Crockett gets case against LDS Church dismissed

[_TAK]

From what I've seen of the Church Handbook of Instructions, it doesn't say to NOT call the police, it simply says to call the hotline.

Here's the actual language from the current CHI (emphasis mine):

If confidential information indicates that a member's abusive activities have violated applicable law, the bishop or stake president should urge the member to report these activities to the appropriate government authorities. Leaders can obtain information about local reporting requirements through the help line. When reporting is required by law, the leader should encourage the member to secure qualified legal advice.

To avoid implicating the Church in legal matters to which it is not a party, leaders should avoid testifying in civil or criminal cases or other proceedings involving abuse.

So it sounds as if the Church wants a leader to report abuse only IF it is absolutely required by law. Otherwise, the Church simply "urges" the member to turn himself in, while at the same time telling him/her to get a good lawyer. So much for 'standing for something.'

Actually the way I read that - the leader is to encourage the member to report..
Not that he is supposed to report it. The Church is telling the leader to stay out of it to "avoid implicating the Church".

[_Sethbag]

To be fair, it does say that the bishop can find out about legal reporting requirements from the hotline. If the bishop is required by law to report something, presumably the hotline would advise him of such, and he would go ahead and report it. As for whether a bishop should report abuse even when not legally required, I guess that depends on whether the bishop just finds out about it, or whether the person confesses it. There is such a thing as a priest/penitent privelege, and the bishop has to take care not to violate that.

I didn't read anything about the case that got dismissed, and I have nothing to say about that except that if Crockett serves as legal counsel for the church, they should pay him, and if they do, that's none of my business. Lawyers get paid for their work just like everyone else. If you're hired by the church to lay brick for a new ward house, then you're probably getting paid out of tithing money too.
Big whoop.

[_quaker]

This was a perfect parade of idiots until seth came along and ruined it.

[_Daniel Peterson]

To the top, because of sethbag's post.

Lucidity on this board should be celebrated.

[_harmony]

To the top, because of sethbag's post.

Lucidity on this board should be celebrated.

There would be no debate at all, if the Church practiced fiscal transparency.

[_Morrissey]

To be fair, it does say that the bishop can find out about legal reporting requirements from the hotline. If the bishop is required by law to report something, presumably the hotline would advise him of such, and he would go ahead and report it. As for whether a bishop should report abuse even when not legally required, I guess that depends on whether the bishop just finds out about it, or whether the person confesses it. There is such a thing as a priest/penitent privelege, and the bishop has to take care not to violate that.

I didn't read anything about the case that got dismissed, and I have nothing to say about that except that if Crockett serves as legal counsel for the church, they should pay him, and if they do, that's none of my business. Lawyers get paid for their work just like everyone else. If you're hired by the church to lay brick for a new ward house, then you're probably getting paid out of tithing money too.
Big whoop.

With due respect, there is a significant difference in using tithing funds to pay bricklayers vs. using tithing funds to defend against sexual abuse allegations.

Moreover, I certainly do not begrudge Crockett his due payment, and in this case it appears that he deserves a generous one. I believe, however, that LDS Inc. has an ethical obligation to disclose how it spends tithing funds. I would like to know how much it is spending on capital investment and improvements as well as how much it is spending defending itself against sexual abuse law suits. (And yes, I do have standing, as my wife continues to pay tithing, with my consent.)