MsJack wrote:The judge is a BYU graduate who was born in Provo and is adjunct faculty with the J. Reuben Clark Law School.
This case is getting dismissed for that reason alone. .
.... the ignorance
MsJack wrote:The judge is a BYU graduate who was born in Provo and is adjunct faculty with the J. Reuben Clark Law School.
This case is getting dismissed for that reason alone. .
boris wrote:.... the ignorance
MsJack wrote:boris wrote:.... the ignorance
Why is that ignorance?
Every single time a sex abuse case against the LDS church has been brought in Utah, Utah courts have found some reason why the case cannot go forward. Every. Single. Time.
Other states have allowed sex abuse cases against the LDS church to proceed.
boris wrote:The level of bigotry and prejudice required for your statement that the sole reason for dismissal is affinty of the Judge to a party, is pure ignorance.
boris wrote:And your quote herein that every single case has been dismissed...on what legal basis were the cases dismissed?
boris wrote:And perhaps you may not know, but Denson's attorney has addressed the issue of recusal and does not believe it is necessary
peacemaker wrote:Anti-Mormons will never admit that McKenna Denson is lying.
I have a question wrote:peacemaker wrote:Anti-Mormons will never admit that McKenna Denson is lying.
The person on trial is Bishop and the Church.
Bishop for sexual abuse - which he’s confessed to.
The Church for failing to act to protect someone for whom they had a duty of care - which is beyond doubt the Church is culpable and now complicit in trying to cover up.
Your accusations about Denson are all post-trauma incidents - meaning Bishop and the Church are also culpable for her behaviours.
That you don’t see this can only be because you are being wilfully ignorant of the data.
esodije wrote:One wonders, if the lawsuit is ultimately dismissed on SOL grounds, how many friends McKenna Denson will still have among those who’ve expressed or provided support thus far. Will she continue to be emblematic of church abuse, and thus remain in the public consciousness? Or will she fall back into obscurity inasmuch as she no longer represents a direct financial or public-relations threat to the church? Call me cynical, but I think one outcome is as likely as the other.