easy to take a request for CFR personally

My last expressed desire for fulfilled CFRs was more personal than usual, so that one would be very easy to take personally, but in my defense it came after a number of days of trying to get CS to abide by board rules by providing quotes (if needed as screenshots) and links for his claims.  Screenshots and quotes without reference to where they came from, articles and videos without relevant quotes identified were not enough to allow me to know for sure he did not have new info, but was referring to information previously referred to on the board.

I can very much understand frustration for being asked for CFRs for private info and I don’t ask for CFRs if info is identified in this way, though I may ask for additional details about it to give it more context, but when I am easily able to find the links when provided with enough info, it is obviously not private info nor difficult to do.  And I could in this case.

In my view, CS needs to respect the board and its readers and especially those whose work product he is using and even those he is accusing by taking a bit more time to frame his criticisms with more detail provided, such as by using actual names where applicable like “Russell Brunson” instead of vague labels like “wealthy member” so we know who he is referring to and whether or not there is more than one case known and using links when quoting.  Plagiarism is unfortunately not uncommon even on this board though it is less common now most are aware they will get banned if they try it; I assume Craig does not want to look like he is stealing others’ work product to make himself good, at best it’s sloppy and speaks to the overall quality of research, leave out crediting others often enough and comments become untrustworthy, imo, simply because it speaks to not taking enough time to pay attention to what they are reading and writing and that is when mistakes are made, like assuming an article says something it doesn’t.

For example, below is an obvious cut and paste that is neither quoted nor a link provided to provide credit as well as further context.  It is from the Trib, btw and it took me less than a minute to find the link and copy the context and a little more to bold the relevant quote and post it with the link, so it’s not like I or the board rules are demanding an onerous task in the vast majority of cases.

https://www.sltrib.com/news/2023/09/25/ex-employees-believed-tim-ballard

Quote

The records also shed some light on how OUR’s founder, Tim Ballard, allegedly exploited the name of M. Russell Ballard, acting president of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, to add gravitas to his endeavors.

In one investigative interview, a former OUR operative said he was told by the head of a for-profit venture Tim Ballard was launching to control proceeds from movie deals, book sales and speaking fees that the senior apostle was a partner in the company, Slave Stealers.

The documents represent a small portion of a series of interviews gathered in a criminal investigation of OUR conducted jointly by the Davis County attorney’s office and the FBI. In all, they collected more than two terabytes of information.

David Lopez, a former Navy SEAL involved in training operatives and leading OUR operations, told investigators he was offered a $25,000 monthly salary to join Ballard’s Slave Stealers. Lopez said the head of the organization told him that Ballard was making $900,000 annually from the organization.

Lopez also provided investigators with a text message from Brian Norton, the head of Slave Stealers, that referred to President Ballard as a “key equity holder” and a “silent partner” in Slave Stealers.

Church spokesperson Doug Andersen told The Tribune on Monday that the apostle is not a key equity holder or silent partner and has “no relationship” with Slave Stealers.

(My bold)

This is my preferred version because it shows the context right there and it is easy to copy/paste or just partially quote it.  Where the above is not possible, a screenshot of the specific quote is also useful, like this:

Again, you would include the link to the page this is from (see above link) and as much info as needed to find the screenshot easily.  This may not provide the context, but you know exactly what the person is referring to and you hopefully can find context if needed.  The context that Brian 

Videos should be timestamped to where the specific quote starts, not a few minutes before it.

Having imprecise references means the reader has to guess what you are drawing conclusions from and may make it harder for the person making the conclusion to realize why others have a legitimate claim their reference doesn’t say what they think it says as happened in this case with Craig’s references multiple times.  If the person takes the time to pull out the specific quote, in rereading it after being informed others don’t interpret it the same way, they may see their error and perhaps the cause of it.

It does not satisfy a CFR to point to the entire article or video for obvious reasons.

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/75632-hmmm…the-tithing-list-plot-thickens/?do=findComment&comment=1210168150

If you are wondering if a CFR is complete enough, ask yourself “would someone understand with no more than a minute or two effort what I was referring to here if this was all they saw of this conversation?”  If someone would have to take time to read the previous parts of your post or even previous posts to come up with an idea of what you are referring to, it is too little.

If you want to be really sure you have nailed it, ask if the reference would be accepted on a college paper or if you would be dinged for incompleteness, vagueness, plagiarism, etc.

Everyone gets careless now and then, I am not suggesting everyone or anyone needs to nail it every time.  Often it’s not needed because someone has already provided the info, just be sure in that case you make the connection between the posts somehow.  In fact, the only time I get annoyed someone doesn’t provide it is when they have been asked to.  I don’t expect people to automatically include this info as this is casual conversation for the most part.  I do expect people to provide references when asked and that includes myself as much as the next person.  No doubt I get sloppy at times, no doubt I misread things and make false claims.  Please call me out on these when I do.

