Tim Ballard Defends Himself

[SeekingUnderstanding]

5 minutes ago, Dario_M said:

I just can tell if somebody is lying.

This man is innocent. 

Are you aware that your church publicly denounced him and excommunicated him?

[Tacenda]

 

[Tacenda]

 

[Dario_M]

5 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Are you aware that your church publicly denounced him and excommunicated him?

My church? The church is not mine. It is our church you see. And quite frankly 

 

 

[Dario_M]

11 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

 

Thank you tacenda. I'm going to digg into this. 

[Anonymous Mormon]

1 hour ago, Dario_M said:

I've seen the whole 2 hour video. I have a nosse for people who are lying. This guy is not lying. And the case against him is ridicelous. Obviously ....he is sincere. 

Dario - I know people are giving you grief for this comment. However, I actually agree with you - I also don't think that he wasn't lying in this particular 2-hour video.

However, he has also been accused of some other things, such as abusing women and using his foundation that saves children from trafficking for personal gain. In these other matters, he has not given such a credible defense and the proof against him is a lot worse.

I think that the reason he chose to respond to Ryan Fisher's statement in full in this video, is because it was the one that was most easily defensible.

Unfortunately, the video creator did not ask him about the other issues, so this is not a good intro video to the topic

 

46 minutes ago, Dario_M said:

My church? The church is not mine. It is our church you see. 

 

Amen to that!  That includes in situations where a member of our church makes poor choices, even publicly. 

[Dario_M]

1 hour ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

Dario - I know people are giving you grief for this comment. However, I actually agree with you - I also don't think that he wasn't lying in this particular 2-hour video.

 

Agree i absolutely don't think so as well

1 hour ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

However, he has also been accused of some other things, such as abusing women and using his foundation that saves children from trafficking for personal gain. In these other matters, he has not given such a credible defense and the proof against him is a lot worse.

Oh okay i didn't know that.

1 hour ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

I think that the reason he chose to respond to Ryan Fisher's statement in full in this video, is because it was the one that was most easily defensible.

It sure is.

1 hour ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

Unfortunately, the video creator did not ask him about the other issues, so this is not a good intro video to the topic

 

Amen to that!  That includes in situations where a member of our church makes poor choices, even publicly. 

People of the LDS community are also just people. And people make mistakes. Well....about les then a half hour it will be 00:00 sunday here where i'm at so if you don't mind i am going to bed now. Because tomorrow i wanna go to church and wanna feel like a human you see. 

Have a nice sunday. 

Edited September 7, 2024 by Dario_M

[MustardSeed]

Well we have Dario and Teddy adamant that Ballard is a victim.  
It’s all just information. 

[teddyaware]

2 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

Well we have Dario and Teddy adamant that Ballard is a victim.  
It’s all just information. 

I guess you haven’t read all my posts on this thread. I previously made it clear that if any of the charges that have been filed against Ballard are substantiated by legitimate evidence in courts of law I’m fully prepared to acknowledge his guilt. Presently, the main wrinkle in this saga is that some of the cases against Ballard have already been dismissed due to lack of evidence, and one of his accusers was just found guilty of pimping out kids, largely thanks to video evidence provided by Ballard. In addition, Ryan Fisher’s case against Ballard is pathetically weak and a lot of it is downright silly, so it looks like that case is also likely going to be dismissed or lost. Like it or not, and whether you deem it just or not,  it appears Ballard is on a roll.

Edited September 8, 2024 by teddyaware

[The Nehor]

9 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

I guess you haven’t read all my posts on this thread. I previously made it clear that if any of the charges that have been filed against Ballard are substantiated by legitimate evidence in courts of law I’m fully prepared to acknowledge his guilt. Presently, the main wrinkle in this saga is that some of the cases against Ballard have been already been dropped due to lack of evidence, and one of his accusers was just found guilty of pimping out kids, largely thanks to video evidence provided by Ballard. In addition, Ryan Fisher’s case against Ballard is pathetically weak and a lot of it is downright silly, so looks like that case is also likely going to be dropped or lost. Like it or not, and whether you deem it just or not,  it appears Ballard is on a roll.

Fisher never had a case against Ballard. The prosecution in another case submitted an affadavit from Fisher.

