Mickelson Case: GA coverup cont.,

[_Chap]

[_Res Ipsa]

I, for one, am happy to see the cat pictures arrive. I welcome the arrival of our cat overlords.

[_Jersey Girl]

I, for one, am happy to see the cat pictures arrive. I welcome the arrival of our cat overlords.

Oh good, here's one with a Jersey accent.

Yap, Yap, swearing, Yap, Nanny, Yap, speculation, Yap, Yap, Yap, rain, rain, rain, Yap, parade, Yap

Carry on, counselor!

[_Chap]

[_Res Ipsa]

Wait!!!! That's not a cat!!!! Derail, I tell you. Derail!!!!!!

[_Jersey Girl]

And how is your personal experience relevant to deciding whether or not the grandfather molested the daughter in this case?

I have already stated up thread that I am personally convinced by the same evidence you are looking at, that Micklesen abused K. Because I am convinced of that I interpret the documentation differently than you.

Unless, I've misread you, that's not an effective way to arrive at truth. If I'm reading you right, you are likely seeing what you're looking for.

I am using my own experience of lds royal families and of the handling of abuse cases in the church that I am personally aware of, to guage whether Ron's account is probable and if so to what extent.

Plausible, not probable.

The * Hank *situation written about in Paper Dolls is interesting because it may establish a pattern for how sex abuse is dealt with when a high ranking apostle's family members are implicated.

I think it would take more instances of sexual abuse to establish a pattern of response.

I wasn't aware of that case, were you and what do you think of the way the church handled it?

I was somewhat aware of Paper Dolls, I have no opinion on the case. I don't think that it necessarily belongs here as a sub topic because it has the ability to create a tangent from which the thread will never recover. At the same time, I think this thread is near to dying a natural death on it's own.

[_Res Ipsa]

***Plays taps***

[Guest]

I don't see it as an abrupt change of topic, Lemmie. He began his series of posts by talking a little about the Pace memo. It seems to have affected him pretty deeply at the time he read it -- long before the unraveling of his marriage. I think he sincerely believes that he and his daughter have been the victims of an ongoing conspiracy within the LDS church and that they are not the only victims. It sounds like the Pace memorandum, as well as this underground network of psychiatrists, help confirm for him his long held suspicions about Mickelsen and the LDS leadership. It makes sense to me that ends his story by saying -- here is my terrible story, and here is confirmation that it isn't just some crazy tale by one Dad.

The advocacy piece isn't new for him. There was a case sometime back where children were taken away from a family. I don't recall the details. That case spurred him to help lobby for some proposed legislation to revamp whatever the child welfare agency in Utah is called.

I've haven't seen anything in what he's said that leads me to think he's in this for the money.

I didn't catch that from the beginning of the thread, so thank you for bringing me up to speed on that, Res Ipsa.

That does put a different picture on things if he is bookmarking the beginning and the end of his story with the overall concept of the church tolerating/ignoring abuse. In that context, I withdraw my 'malicious smear' that money is involved. (now see, Chap, if you had just spoken your mind instead of indulged in sprinkling your little drops, I would have been happy to concede your point!!!!!)

While I don't think the Pace memo documents real cases of Satanic ritual abuse, I do think that the Mormon church leadership does not deal appropriately with the actual child abuse cases that occur.

Let Res Ipsa's taps play.

[_Mary]

RI... Walking Dead!!!! Noooooo. Damn.

[_Res Ipsa]

RI... Walking Dead!!!! Noooooo. Damn.

I know, right?