Edited November 17, 2023 by Calm

[Craig Speechly]

I offered to drop this and walk away but the people demand blood…so be it…
 

https://americancrimejournal.com/criminal-investigation-into-o-u-r-expands/

The pertinent information begins at the 16:47 mark through to 21:36

 

This is a report from Lynn Packer who’s reporting, though rock solid, may offend some. He is the same reporter who exposed and ultimately brought down Paul H Dunn. 

If you have issues take them up with him not me  

This particular report was released in 2021. 
 

ok let the shooting of the messenger begin…

[Calm]

21 hours ago, Craig Speechly said:

 

https://americancrimejournal.com/criminal-investigation-into-o-u-r-expands/
The pertinent information begins at the 16:47 mark through to 21:36

This is a report from Lynn Packer who’s reporting, though rock solid, may offend some. He is the same reporter who exposed and ultimately brought down Paul H Dunn. 

This particular report was released in 2021. 
 

Thank you for providing the reference and time stamp.  It was very easy to find what you were referring to.

Lynn Packer is pretty good at finding stuff others don’t, or so it seems to me. He still speculates a lot and too often then treats his speculation as fact as iirc he does in this video (I watched it back when this story was first broken and claims were made about Brad Brower that went too far, imo).

Smac analyzed one of his more recent videos on accuracy of claims.  I add a few issues with his claims, including some sources saying the opposite of what he claims in the post below.

 

All in all, go to Lynn Packer when you want to find what is out there, but double-check all his sources to see if his summarizing is correct because often it is not.

Added:  Smac referenced this video first here, I believe, in reference to the claim Russon is a psychic.  I don’t believe he analyzed it in detail for anything else though, but tha5 is most likely when I first watched it.

 

Edited November 18, 2023 by Calm

[Calm]

For those not interested in watching the video, perhaps Craig will verify if this is the relevant part or not (a transcription I ripped off of Reddit awhile back for myself, I don’t like using Reddit usually, but this was too useful…sorry about the formatting, I can’t get rid of it to repost as just a link):

Quote

“Tim Ballard held a private meeting, which unsurprisingly was leaked, in which he listed Russell Ballard as a silent partner in Tim Ballard's company Slave Stealers, LLC.

In a later interview with Marc Jensen, the project leader of the church's Kirtland Ohio Project, Jensen claimed that at the request of President Ballard he attended several meetings with him and brought other prominent church donors to these meetings as well. To quote a few of the slides:

Jenson claims that during the meetings Elder Ballard would suggest that donors also consider investing with his son Craig Ballard and son-in-law Brad Brower.

Subsequent meetings were set up at their offices in Farmington next to a facility where powders and drinks are formulated for various multilevel marketing ventures.

One of several Kirtland donors, who Jenson says invested in the Ballard family enterprise, was Mormon billionaire Gene Yamagata, handled by Yamagata's CFO David Senior.

Jenson claims Ballard "fired" him from from (sic) his calling after Jenson and at least one of the Kirtland donors expressed concern about the propriety of linking church donations to investments with Ballard's family.

Jenson says, after his termination he was re-engaged, but under the direction of two other apostles, Henry Eyring and Jeffrey Holland.

Jenson says the fundraising continued.

It shows that Russell Ballard's alleged secret investment in OUR, through a business entity controlled by his son or son-on-law (sic), is plausible.

 

The video goes further into corroborating evidence for the possibility that Russell Ballard has used his office (both his authority and physical church office space) to promote OUR in addition to Tim Ballard's admission that he is providing financial support.”

 

 

Edited November 18, 2023 by Calm

[Calm]

And this is what I posted elsewhere in a private and more casual forum than this about the video:

Quote

On Lynn Packer….I noticed he mentioned that his source on Elder Ballard allegedly influence peddling for his son-in-law out of Church headquarters, Marc Jenson, was charged with fraud, but then he was found innocent.  However, Packer appears to have left out Jenson also was sentenced to 10 years when he couldn’t pay back investors according to a plea deal he made for another charge***.  Kind of a massive slant there.

 

I am trying to find out any current info on Marc Jenson, but he disappears after 2017…maybe because he was sitting in prison till 2021 or later.  Jenson was apparently really into using his church contacts for personal gain, so not surprising if he assumed others did as well on flimsy evidence.  And if I understand the articles that I skimmed correctly, he made a lot of major allegations of corruption against the state AGs, that were eventually dismissed….so my guess is he lies about people when it’s good for him.

