"what the [lds] church misrepresented in the AP article response"

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
dastardly stem
God
Posts: 2259
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:38 pm

Re: "what the [lds] church misrepresented in the AP article response"

Post by dastardly stem »

JohnW wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 3:37 am
So maybe it was a mistake to post on this topic. Situations that are highly emotional usually don't lend well to rational discussion. I can't go into any details, of course, but I can try to clear up a few obvious misconceptions. I probably won't respond to everyone just because I think if I clear up a few things, most questions will be moot.
dastardly stem wrote:
Mon Oct 03, 2022 1:40 pm


10-15 times over the course of 6 years. That's quite a span. Closer to 15 than 10? Is this specific to sexual abuse? THat's kind of a scary thought. When you say there were multiple cases where things were reported to the police, does that also imply there were cases that weren't reported to the police? Why would that be? And why would the Church lawyers advise against doing so? I do believe that's what we're getting down to on this topic. Why would the Church present reasons why sexual abuse should not be reported?
This is an example of quick escalation from an assumption. No, these calls were almost never on sexual abuse. These calls were often heart-wrenching to the individuals going through those issues, but usually not hot-button topics that the general membership would be concerned with. Think along the lines of legal concerns relating to divorce and child custody, situations where restraining orders are in place, or when bishops should or should not testify in court as a witness. This just names a few of the dozens of possible situations where a bishop would not normally know how to navigate a situation. Bishops simply can't be experts in counseling, legal issues, financial issues, technical issues, etc. I personally am glad the church had various people we could call in Salt Lake who would help us navigate these sometimes complex situations. I always felt uplifted when talking with the various hotlines. I never got the sense they were upset that I called (even when I sometimes had to call on a weekend). Usually, I could literally hear the smile in their voice as they were happy to help someone who was completely lost on how to proceed. Is it possible mistakes can be made? Certainly. Should the fear of a big mistake with terrible repercussions mean we should stop trying to help people going through these issues? Certainly not.
Thanks for responding, John. It sounds like you have no experience on these matters, although granted I’m not clear what you mean by “almost never”. When you brought up 10-15 calls in the context of sexual abuse I certainly was curious what your experience may add, particularly if you could possibly clear things up. I asked, thinking, likely, you’d have little to no experience on the type of matter under consideration. I guess I was right. I don’t know what you had to do with calling the police but it doesn’t sound like it involved sex abuse. I’m sure you’re time as bishop was fulfilling, interesting difficult and all of that.

I am absolutely depressed seeing that the church failed so badly on this case. It is absolutely an enormous mistake if the church advised the bishop to not turn in the abuser because they all thought it was a one time thing or that an inadequately qualified bishop should somehow handle the situation. I can’t help that. I don’t think it wise to defend the church here. Failure all around. The church whiffed. If this is a representation of other cases involving local leaders and calls for help from the help line, the church has tons to fix.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
User avatar
Morley
God
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:17 pm
Location: detail from Alice Neel's 1980 self portrait

Re: "what the [lds] church misrepresented in the AP article response"

Post by Morley »

JohnW wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 4:04 am
Again, I may have communicated poorly here. The above bolded portion assumes the bishop thought this was an occurrence far in the past, and the child was in no current danger. In that case, it MAY be possible the church would have advised the bishop to counsel a bit longer.
Thank you for replying, John. I appreciate your viewpoint.

That we’re not reporting the crime because it’s far in the past and the bishop thinks the child is no longer in danger, insinuates that—with perceived offender repentance and having dealt with and disciplined the penitent abuser in-house—the crime may never really be reported. Am I wrong? Otherwise, why put off reporting until you ‘counsel a bit longer.’

I’m going to ask this again: If this had been a murder, say far in the past, is there any chance the church would have advised the bishop to not report yet, but to counsel a bit longer?
User avatar
JohnW
Valiant A
Posts: 178
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2022 10:11 pm

Re: "what the [lds] church misrepresented in the AP article response"

Post by JohnW »

Morley wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 5:15 am
JohnW wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 4:04 am
Again, I may have communicated poorly here. The above bolded portion assumes the bishop thought this was an occurrence far in the past, and the child was in no current danger. In that case, it MAY be possible the church would have advised the bishop to counsel a bit longer.
Thank you for replying, John. I appreciate your viewpoint.

