paracaidista508

Banned
  • Posts

    387
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by paracaidista508

  1. 2 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

    You are trying to deflect from the issue, which was your assertion that BYU's activities were "just a nice way of discouraging the reporting of sexual assault" and adding, when I suggested that BYU didn't care whether people reported sexual assault or not; that "[t]hey cared enough to look into it with an unsolicited reporting".  Yea they looked into it alright...from the standpoint of getting her on an honor code violation. That is caring, but not in the sense I thought of it as initially.

    Heres a quote from an article (link below):

    In her statement, Jenkins emphasized, "University Police enforce public law and safety on campus, not the Honor Code."

    But school documents leaked to The Tribune and police files show a BYU lieutenant reviewed Barney's rape report after an Honor Code investigator requested information on the case, and that he shared with the Honor Code investigator intimate details from the medical records of Barney's sexual-assault exam.

    The documents, verified by Provo police, indicate that the lieutenant specifically agreed to review Barney's file for evidence of consensual sexual contact — not a crime, but a violation of the Honor Code. BYU credits the code with maintaining "an atmosphere consistent with the ideals and principles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," its owner. 

    So, you can't find a source substantiating your earlier claim that Randolph "did this with both a BYU detective and a Title IX person present. Are you admitting that the claim was false?

    No I was mistaken...the BYU cop actually illegally accessed the report for the Honor code office. That's even worse than siting there with them. He went and looked it up...illegally I might add or reemphasize.
    Heres another clip:

    But BYU documents, obtained by The Tribune and verified by Provo police, show BYU police already had used the Spillman database to access those Provo police records — apparently at the behest of the Honor Code Office — before Deputy Edwin Randolph brought the file to the school.

    According to reports by an Honor Code investigator, or "counselor," Randolph had called the Honor Code Office on Nov. 20, three days before he delivered Barney's file. The counselor wrote down numerous allegations Randolph made against Barney during that call.

    The counselor wrote in her report that on the same day, she asked BYU police Lt. Aaron Rhoades to seek information on the rape case.

    Logs from the records system show Rhoades accessed Barney's case that day, Provo police reports state. According to an Honor Code Office report, Rhoades described viewing a "long police report with 3-4 supplements," and he relayed intimate details from the file to the counselor

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    The legalities are what they are--time will tell.  GRAMA seems to have a penalty for public employees disseminating that sort of info--but BYUPD officers are most likely private, not public, employees. 

    Theres no such thing as a private police agency in terms of not being accountable. Pretty much any LE agency in the US who has the power to put you in jail, access govt databases and charge you with crimes cannot possibly be private. If so, they would have no accountability. I have never heard such nonsense. Sure they are paid by a private institution, but they have state police powers. They have to obey all laws- not exempt.

    The AGO has had the case for eight months, and still no charges; so while a smackdown over general procedure may yet be coming I wouldn't hold my breath for charges against the specific officer who pulled Barney's report.  As I recall the federal government is investigating BYU generally (plus over three hundred other universities) for federal Title IX violations, not for state-law violations by BYUPD or BYUHCO.

    Wrong, again. The inquiries dropped off in the month of May, per the Provo Daily Herald.  The investigation was requested by BYU Police Chief Stott and officially began on May 26, as per an April 2017 article in the Salt Lake Tribune.  The news of the investigation broke on June 1, 2016. Yea it dropped off when the news of the investigation (wherever that came from) reached the end user, not necessarily the "news" per se.

    The timeline suggests that Stott learned there was a problem with rogue employees  (Agreed) in early-to-mid May, told his department to knock it off, and then asked DPS for an audit/investigation to find out just how pervasive the problem had been. I agree...that's why the activity dropped off. If it was on the up and up, why any change at all??

    Assuming for a moment that no criminal charges are filed and that no laws were broken:  What exactly is "out of line" about a law enforcement agency giving a private institution the information it needs to prevent itself from being fraudulently bilked into giving away a benefit whose open-market value is in the tens of thousands of dollars?