 

—-

 

It does look like Elder Ballard’s son in law might have been involved with Tim Ballard in more than just promoting his supplements  as Ballard used the address for Brower’s company he managed as a Slave Stealers, LLC, though it was Tim Ballard’s name on it and it could have been anyone who worked at the company who accommodated Ballard with a company address for four months.  But it can also be explained by the two becoming friends after being informally introduced by Elder Ballard.  The second document in the link below [Smac’s list of documents] is the relevant one, the address is Indulgent Foods, but other than that and the advertising on Ballard’s podcast or whatever it was, no connection elsewhere to Brower, I believe….at least haven’t seen it yet.

 

I am definitely open to changing my viewpoint on Marc Jenson as a reliable source if you have evidence supporting that position.

Jenson states he was fired by Elder Ballard, some motivation there to try and paint him in a bad light.

As I understand it, the accusations he made against Shurtleff and Swallow were dismissed even though he apparently had some evidence for some of his claims.

Jenson has also gone to federal prison for bank fraud in 1992. (Bottom link)

@Craig Speechly, do you have anything from Gene Yamagata confirming the above claim?  I have not been able to find anything.

***https://www.deseret.com/2016/3/21/20585162/convicted-businessman-who-accused-shurtleff-swallow-hasn-t-paid-restitution-parole-board-finds

Also:

https://www.deseret.com/2013/6/9/20453472/unraveling-shurtleff-and-swallow-s-complicated-relationship-with-a-felon

Edited November 18, 2023 by Calm

[Craig Speechly]

15 hours ago, Calm said:

And this is what I posted elsewhere in a private and more casual forum than this about the video:

I am definitely open to changing my viewpoint on Marc Jenson as a reliable source if you have evidence supporting that position.

Jenson states he was fired by Elder Ballard, some motivation there to try and paint him in a bad light.

As I understand it, the accusations he made against Shurtleff and Swallow were dismissed even though he apparently had some evidence for some of his claims.

Jenson has also gone to federal prison for bank fraud in 1992. (Bottom link)

@Craig Speechly, do you have anything from Gene Yamagata confirming the above claim?  I have not been able to find anything.

***https://www.deseret.com/2016/3/21/20585162/convicted-businessman-who-accused-shurtleff-swallow-hasn-t-paid-restitution-parole-board-finds

Also:

https://www.deseret.com/2013/6/9/20453472/unraveling-shurtleff-and-swallow-s-complicated-relationship-with-a-felon

Journalists use various methods to verify information, including cross-referencing multiple sources, fact-checking with reliable sources, interviewing witnesses, and confirming details with experts. Additionally, they strive to ensure the credibility and reliability of their sources before publishing a story.  When Packer releases a story he is putting his own integrity on the line. I don’t doubt that Packer reported the facts he received through his investigation accurately. In fact, I’m surprised that he was so far ahead of everyone else in reporting this and other OUR related stories. 
 

I have nothing on Yamagata. 

[Calm]

7 hours ago, Craig Speechly said:

 When Packer releases a story he is putting his own integrity on the line. I don’t doubt that Packer reported the facts he received through his investigation accurately.

Then why didn’t he share that he was able to confirm Jenson’s claims with another source?  Why didn’t Packer report that Marc Jenson served time for bank fraud and that he made a plea deal based on paying back what he owed his investors and ended up in jail when he didn’t follow through?  Instead Packer only mentions that while Jenson was charged with fraud, he was found innocent…which is true, but only part of the story.  The rest of the story throws doubt on the credibility of Packer’s source….if he wasn’t aware of such details (which I find highly unlikely), that raises questions about his competency as a journalist; if he was aware of the details and chose not to mention them, that raises questions on how much his bias influences his presentation of his findings.

Plus we know he can make mistakes interpreting what the sources say***, so unless Jenson shared the same info with others (and I haven’t seen this reported) we can’t be sure Packer’s summary of what Jenson shared is accurate.  Did you look at smac’s analyses of another of Packer’s videos?  If you did, perhaps you would like to explain how you are so certain Packer presents the facts accurately.  For example, one of his own sources corrects him on his accuracy of reporting the facts he received:

Quote

@mrjimmyrex

 

1 hour ago

I need to correct you, I was not at the white board meeting but 2 of my closest friends were. I got all my information about that meeting from Paul

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/75552-tim-ballard/?do=findComment&comment=1210164156

I assume you don’t automatically assume a journalist has integrity just because they are a journalist or that mistakes in reporting rarely occur because journalists always double-check sources’ claims (see second link for examples refuting that) or that being too eager to be first rarely results in bad journalism?

https://www.thoughtco.com/the-top-journalism-scandals-2073750

https://www.cato.org/policy-report/january/february-1995/counting-errors-modern-journalism

https://en.ejo.ch/ethics-quality/more-errors-in-us-newspapers

Quote

According to a study conducted by Scott R. Maier, University of Oregon and recently published in Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly (vol. 82, 2005, pp. 533-551) , 61 per cent of local newspaper reports and features contain factual inaccuracies. To obtain this result, 4,800 articles were taken from 14 different newspapers and sent back to the people and institutions cited as primary sources for an assessment of factual accuracy.

