MormonLeaks defends Bishop leak, FMH responds

[Reuben]

In defense of releasing the recording:

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

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.

Katie L at FMH responds:

http://www.feministmormonhousewives.org ... recording/

I am distressed yet again, this time with MormonLeaks’ official statement on their decision to publish the audio recording of the conversation between Joseph L. Bishop and an anonymous woman who confronted him about his past abuses - without the woman’s consent.

[...]

It is not justice if it is pursued by violating the vulnerable.

This woman has the right to control her own narrative. She has the right to share what is disclosed and when. She should have been offered the opportunity to consent before the leak went live - and if her answer was no, it should never have been published.

Would she have consented? Probably not.

From Peggy Fletcher Stack's excellent article at the Salt Lake Tribune:

In an interview earlier this week, she told The Salt Lake Tribune she did not release to MormonLeaks a copy of her recorded conversation. She had shared the recording with several people, she said, and someone gave it to MormonLeaks without her consent.

She said the release may have undermined settlement negotiations she was having with Mormon officials.

Corroboration from the Deseret News:

MormonLeaks released the recording on Monday without the permission of the woman, who told the Deseret News she was unhappy with the release, which she said created problems for her.

The Deseret News leaves out the settlement negotiations, but it's possible that they didn't know about them.

[Not Buying It]

They are right. However important this story is in so many ways - it was her story. She was evidently pursuing a settlement, she has now lost some of her leverage, because what the Church really wanted was for the story to remain hidden, and now that it is out there they don’t have as much to gain by making a settlement.

Now that it is out, though, it has demonstrated without a doubt that the Church is a cold, cruel, self-interested, back-stabbing, duplicitous organization that will viciously attack the credibility of a sexual assault victim even when it knows there is evidence for her claim. When they released their carefully worded statement undercutting the victim’s credibility, they knew Bishop had confessed to the BYU police to asking her to expose her breasts, as now reported in the Trib. Yet with their statement, and then further with the Deseret News, they sought to sow doubt in the minds of members as to whether any impropriety was committed by Bishop and to besmirch the character of the victim. And Bishop’s lawyer son is a slimeball, because he knew his father did had confessed to the BYU Police, and yet publicly savaged the victim’s character with no mention of his father’s confession.

But the story should never have been released without the victim’s permission, however much I like seeing the Church exposed.

[RubinHighlander]

But the story should never have been released without the victim’s permission, however much I like seeing the Church exposed.

I agree. It may have hurt her financial future, but it's a great benefit to the public to have these events out on the table. The days of the corporation hiding all it's secrets and protecting all it's uninspired upper-class white male dweebs (at the expense of it's TBMs) is hopefully and rapidly diminishing.

[Mormorrisey]

What I appreciated about Katie L, given that she gave a rant for the ages about how victims of sexual assault are dealt with by the church, is her consistency. And despite Mormonleaks views to the contrary, Katie L is bang on here too. The victim HAS been re-victimized all over again by the leak without her consent.

Again, this is just tragic all around. Especially by the fact that clearly there are more victims that are out there that have either been bought off, or are afraid to speak out. Just horrific.

[Reuben]

They are right. However important this story is in so many ways - it was her story. She was evidently pursuing a settlement, she has now lost some of her leverage, because what the Church really wanted was for the story to remain hidden, and now that it is out there they don’t have as much to gain by making a settlement.

Looks like you're right. She's suing the church now because settlement talks have broken down:

http://fox13now.com/2018/03/22/woman-wh ... ds-church/

Meanwhile, Ryan McKnight says they had good, undisclosed reasons for releasing the recording:

https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/comment ... nt/dw4eyk7

I am not going to address it right now but I hope to in the near future. I believe that when the full story comes out, people will understand exactly what happened and why we did what we did.

For now the best I can tell you is to refer to our official statement on the matter which says that we received the tape without any restrictions on publication.

I understand why this opens us up to criticism at this time and, while I don't enjoy the criticism, I respect that people are asking legitimate questions.

I wonder if forcing a lawsuit is part of the reason. Maybe the point is to encourage some of the other women Bishop abused to speak up. Such a sucky and dangerous way for it to happen, though.

[Red Ryder]

First off, I agree it is her story and agree with sentiments made above. However I'm going to disagree on different grounds and side with MormonLeaks on releasing the leak.

She released the audio to other people. Once that was done she gave up control of her story because she couldn't prevent anyone who had it from leaking it. Not were there known restrictions when MormonLeaks validated the information.