    What is out of line? Well for one, some girl having sex with some dude does not constitute fraud. Can you tell me how many honor coded people have been charged for fraud for breaking the honor code? Im betting ZERO. That is because it is not a crime. the punishment according to BYU honor code page is discipline up to and possibly including expulsion.

    Additionally, using a function of the state to further the interest of a religious organization is about as much of a violation of the 1st amendment I can think of at the moment except perhaps the police smashing the BOM printing press. it is not a crime to violate the byu honor code. It is a crime, however; for a police officer (even a "private cop" lol) to illegally access a police report and share the contents with an unauthorized end user.

     

    Using the police as a means to not only protect, but mandate a certain expression of speech reminds me of these guys:

    See the source image

    I still don't have a vendetta against BYU, but their honor code office, Title IX office and PD sure need some house cleaning. I can name some other police departments to include the one I used to work for who need an element or two from within to be purged or otherwise fixed. BYU isn't alone.

    How many more falsehoods are you going to repeat in the service of your grudge against BYU?

    https://www.sltrib.com/news/crime/2016/07/31/salt-lake-tribune-sues-says-byu-police-should-have-to-release-records/

    http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=3956084&itype=CMSID

     

  2. 1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

    I don't have a weird fixation on your job. You brought up the fact you weren't trained in pretextual phone calls. Your bringing this up implied in my mind that due to your current job,i f it was a valid technique you would know about it.

    Quite to the contrary, I was trying to limit my criticism by noting that I am not fully trained in the technique.

    I agree...if done by an LE agency or law firm. This was the alleged victim. She can do what she wants with it.

    The Salt Lake Tribune of 4/16/16 says the call was done in cooperation with law enforcement.  (“Boss of prosecutor who criticized BYU says school supports rape victims, has not interfered”)Which call?? Barney or Bishop? I agree barneys was and Bishop was not. I dont recall stating otherwise.

    They cared enough to look into it with an unsolicited reporting by Randolph.

    BYU didn’t investigate her because she had somehow “sinned” by virtue of being sexually assaulted.  They investigated her because 1) the initial tip suggested she was trying to ruin a man’s life by making a false report to law enforcement; and 2) on doing some research it became clear that immediately before her assault she was voluntarily having sexual relations on her living room couch. Still unsolicited... Randolph decides he needs to go to bat for a 39 year old married dude who is having biblical knowledge of a 19 year old girl and all he provides is a police report which anyone can get through the proper channels? How much of an idiot is randolph esp when nothing prohibited the suspect from doing it himself??? 

    Already explained re the stealing of a report. He had no business as an LE officer for transferring that report to BYU. Those are strictly need to know only. The suspect could have done that, but he did not.

    You’ve alleged BYU of mishandling info from the Spillman database, which I will come back to and which even if true doesn’t conform your lie about the “stolen” report.  And no, Randolph didn’t “steal” the report; Seidu gave it to him. Utah County Sheriff Jim Tracy confirmed that as a “special function officer” Randolph was off-clock when he turned the report over to BYU-Title IX and thus was acting as a citizen, not a law enforcement officer.  That’s why, contra the lie you peddled earlier, Randolph was NOT disciplined by his Internal Affairs section for ferrying the report to BYU. 

    It is not a lie- at best it is semantics. Why not just tell his buddy to go do it himself? Any cop who injects himself into an investigation for a friend is asking for every bad thing that can happen- to happen.

    BYU PD detective was sitting right there. He knew they were not supposed to use that report. It was none of of their business. They did it anyway

    Source?  My understanding of the 11/23/15 meeting was that it was attended by Randolph, a friend who was also a BYU employee, another friend of his, and BYU Title IX office staff.  Again—the chain of custody for this document came from Seidu himself. And the BYU cop accessed it too. 