This clearly goes to show that, since the publication of Mitchell Charnley’s groundbreaking study 70 years ago – which launched the field of accuracy research and found an error rate of 46 per cent in US newspaper reports – the tendency of US journalists towards factual inaccuracy has increased further.

Several similar research projects conducted from the mid-1960s onwards have found error rates of between 40 and 60 per cent. However, it should be noted that the sources are usually too intimately involved with the information they provide to give a perfect assessment of factual accuracy. The figures, therefore, might be somewhat exaggerated.

***

Me in an earlier post:

Quote

The last two interviews say the opposite that Packer is claiming.  Katherine Ballard says Elder Ballard was very careful as was Tim Ballard in those meetings (probably why Elder Ballard originally assumed he was careful with other people I am guessing) and the only advice given she mentioned was for the “nonprofit”, which would be the humanitarian side of Tim Ballard’s work.  The last interviewee said Tim said all sorts of things about Elder Ballard’s involvement, but at the end she said she wasn’t sure if she believed him…meaning it had to be just his word even though she had been in meetings with church leaders (which more than likely means those meetings had to be focused on the humanitarian side).

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/75552-tim-ballard/?do=findComment&comment=1210164868

If Packer is so accurate, why does he report frequent meetings for updates about OUR’s efforts and spiritual counseling (blessings and such) as “proof” that Elder Ballard and Tim Ballard are lying about having a financial relationship?  Giving someone a blessing to be successful is not entering into a financial relationship.  Even counseling someone on finances does not mean there is a financial relationship when that is intended to mean being in business with each other, intent on both making money off financial dealings, etc. (starts at about 21 minutes)

At 26:50, Packer states the Brunson video is the strongest evidence that Elder Ballard was deeply involved in Tim Ballard’s business ventures, yet all the video does is establish that Elder Ballard connected Ballard and Brunson and continued at least for ac time to support this relationship, Brunson does not state or imply that Elder Ballard was personally financially involved in the documentary project, just that he helped Tim Ballard get funding.  A very reasonable interpretation is that Elder Ballard was very concerned about human trafficking (the reason why Elder Ballard first contacted Tim Ballard was to get his help to rescue a child who had gone missing, believed to be kidnapped), especially of children, and wanted the documentary produced as a way to inform people about it.  That interpretation is consistent with Elder Ballard’s public behaviour.  If this is the strongest evidence according to Packer, he has a very weak case imo.  He has to first assume that Tim Ballard, a known liar, (and possibly Brian Norton, but it isn’t clear if Norton is sharing with Lopez what TB told him or claiming personal knowledge) is telling the truth about Elder Ballard as a silent partner and that documentary originally was a part of the plan of Slave Stealers, LLC making money.  However, the movie came out in 2018 and Slave Stealers, LLC wasn’t created until December 2018, so while it could be possible Elder Ballard acted to help get funding for the documentary in anticipation of it financially benefitting a future for profit company he would be a silent partner in, it has to be assumed he is thinking this way as well as Tim Ballard is even telling the truth of the silent partnership and sharing that information contrary to Elder Ballard’s instructions based on Katherine Ballard’s testimony below.

The Katherine Ballard reference starts at about 28:45 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXbcrDd4J-Q&t=82s and the specific statement that refutes Packer’s claim that this witness statement (this statement is from a podcast and not the investigation report) contributes proof of financial dealings is about a minute later.  Elder Ballard is paraphrased by KB as saying that he doesn’t want OUR hurt by bringing the Church into it and the reverse; this is in response to a question about her husband inappropriately using Elder Ballard’s name to promote his businesses, etc. and is being used as evidence by Katherine Ballard to show her husband wouldn’t use Elder Ballard’s name to promote himself.  Now Katherine Ballard could be lying given we know Tim Ballard did use Elder Ballard’s name to promote his businesses, but my point is Packer is using her comments to substantiate his claim that Elder Ballard had a financial relationship with TB (such a relationship is never mentioned by KB) that included promoting Tim Ballard’s businesses out of Church offices, etc when she is actually saying Elder Ballard was being very careful because he didn’t want their relationship to become a problem for either the Church or OUR.  She is not the witness to financial dealings Packer is claiming she is, quite the opposite in fact.

The next witness statement (around 30:30) he is claiming provides proof, Cherstyn Stockwell, goes into details about what Tim Ballard claimed about Elder Ballard, but Stockwell ends her testimony (quoted by Packer at 32:20) with the qualifier that “she didn’t know if she believed that”.  How is a witness saying Tim Ballard could be lying about Elder Ballard’s involvement proof of Elder Ballard’s involvement?

 

 

Edited November 19, 2023 by Calm