That we’re not reporting the crime because it’s far in the past and the bishop thinks the child is no longer in danger, insinuates that—with perceived offender repentance and having dealt with and disciplined the penitent abuser in-house—the crime may never really be reported. Am I wrong? Otherwise, why put off reporting until you ‘counsel a bit longer.’

I’m going to ask this again: If this had been a murder, say far in the past, is there any chance the church would have advised the bishop to not report and to counsel a bit longer?
I'm not sure if I'm qualified to answer the question on murder. Is there a statute of limitations on child abuse but not murder? That would be my first question. I'm honestly not sure of the answer. It may involve questions regarding the seriousness of the abuse. I'm pretty sure in the past there were statutes of limitations on some forms of abuse, but my impression is that laws are being passed to eliminate those limitations in some cases.

I could imagine a case where in a particular state the statute of limitations means that the perpetrator would no longer be reachable by the law. That would be a scenario where counseling by the bishop might be the only way forward, at least in the near-term. Frankly, there are just so many scenarios which get increasingly complex that I just don't have the expertise to comment much. That is why I was glad the hotline was there.
User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 9568
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Playing Rabbits

Re: "what the [lds] church misrepresented in the AP article response"

Post by Res Ipsa »

I’d encourage anyone interested in this issue to read the testimony of the investigating agent who interviewed the bishop. The father confessed during a counseling session that he had been abusing the oldest daughter. The Bishop called the mother in and had the faster tell her about the molestation. It was clear from the testimony that this was not a confession of a one off in the distant past.

The agent reported that the bishop told him he continued to counsel the father, that he knew the father was continuing the abuse, and that he had called the wife in several additional times to tell her that the abuse was continuing.

The Bishop said that he hoped the mother would either report the father or leave him with the children. All she said was that she would try to keep the father away from the daughter, but the bishop knew that wasn’t working. And he didn’t lift a finger to help the young girl whose father was filming himself having oral and vaginal sex with with his child and uploading the film to the internet.

For the LDS Church to be minimizing what happened here is inexcusable. One phone call would have prevented these two girls from enduring years of abuse that may well have destroyed their lives.

https://mormonleaks.io/wiki/documents/5 ... ENCING.pdf
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.

Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
IHAQ
God
Posts: 1533
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:00 am

Re: "what the [lds] church misrepresented in the AP article response"

Post by IHAQ »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 5:55 am
For the LDS Church to be minimizing what happened here is inexcusable. One phone call would have prevented these two girls from enduring years of abuse that may well have destroyed their lives.

https://mormonleaks.io/wiki/documents/5 ... ENCING.pdf
Well said.

Nelson talks big when it comes to abuse...
“Abuse constitutes the influence of the adversary. It is a grievous sin,” he said. “As president of the church, I affirm the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ on this issue. Let me be perfectly clear: Any kind of abuse of women, children or anyone is an abomination to the Lord. He grieves and I grieve whenever anyone is harmed. He mourns, and we all mourn, for each person who has fallen victim to abuse of any kind. Those who perpetrate these hideous acts are not only accountable to the laws of man, but will also face the wrath of God.”
https://www.deseret.com/2022/10/1/23381 ... conference

But talk is cheap, and the reality is Nelson and his cohorts have done nothing to address the mountain of abuse being perpetrated within the institution he is President of. Well, nothing except work hard at covering it up.
dastardly stem
God
Posts: 2259
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:38 pm

Re: "what the [lds] church misrepresented in the AP article response"

Post by dastardly stem »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 5:55 am
I’d encourage anyone interested in this issue to read the testimony of the investigating agent who interviewed the bishop. The father confessed during a counseling session that he had been abusing the oldest daughter. The Bishop called the mother in and had the faster tell her about the molestation. It was clear from the testimony that this was not a confession of a one off in the distant past.

The agent reported that the bishop told him he continued to counsel the father, that he knew the father was continuing the abuse, and that he had called the wife in several additional times to tell her that the abuse was continuing.

The Bishop said that he hoped the mother would either report the father or leave him with the children. All she said was that she would try to keep the father away from the daughter, but the bishop knew that wasn’t working. And he didn’t lift a finger to help the young girl whose father was filming himself having oral and vaginal sex with with his child and uploading the film to the internet.