    By the way, BYUPD did access the Spillman record of the Provo report per HCO’s request on the day Randolph contacted them.  They did not distribute the written report; they merely orally reported some of the salient details back to HCO.  And one might argue it was very much BYU’s business if a student was trying to perpetrate a financial fraud against the university, which fundamentally is what Barney was doing. Well you just sourced it yourself. I read the same thing. Sitting right there is semantics if thats how you want to be. They communicated with each other and the BYU cop looked up the report for the morality folks. Im having trouble seeing how accessing a legal document in order to enforce a civil honor-code agreement is even legal in the first place. Must not be since the DOJ and State of Utah is all over BYU about this right now.

    Why do you think when this came out Provo PD was like how they heck these guys get the police report??? Come to find out BYU had access to the Spillman database. Apparently they are not supposed to so that is under investigation. Additionally, once Provo PD got wind of this they found BYU pd had accessed thousands of their reports for unknown reasons...that will be another juicy finding I am sure. So Provo looks into this and finds out BYU PD accessed the sexual assault report three days prior to Randolph delivering the paper copy to them. Right after Randolph calls them and tells them of the sex assault allegation and wanting to report an honor code violation. 

    Provo PD got wind of this because on 11/25/15 BYUHCO calles Barney and asked her to discuss recent alleged honor code violations.  Barney lied and replied that she hadn’t violated the honor code, whereupon she was confronted with the police report provided BYU Randolph two days earlier.  Barney called Provo PD to report witness intimidation and ask how the heck BYU was able to get solid evidence of her deceit.  That was the cause of Detective Webb’s investigation.

    BYU’s own chief of police requested in May of 2016 that the state Department of Public Safety audit BYUPD’s use of Spillman records, and Provo PD immediately joined that request.  The investigation was finished in mid-2017 showing that, yes, BYU has accessed reports for over 6,000 cases over an eighteen-month period; and the circumstances behind each and every one of those records being pulled still hadn’t been completely weeded out.   Nearly a year later there have still been no charges and no adverse actions against BYUPD’s Spillman access. Interestingly, once news of the investigation broke, the inquiries into the database more than halved. I wonder why?

    BTW- what adult living in the real world has time or the inclination to report some honor code violation to BYU? 

    Apparently, either someone with strong community ties to BYU who doesn’t like the idea of his tithing dollars going to subsidize the education (Provo PD conclusion) or someone with strong community ties to BYU who was concerned about the pattern of exploitation of/by BYU athletes that was alluded to in the report (Utah County Sheriff Internal Affairs and Utah County Attorney’s Office conclusion).  I dont like the idea of my tithing dollars subsidizing a police agency that is out of line either....and why are our tithing dollars paying for kids edu?? Man I need to look into that. Can my kid get a  tithing scholarship if he attends another university??..that is something else. 

    By the way:  IA cleared Randolph of any wrong-doing vis a vis the report.  The pending investigation was coming from POST, which was accusing him of having lied to the Provo PD regarding his motives for relaying the report.

     

  3. 6 hours ago, anatess2 said:

    Bowtie police.  Wow.  That's what you got out of it.  And that, my friend, is the perfect example of how God had to give us the "letter of the law" because you are too blind to understand its spirit.  And like I said repeatedly in this thread.  This is not about the bowtie.

    The bowtie police is an example of how in various ward we have made up rules or whatever you want to call it. I get it that you intended to teach your kid that church leaders are never to be questioned. I get that. That in combination with made up rules is what makes letter of the law issues relevant. Too often leadership within and without the church decide to make up their own rules knowing that since they are the boss this is the way it is....no one questions me. Later, the kids grow up to do the same thing. Thus policies are set forth so that leadership can make calls wish are consistent with church policy. When there is inconsistency in seemingly standard rules (and dress code should be standardized) then it tends to lead to confusion down the road.

  4. 36 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

    I can't tell yet if you're purposefully evading my question or if you just missed it, so I'll ask again.

    You talked about Randolph.  I was asking about BYU's HONOR CODE OFFICE.  Not the police.  Not the Title 9 office.  Not the BYU Police.  The HONOR CODE OFFICE.

    As for Wilson, I don't see how that makes any difference.  You said that NO OFFICER resigns unless they are guilty. 