One of his accusers? No. Kely Suarez sued Ballard for defamation for how she was portrayed in his movie. This is not one of the women suing him for his actions on one of his ‘stings’. He portrayed her as a sex trafficker in Columbia. She argued that was defamatory. She was then convicted of pimping out a minor in Columbia. This was a cold case. It happened 8 years ago and was inactive. Then right after Ballard paid for a bunch of Columbian prosecutors to take a vacation and come see his movie one of them suddenly brought the case back up again and convicted her on pretty flimsy evidence. Seriously, look at what the video evidence was. This case would almost certainly have died in a US court. Was she guilty? I am not sure at all. I don’t see this as somehow exonerating Ballard. If she was involved I look at this as a scum on scum fight. Much like Ballard and Fisher’s fight appears to be.

I mean, if you trust the Columbian judicial system to be above corruption this might be a big win……….and no, I couldn’t keep a straight face while typing that.

 

Your facts are pretty much all wrong. You just eat up the propaganda. Also that you need the United States courts to tell you when someone is bad is kind of disheartening and sad.

[teddyaware]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Fisher never had a case against Ballard. The prosecution in another case submitted an affadavit from Fisher.

One of his accusers? No. Kely Suarez sued Ballard for defamation for how she was portrayed in his movie. This is not one of the women suing him for his actions on one of his ‘stings’. He portrayed her as a sex trafficker in Columbia. She argued that was defamatory. She was then convicted of pimping out a minor in Columbia. This was a cold case. It happened 8 years ago and was inactive. Then right after Ballard paid for a bunch of Columbian prosecutors to take a vacation and come see his movie one of them suddenly brought the case back up again and convicted her on pretty flimsy evidence. Seriously, look at what the video evidence was. This case would almost certainly have died in a US court. Was she guilty? I am not sure at all. I don’t see this as somehow exonerating Ballard. If she was involved I look at this as a scum on scum fight. Much like Ballard and Fisher’s fight appears to be.

I mean, if you trust the Columbian judicial system to be above corruption this might be a big win……….and no, I couldn’t keep a straight face while typing that.

 

Your facts are pretty much all wrong. You just eat up the propaganda. Also that you need the United States courts to tell you when someone is bad is kind of disheartening and sad.

Here’s some more Tim Ballard “propaganda” for your delectation… https://www.facebook.com/officialtimballard

Edited September 8, 2024 by teddyaware

[teddyaware]

https://www.facebook.com/officialtimballard

[Dario_M]

Okay....so he is a fraud? 

[teddyaware]

6 hours ago, Dario_M said:

Okay....so he is a fraud? 

My long held perspective on Tim Ballard is that either he’s an extreme sociopath who’s able to lie with great confidence and convincing passion, or he’s a good man who like many other good men throughout history is getting railroaded. The problem for his detractors is that Ballard’s on a legal winning streak, and it appears that much of what he’s been asserting all along is being vindicated, For some strange reason, many on this board want Ballard to be judged guilty before he’s had his day in court. I presume the reason why they want their fellow church member to be judged guilty before trial is because he’s identified with the Ezra Taft Benson wing of the church.

Edited September 8, 2024 by teddyaware

[Dario_M]

35 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

My long held perspective on Tim Ballard is that either he’s an extreme sociopath who’s able to lie with great confidence and convincing passion,

Hmmm that's not good. 

35 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

or he’s a good man who like many other good men throughout history is getting railroaded.

 

That's what i also thought but many people here told me that he was a fraud and that he had an abusive nature. 

I find it also strange that the church has excomunicated him. He must have done something that wasn't right. 

35 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

The problem for his detractors is that Ballard’s on a legal winning streak, and it appears that much of what he’s been asserting all along is being vindicated, For some strange reason, many on this board want Ballard to be judged guilty before he’s had his day in court. I presume the reason why they want their fellow church member to be judged guilty before trial is because he’s identified with the Ezra Taft Benson wing of the church.

This part of your post i don't understand sorry.

Edited September 8, 2024 by Dario_M

[webbles]

1 hour ago, teddyaware said:

My long held perspective on Tim Ballard is that either he’s an extreme sociopath who’s able to lie with great confidence and convincing passion, or he’s a good man who like many other good men throughout history is getting railroaded. The problem for his detractors is that Ballard’s on a legal winning streak, and it appears that much of what he’s been asserting all along is being vindicated, For some strange reason, many on this board want Ballard to be judged guilty before he’s had his day in court. I presume the reason why they want their fellow church member to be judged guilty before trial is because he’s identified with the Ezra Taft Benson wing of the church.