For the LDS Church to be minimizing what happened here is inexcusable. One phone call would have prevented these two girls from enduring years of abuse that may well have destroyed their lives.

https://mormonleaks.io/wiki/documents/5 ... ENCING.pdf
Excellent clarity given, red Ipsa. This remains failure all around by the church. The response called out in the op only demonstrates how far the church is willing to go to try and protect their name. This is the clearest case of church failure on handling abuse and the fallout I can imagine. It is awful and embarrassing and to defend the church even in the slightest way requires one to miss or close one’s eyes to what happened. The dad and mom’s failure is beyond disgusting, the church’s part in this is absolutely appalling.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 8980
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: "what the [lds] church misrepresented in the AP article response"

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

JohnW wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 4:48 am
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 4:06 am


Your moral center ^ has been utterly compromised. That is what Mormonism does to a person’s ethos.

Child Rapist > i rape my kids and post it on the Internet

Bishop > this is complicated. i better send you back to your family.

A month later …

Child Rapist > I can’t seem to stop with the raping and filming and all that jazz

Bishop > ugh. this is too difficult for me to figure out as an adult with a completely screwed up moral center. i better call some lawyers!

Lawyers > ten hail marys and definitely don’t involve law enforcement.

Bishop > o-oh-okay

Child Rapist > uh, yeah, i’m still raping my kids and i have a baby on the way. just so you know. a baby. i ain’t sayin’ i’m going to do horrible things to this baby, but i’m battin’ a thousand over here, bro.

Bishop > gee, willickers. gosh. this is just such a mystery to me. welp. good thing the child rapist isn’t stealing from the church because he’d be ex’d in a heartbeat. guess i’ll just tell him to keep givin’ it the ol’ college try!

- Doc
I apologize. It looks like I have struck a nerve or something.
Well, yeah. You won’t come out and state plainly that you either you called the cops when a man confessed to you he was committing a heinous act to his family, or that you would’ve called the cops had a confession been made. You also won’t state plainly that the Mormon HQ policy is about as heinous a thing as it gets, or something to that effect.

This one is such a layup for anyone with half a brain and half a heart, but two Mormons on this board are tippity tapping harder than Fred Astaire.

Call the cops when you find out a man is raping his kids. CHOOSE THE RIGHT, let the consequences follow. The sinner can repent in jail. The sinner can get ministrations in jail. It doesn’t matter if that means the family will lose financial support from the rapist. There are ways and means a family can get assistance while their rapist is safely away from them.

Anyway, I’m left to surmise that Mormon men simply don’t think raping kids is that big of a deal. I’m serious. Who lets a known rapist go back to his family to rape them some more? It’s someone who doesn’t find the sin that grievous. Unbelievable.

- Doc
Last edited by Doctor CamNC4Me on Tue Oct 04, 2022 1:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 8980
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: "what the [lds] church misrepresented in the AP article response"

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

As far as striking a nerve or whatever, of course it strikes a nerve. I have damned empathy for anyone on the receiving end of a man’s evil. John, and I mean this as kindly as possible under the circumstances, but your nerves should be absolutely stepped on, too. To the point you wouldn’t tolerate this policy under any circumstance, and you wouldn’t be a part of an organization that aids and abets a pedophile rapist. That’s a massive moral failing top to bottom that can’t be understated.

I mentioned it before, but it bears repeating. I had a subordinate, when I was stationed in AZ, who confessed to his wife he was raping one or two of the step-daughters (pre-teen, if it matters). Cops were called, he went to jail, was charged and convicted, and will now spend the majority of his life behind bars, most likely. It was astonishing because this Soldier was outstanding, so much so I recommended him for Warrant Officer Candidate School. He was also taking care of a wife and five kids, with one on the way. Long story short, between the Army, the state, and family the kids and ex-wife have their needs met. The Soldier was, from all appearances, truly repentant. I visited him twice in jail while he was in AZ, and have sent him a note every year expressing my hope he’s doing ok in prison and that I still think about him. He’s a faithful Christian, by the way. And he’s part of a strong Christian fellowship in prison where he is making amends to society by serving time and gettin’ right with Jesus. I felt love and compassion for this Soldier who committed heinous acts, but kept in touch with him because of his remorse and repentance, an act that included serving time for his crimes.