Sometimes the best strategy is to leak even if publicly saying you don't want to. She has more leverage now with a civil lawsuit because of the discovery phase. If there truly is a cover up (which I believe there is) then the church will be even more ready to settle than allow for the cover up to come to light. If she has a good attorney they will use this leverage to get her more money in a settlement than allow for discovery to unearth even more dead bodies.

It will be interesting to see if we get the rest of the story from MormonLeaks. But something tells me she will still get compensation from the church. She does mention in the audio she deserves compensation. The church will settle eventually. They always do.

[RubinHighlander]

The church will settle eventually. They always do.

And no TBM will even think about how their tithing is the funding for paying off the victims of these high ranking misbehaving priesthood holders. It won't come out of the profits of the 70's or 14 prophets that ordained them!

[wtfluff]

The church will settle eventually. They always do.

This will be interesting to watch. The longer LDS-Inc. waits to settle, the more people will be deposed: Like Emeritus GA Robert E. Wells.

Of course the GA's are accustomed to lying, so they won't have a problem lying under oath...

[oliblish]

Looks like you're right. She's suing the church now because settlement talks have broken down:

http://fox13now.com/2018/03/22/woman-wh ... ds-church/

This shows that the only reason the church was in settlement talks was they thought they could write out a check to keep this hidden. Now that the information is out, there is no reason to continue with talks.

In the end I wonder if this leak will result in more money for the victim or less? I am sure the church will still pay quite a bit to keep this out of the court system. They will probably still insist that the details of any settlement will be confidential.

[Hagoth]

Makes me wonder how many cases like this there were that we have never heard because they were settled and non-disclosure agreements signed. This poor lady deserves to be well compensated, and at the same time, the church deserves to have these things shouted from the rooftops.

[Palerider]

Makes me wonder how many cases like this there were that we have never heard because they were settled and non-disclosure agreements signed. This poor lady deserves to be well compensated, and at the same time, the church deserves to have these things shouted from the rooftops.

The church of the latter-day Harvey Weinstein....

What a grope, uh, I mean group....

[moksha]

If this lady was to sue the Church in the State of Utah, her efforts would be futile. She would need to file the case outside the Church's sphere of influence.

[wtfluff]

The plot continues... To continue.

Statement on Behalf of the Victim in Joseph L. Bishop Audio Recording

The following is statement written by the victim whose voice is heard in the audio recording of former Mission President, Joseph L. Bishop, admitting to inappropriate relations with women.

I’m the woman in the recording with Joseph L. Bishop. My identity will be revealed when I file the lawsuit.

First, although MormonLeaks did release my recording prior to my consent, Mr. McKnight and Mr. Dodge support my cause. It is my belief that they were concerned about ALL of the victims that may become forgotten if my story was silenced by a settlement and non-disclosure agreement. I cannot fault them for that. Having this story leaked has actually helped me. I was struggling with the settlement. Part of me wanted to take it and part of me didn’t. They made it easy for me. I didn’t have to choose. Some have stated that I am heroic and brave. I am neither of those things. I interviewed my rapist because I was pissed off. The church told me I wasn’t entitled to know what action, if any, had been taken in my reporting his raping me to several church leaders for 30 years. I was fed up. It was neither brave nor heroic.

Part of me wanted this to go away quietly and a bigger part of me wanted to scream from the top of the mountain what he did to me. Now I get to scream!

Even if the leak of the recording was prior to my consent, I do not agree that these men are re-victimizing me. I don’t think they would have released the recording without giving it serious thought and weighing the consequences heavily.

I look forward to sharing more of the story in the coming weeks.

https://mormonleaks.io/newsroom/2018/03 ... hop-audio/

[Reuben]

Good, good, good. I'm glad she's determined to shout it from the tops of the mountains. It needs to be done, and to be done by someone who has become strong enough.

I still maintain that it was dangerous.

[Rob4Hope]

WOW,...this thing is blowing up.

[Reuben]

Some have stated that I am heroic and brave. I am neither of those things. I interviewed my rapist because I was pissed off. The church told me I wasn’t entitled to know what action, if any, had been taken in my reporting his raping me to several church leaders for 30 years. I was fed up. It was neither brave nor heroic.

Some recent events in my life have driven home to me the fact that bravery never, ever feels brave. It's often terrifying, in fact. I think anger is also valid, especially when without it the terror would keep you from acting.

[moksha]

The lawsuit really should be based on whether she was harmed by this rape or molestation. Of course, there is the grief that was caused to her all these years by the Church stonewalling these reported cases.

From a utilitarian point of view, the good that it will do for the bulk of Mormons to not let this pattern of behavior and blind oversight continue unabated outweighs an individual's right to an easy six-figure settlement.