Personally, I think he is an example of the pride cycle.  He started out doing something good.  Then, as he started to gain fame and fortune, he started to become proud and started to think of himself more than what he was doing.  He took advantage of it to gain more fortune and did some morally wrong things.  I doubt he broke any legal laws but that doesn't matter when talking about moral laws.  He is right now in the punishment phase of the pride cycle.  He isn't an "extreme sociopath".  He is just a guy who got caught up in what he was doing.  Happens a lot (see Book of Mormon for lots of examples).

[The Nehor]

14 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Here’s some more Tim Ballard “propaganda” for your delectation… https://www.facebook.com/officialtimballard

I thought you were saying that ironically but nope, you were serious.

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, teddyaware said:

My long held perspective on Tim Ballard is that either he’s an extreme sociopath who’s able to lie with great confidence and convincing passion, or he’s a good man who like many other good men throughout history is getting railroaded. The problem for his detractors is that Ballard’s on a legal winning streak, and it appears that much of what he’s been asserting all along is being vindicated, For some strange reason, many on this board want Ballard to be judged guilty before he’s had his day in court. I presume the reason why they want their fellow church member to be judged guilty before trial is because he’s identified with the Ezra Taft Benson wing of the church.

A case being dismissed might be a relief for him but it is not a winning streak and it doesn’t vindicate Ballard at all.

I don’t need a guilty conviction to prove anything. I know he is a gloryhound and all style and no substance and that he uses his job as a pretext to flirt with women. Enough evidence has been published to establish that. Whether any of it is legally actionable I don’t know.

[Calm]

5 hours ago, teddyaware said:

For some strange reason, many on this board want Ballard to be judged guilty before he’s had his day in court.

I think you are misinterpreting people’s responses.  I do not want in the least for Ballard to be judged guilty even when he has his day in court.  I would much prefer he is a good guy who has been misunderstood and then misrepresented.

However, the story is out there as well as some evidence he has not rebutted and quite a few of his own comments.  I have noticed how he avoids dealing with the hard evidence in what I have seen (and I am willing to admit I am wrong as I haven’t watched everything he has said) and he has made statements that appear to contradict the evidence (such as never using Elder Ballard’s name in his business dealings iirc).  His explanation of the couples’ ruse and the need for it does not match what I have read about traffickers (though that isn’t much).  And if OUR’s methods are accurately described (and as far as I am aware no one has refuted that they go in and ask for young children if what they are offered are not minors or young minors), it seems quite reasonable they are running the risk of new kids being trafficked to meet that request.
 

Taking the time to discuss my current understanding of his and OUR’s actions is not wanting him or them to be judged guilty, it is wanting to share accurate info (meaning I link to info to answer questions and others link to info or share personal firsthand knowledge to answer mine) out there with those curious about it.  I may believe he is guilty of at least some of the actions, but I will be very, very happy if I am proved wrong and no children or women were put at unnecessary risk or were abused.  That is what I care about.

I assume the majority of those commenting on this thread feel the same way even if by now they don’t like Tim Ballard.

Edited September 8, 2024 by Calm

[MustardSeed]

17 hours ago, teddyaware said:

I guess you haven’t read all my posts on this thread. I previously made it clear that if any of the charges that have been filed against Ballard are substantiated by legitimate evidence in courts of law I’m fully prepared to acknowledge his guilt. Presently, the main wrinkle in this saga is that some of the cases against Ballard have already been dismissed due to lack of evidence, and one of his accusers was just found guilty of pimping out kids, largely thanks to video evidence provided by Ballard. In addition, Ryan Fisher’s case against Ballard is pathetically weak and a lot of it is downright silly, so it looks like that case is also likely going to be dismissed or lost. Like it or not, and whether you deem it just or not,  it appears Ballard is on a roll.

I have read it all.  
What I find interesting is that you typically and consistently appear have zero tolerance for anything outside the lines of rigid right and wrong.  You come across with the board in a judgmental and condemning manner.  Yet in this case, You defend somebody who would malign a prophet, who cheated on his wife, and who took advantage of his position of power to be sexual with his employees.  
 