If you protect a rapist, especially one that has easy access to his victims, statistically he’ll rape again with almost 100% certainty. That’s the bottom line. in my opinion, anyone who stays in and gives money to an organization that protects a child rapist is complicit in the crime, even if they’re removed from it by a few steps. Next time you’re sitting in church and you hear someone state they “know the church is true”, remind yourself this “church” not only passed a policy in 2015 literally denying the atonement to a segment of children, which was the most anti-Christ thing you could possibly do, but now protects pedophile rapists as they’re actively raping their family, and they’re good with that.

Anyone who stays in that mess needs to absolutely conduct a personal inventory, a gut check really, and do the right thing by leaving it. That “church” isn’t “true”.

- Doc
Last edited by Doctor CamNC4Me on Tue Oct 04, 2022 10:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
User avatar
Morley
God
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:17 pm
Location: detail from Alice Neel's 1980 self portrait

Re: "what the [lds] church misrepresented in the AP article response"

Post by Morley »

Thank you for replying, MG. You’ll not be surprised that I largely disagree.

MG 2.0 wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 12:30 am
I believe that John W and many other honest hearted leaders do their darndest to tread the line between ministerial responsibilities and the law. I don’t envy them. I have not been a Bishop but have been associated with many good men in leadership positions. On the whole I think that they have the best interests of ALL in mind as they perform their responsibilities. I am sure that those in positions of general church leadership have nothing but love/concern for those that fall prey to abuse.


Intentions are worthless. Virtually everyone can say they have good intentions. The church leadership needs to actually act wisely and morally, not intend to act wisely and morally.

There is no line to be tread between ministerial responsibilities and the law. Bishops need to embrace the law. Prioritizing ministry feeds the abuse.

Church leadership having “nothing but love/concern for those that fall prey to abuse” is also worthless. Intelligent actions and policies (and effective hotline call procedures) that prevent and ameliorate that abuse should be the goal. ‘Ministerial responsibilities’ should be after everything else is taken care of.
MG 2.0 wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 12:30 am
My thinking is that there has been and will continue to be a fair bit of ‘fine tuning’ in respect to the policies and procedures in connection with this problem which has escalated in modern society.


Should have already happened. This is not a new ‘modern society ‘ problem. Nor is this a new conundrum for this, or any other, religion.
MG 2.0 wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 12:30 am
l choose to give the ‘powers that be’ the benefit of a doubt and that they will continue to find that balance between their ministerial duties and the duty to not let an abusive monster rule the day.


It’s not a balance. Turn in the abuser. Then minister.
MG 2.0 wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 12:30 am
Mercy and justice are difficult to calibrate ‘on the ground’. A Bishop both has the responsibility to condemn the sin and where possible bring the sinner to repentance before the Lord and his church while at the same time meting out required punishment and prosecution by the law.
Before the bishop does any of those things, he should get the child molester away from the child. Before the church urges the bishop to do any of these things, they should demand that he get the child molester away from the child.

The research is pretty unambiguous on this. Prayers and counseling to cure the pedophile won’t work as long as the molester has continued access to the child. Bishops and (especially) the church should know this.
MG 2.0 wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 12:30 am
Again, I don’t envy them. But neither do I condemn them. And unfortunately you are also going to have a few rogue Bishops along the way. But that isn’t any reason to tear the whole system down as some might desire.
Sure it is.

“And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.”




Edit: As I reread, I see that Marcus and Doc Cam may have already written what I just said, only much more succinctly.
User avatar
Doctor Steuss
God
Posts: 1671
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:48 pm

Re: "what the [lds] church misrepresented in the AP article response"

Post by Doctor Steuss »

Note, that in all of this, and the anecdotal personal accounts of others that have served as Bishops, the counseling and focus is primarily on, and for, the perpetrator.

Nothing for the welfare of the children. Nothing on getting counseling services for the children (likely because they know that LDS Social Services counselors are mandated reporters). Nothing on sitting down with the children and meeting with them. Nothing on getting the children medical care (again... mandated reporters).

The focus is on the perpetrator, and the Church, with the victims viewed as being almost intangible.

Anyone who personally knows someone who was sexually abused as a child has seen first-hand the lifetime devastation of trauma, dysfunctional relationships, and mental health struggles. It doesn’t matter if the abuse happened “in the past,” it will forever be in the present for those that the Church and its leaders abandon in favor of the saving the abuser.
Last edited by Doctor Steuss on Tue Oct 04, 2022 4:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply