MTC President Sexually Assaulted Sister Missionaries

[_consiglieri]

I'm kind of surprised that in the statement that they didn't say that Joseph Bishop is a few months shy of being 86.

Brilliant!!!

[_Res Ipsa]

Here’s the write-up in the DN: https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900 ... l?user=app

[_Sammy Jankins]

MormonLeaks™ Statement Regarding the Publication of Joseph L. Bishop Audio Recording

The following is concerning the publication of an audio recording of former Mission President, Joseph L. Bishop, admitting to inappropriate relations with women.

MormonLeaks™ deeply values the privacy of victims of sexual assault. We prepared the recording of Joseph L. Bishop while coordinating information between multiple sources, none of whom were the accuser and it was received with no restrictions of publication. We verified its authenticity and found it to be in line with our mission of “starting and expanding news reporting, public commentary, and criticism related to Mormonism” given Bishop’s blatant on tape admission to inappropriate behavior while in a leadership position within the Mormon Church. We eliminated all identifying information related to the victim, as is standard protocol, in order to protect her privacy and safety.

https://mormonleaks.io/newsroom/2018/03 ... recording/

But they left her voice in it. I disagree with the decision to go ahead without her consent. I assume it’s only a matter of time until someone looking to defend the church identifies her. It should have been her decision.

I assume it’s also possible that they are lying because she wanted it leaked but for legal reasons she needs to deny she was involved.

[_Shulem]

Joseph Bishop
Wikipedia

Allegation of attempted sexual assault

[_Xenophon]

But they left her voice in it. I disagree with the decision to go ahead without her consent. I assume it’s only a matter of time until someone looking to defend the church identifies her. It should have been her decision.

I assume it’s also possible that they are lying because she wanted it leaked but for legal reasons she needs to deny she was involved.

I think this is about where I am at as well. I'm torn because I think this level of transparency is required of an organization like the LDS church(even if it is being forced on them) but if the accuser really didn't want this leaked I don't agree with MormonLeaks decision to share it anyway. If she was content to let it be, I'm inclined to think her desire trumps mine for openness.

Even if we all agree that Bishop clearly engaged in some illicit/illegal activity, I worry about this woman's privacy.

[_Res Ipsa]

One thing that jumped out at me was the statement that the statute of limitations for rape is four years, while the law that Consig pointed out says there is no SOL for rape. I’m guessing that the statute was amended between the date of the offense and today. I took a stab at researching the legislative history, but the online version doesn’t seem to have the complete history listed. Any of you Utah legal beagles with access to a print version willing to take a look?

[_Dr Exiled]

But they left her voice in it. I disagree with the decision to go ahead without her consent. I assume it’s only a matter of time until someone looking to defend the church identifies her. It should have been her decision.

I assume it’s also possible that they are lying because she wanted it leaked but for legal reasons she needs to deny she was involved.

I think this is about where I am at as well. I'm torn because I think this level of transparency is required of an organization like the LDS church(even if it is being forced on them) but if the accuser really didn't want this leaked I don't agree with MormonLeaks decision to share it anyway. If she was content to let it be, I'm inclined to think her desire trumps mine for openness.

Even if we all agree that Bishop clearly engaged in some illicit/illegal activity, I worry about this woman's privacy.

I would like to assume that mormonleaks got the recording from her, through channels, and that she is denying having done so for fear of a defamation lawsuit. My guess is that she was frustrated at not acting sooner and feeling that the tape being leaked was her only alternative to get some sort of justice in her eyes. I wonder if she made a settlement demand and then found out that her legal rights had long since expired, then passed the recording through channels to mormonleaks?

[Guest]

I would like to assume that mormonleaks got the recording from her, through channels, and that she is denying having done so for fear of a defamation lawsuit. My guess is that she was frustrated at not acting sooner and feeling that the tape being leaked was her only alternative to get some sort of justice in her eyes. I wonder if she made a settlement demand and then found out that her legal rights had long since expired, then passed the recording through channels to mormonleaks?

It is possible and I certainly hope it isn't the case that it was published against her will. Yours and others theories on her denial are plausible but I think it still puts this story in a weird position. Perhaps with time we will get some more clarity.

As others have noted our best hope at completing the picture is for this to get picked up nationally and have other victims (of which there appear to be plenty) come forward with their stories.

edit: mobile keyboards are not my friend

[_Dr Exiled]

One thing that jumped out at me was the statement that the statute of limitations for rape is four years, while the law that Consig pointed out says there is no SOL for rape. I’m guessing that the statute was amended between the date of the offense and today. I took a stab at researching the legislative history, but the online version doesn’t seem to have the complete history listed. Any of you Utah legal beagles with access to a print version willing to take a look?

The statute of limitations for aggravated sexual assault crimes changed in 2013. Prior to that it was 4 years. See State of Utah v. Toombs, 380 P.3d 390 (Utah.App. 2016).

[_Res Ipsa]

One thing that jumped out at me was the statement that the statute of limitations for rape is four years, while the law that Consig pointed out says there is no SOL for rape. I’m guessing that the statute was amended between the date of the offense and today. I took a stab at researching the legislative history, but the online version doesn’t seem to have the complete history listed. Any of you Utah legal beagles with access to a print version willing to take a look?

The statute of limitations for aggravated sexual assault crimes changed in 2013. Prior to that it was 4 years. See State of Utah v. Toombs, 380 P.3d 390 (Utah.App. 2016).

Thanks!