It just doesn’t make sense, but I don’t suppose it needs to. I trust if I had all the information it would make perfect sense.

Edited September 8, 2024 by MustardSeed

[ttribe]

On 9/7/2024 at 12:09 PM, Dario_M said:

I just can tell if somebody is lying.

This man seems to be innocent 

Wow, you are an easy mark for a con man. Fraudsters LOVE people who are vastly overconfident in their ability to engage in lie detection.

[Dario_M]

4 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Wow, you are an easy mark for a con man. Fraudsters LOVE people who are vastly overconfident in their ability to engage in lie detection.

Well...that's not true.

Later on in this topic i had admit that i was doubting about Tims attentions. So i took back my words a bit. 

[Rain]

On 9/8/2024 at 2:41 PM, teddyaware said:

My long held perspective on Tim Ballard is that either he’s an extreme sociopath who’s able to lie with great confidence and convincing passion, or he’s a good man who like many other good men throughout history is getting railroaded.

It's interesting to see how people view others.  He has convinced you he is telling you the truth so you figure he either has been doing that or you are so convinced that you feel he must be in a special class.

But I don't find him convincing at all.  I just find him to be pretty dramatic. 

 

On 9/8/2024 at 2:41 PM, teddyaware said:

The problem for his detractors is that Ballard’s on a legal winning streak, and it appears that much of what he’s been asserting all along is being vindicated, For some strange reason, many on this board want Ballard to be judged guilty before he’s had his day in court. I presume the reason why they want their fellow church member to be judged guilty before trial is because he’s identified with the Ezra Taft Benson wing of the church.

I didn't even know his political stances. I just find him so dramatic that I can't trust him.  I haven't judged him guilty or not innocent - that's not the problem here.  The problem is that it is hard to lay aside the drama to see the real him. 

[Damien the Leper]

46 minutes ago, Dario_M said:

Well...that's not true.

Later on in this topic i had admit that i was doubting about Tims attentions. So i took back my words a bit. 

This does not negate your claim for "having a nose" for lie detection. It's good to know your detection was more on point after your initial opinion. Detecting is such hard work.

[smac97]

On 9/6/2024 at 2:14 PM, teddyaware said:

My opinion is that, by necessity, a sexually charged atmosphere had to be created in order successfully escape detection during the child trafficking undercover work. And as many sexual abuse victims will tell you, in sexually charged atmospheres their very human bodies often betrayed them by responding to the unwanted sexual stimuli with arousal, even when participation in the abuse is the last thing they wanted to do.

I think law enforcement experts have developed all sorts of procedures, deceptive strategies, rules, etc. for "undercover" operatives to perform their duties which minimize the risk of the sorts of allegations that have been asserted against Tim Ballard.  I doubt using attractive young female volunteers in a "couple's ruse" is part of that playbook.  

On 9/6/2024 at 2:14 PM, teddyaware said:

In light of the above, I believe what likely happened is that the women who are charging Ballard with sexual abuse are feeling guilt stricken due to their willing participation in a job the required them to convincingly coming off as practicing sex perverts, and now, months or years after their willing participation, they want to put all the blame for their feelings of guilt and remorse of conscience exclusively on Ballard, when what they should have done was back out of their participation in the very beginning, at the time when they first started to feel uncomfortable and conflicted. The best way to convince others you’re a sexual pervert is to convincingly behave as if you really are a sexual pervert, and convincingly acting like authentic sex perverts was the most essential element of their job description.

This is too speculative for me.  And it focuses on the putative conduct of the women to the exclusion of the putative conduct of Tim Ballard.

Sexual misconduct by a notable Latter-day Saint can and does happen.  As far as that goes, I don't think it merits much public attention.  But Tim Ballard may have implicated the good name and reputation of Pres. Ballard and the Church in his behaviors.  

On 9/6/2024 at 2:14 PM, teddyaware said:

Given this emotionally volitile state of affairs, all some eager beaver lawyers had to do is couple the female accuser’s guilty consciences. and resentments toward Ballard, with the promise of big financial payouts, to compensate them for the abuse they say they suffered, and you have Ballard’s present legal woes.

I don't think much of lawyers to try to litigate in the Court of Public Opinion.  And here, the plaintiffs' lawyers are not only doing that, they are doing it very poorly.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited September 9, 2024 by smac97