    No Im not evading...just missed it apparently.

    The honor code office apparently has been working hand in hand with BYU PD. I find it highly unlikely that BYU PD has not educated the honor code office about if, when and how they can get access to a police report for any reason. That said, the honor code office likely has a policy in place that tells employees when they may request a report from the BYU pd or any pd for that matter. If BYU does not have a policy in place (at that time) re report sharing etc...then they are severely mistaken. I started my police career over 25 yrs ago and report sharing under any circumstance except official is pretty much illegal. Any LE agency worth its salt would have a policy clearly drawing a line....maybe BYU didn't and that will be a problem for them.

    Randolph knew what he was doing was wrong and so did BYU PD/ Honor code office.

    Wilson was a one off so I'll clarify....
    Under normal circumstances, a cop who is accused of wrongdoing in a fairly benign case esp not related to use of force, will not resign in the face of an investigation.

    Generally how that works is they committed a violation of sorts, if it is serious enough to merit termination, the accused will be called in to internal investigators and told that on such and such a day, we will submit the report to the chief. Typically a finding showing you did the thing you are accused of, the chief has in  the past terminated employees for this. Their lawyer will then walk them out and tell them to resign so they don't have a termination and revocation of a certification on their record. this allows them to get employment elsewhere after the dust settles- generally. I have seen this at least 30-40 times and there is usually no connection to whether or not they are eligible to retire.

    As for you not seeing how the Wilson reasoning makes any difference??? Well apparently you value your own employment over the physical safety of your long time friends. Cops are different, we are willing to die for our friends and also dont want them to be killed or injured because of our actions. No cop expects you to understand that so I wont ask you to agree with Wilsons rationale.

  5. 2 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

    1.  This weird fixation on the details of my professional qualifications and training is odd, but I'll play along.  Yes, I probably won't get "trained" well enough to do it.  I may well at some point be "trained" in the sense of getting a two-hour crash course on the basics, similar to those I have received on--for example--NICHD interviewing protocols.

    I don't have a weird fixation on your job. You brought up the fact you weren't trained in pretextual phone calls. Your bringing this up implied in my mind that due to your current job,i f it was a valid technique you would know about it.

    2.  Err . . . I'm surprised I have to explain this to you; but the point of these sorts of interviews is to get a confession that can be used--wait for it--to throw the rapist in jail.  Not to get good stuff you can leak to the public in an attempt to embarass third-party institutions you're already predisposed to dislike.  Barney's alleged assailant is a free man; ergo, her "pretext interview" failed.  And "pretext interviews" were the subject under discussion before you jumped in and hijacked the discussion with your vendetta against me and against BYU.

    I agree...if done by an LE agency or law firm. This was the alleged victim. She can do what she wants with it. As for a vendetta against BYU...I have none other than I find their handling of this to be way out of line.

    Okay, let's review the lies; both from your earlier post and from your more recent one:

    1.   Also, co mingling title 9 and honor code folks is just a nice way of discouraging the reporting of sexual assault. 

    Maybe more of a distortion than an outright lie.  BYU couldn't have cared three straws whether Barney or any other BYU student reported sexual assault.  Their preoccupation was with ensuring that Barney, who had committed to living chastely in exchange for a college education that the Church was subsidizing to the tune of $20-$30K per year, wasn't dealing falsely with them.  

    They cared enough to look into it with an unsolicited reporting by Randolph. Apparently he gave them a 3 day heads up and BYU PD accessed the Spillman Database to pull up the sexual assault report (that access is likely illegal BTW as they had no involvement in the investigation) from Provo PD. BYU PD shard it with Title IX office which is also illegal. Three days later, in marche Randolph with a couple other people to report Barney for an honor code violation. He did this with both a BYU detective and Title IX person present. 
    As a Deputy (corrextions guy I guess so not a real cop) he knows better than to take up causes of people who are currently being prosecuted for felonies within their own jurisdiction. What kind of an idiot is this guy?

    2.  The cop got disciplined for essentially stealing a policecreport and delivering it to byu.

    Two lies in one.  

    a)  He (Randolph) was disciplined for maintaining social contact with an individual who also happened to be on supervised probation by the agency Randolph worked for.

    b)  He did not steal the police report.  The defendant, Seidu, who had received a copy of the report as part of his pre-trial discovery, passed it on to Randolph.  

    Already explained re the stealing of a report. He had no business as an LE officer for transferring that report to BYU. Those are strictly need to know only. The suspect could have done that, but he did not.

    3.  Byu then used it against the girl.

    Lie.  BYUHCO never got a chance to "use it", because Barney never engaged with the HCO fact-finding process.  HCO received information that Barney may have engaged in voluntary sexual relations prior to her assault--information they could have acted upon after getting it orally from Randolph, Seidu, or Barney's own roommates; regardless of whether they ever saw or retained the report.  (There's no "fruit of a poisonous tree" doctrine at the HCO.)  HCO asked Barney to appear before them to explain herself.  She got a one-semester extension from HCO due to the pending litigation, and then withdrew rather than face the music when BYU declined to give her a second extension.  

    4.  BYU used it and they knew it was stolen.

    Lie.  BYU didn't know it was stolen, because it wasn't stolen (see above).  Nor did they have any immediate way of knowing whether it was prevented from further dissemination under a Rule 16(e) or 16(f) order.

    BYU PD detective was sitting right there. He knew they were not supposed to use that report. It was none of of their business. They did it anyway. 

    Why do you think when this came out Provo PD was like how they heck these guys get the police report??? Come to find out BYU had access to the Spillman database. Apparently they are not supposed to so that is under investigation. Additionally, once Provo PD got wind of this they found BYU pd had accessed thousands of their reports for unknown reasons...that will be another juicy finding I am sure. So Provo looks into this and finds out BYU PD accessed the sexual assault report three days prior to Randolph delivering the paper copy to them. Right after Randolph calls them and tells them of the sex assault allegation and wanting to report an honor code violation. BTW- what adult living in the real world has time or the inclination to report some honor code violation to BYU? 

    5.  The deputy resigned his certification and retired. No innocent cop does that. I was a cop for 20 yrs and the only ones who went out like that was the ones who wanted resume preservation.

    Not necessarily a lie, but worth noting:  Randolph isn't the only person in this sorry little debacle who acted questionably, then chose to cut their losses and withdraw in the face of pending institutional disciplinary proceedings.

     

    On Edit BYU dos have access to Spillman database. The problem is two-fold:
    1- Why did they access the sexual assault report?
    2- Why did BYU PD make thousands of inquiries in the database. That is under investigation by the state.

  6. 1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

    The written report repeatedly said he "took the report to BYU".  I didn't hear how they knew it was "stolen".  Is the Honor Code office trained in police procedures?  Did they know that seeing a police report that was handed to them by a police officer would be illegal? These are honest questions.  What did they know?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/12/01/darren-wilson-resigned-from-the-ferguson-police-department-what-will-he-do-now/?utm_term=.03728cf9856f

    http://www.ibtimes.com/where-darren-wilson-now-update-ferguson-police-officer-who-shot-michael-brown-2398658

    Now, I do believe Randolph did wrong.  And, YES, he should have gotten terminated.  But the blanket statement you said -- it is lacking.

    Any LE Officer (Randolph included) knows that if you get a hold of a police report of an "in-progress" investigation....no matter how and then unofficially transfer it to someone else who likely has no legal authority to view it is in violation of the law. All cops know this. Especially when the suspect is your friend. Let the friend take it to the cops, not you. This is why he initially got charged with witness tampering. BYU used it to kick the girl out of school prior to trial.

    As for Wilson resigning...he did so AFTER he was cleared of any wrong doing by a grand jury. He cited his presence in Ferguson would be a hazard to his fellow officers. Judging by what was going on in Ferguson at the time I agree with him. His case is extreme. The BYU thing....not so much. Randolph left because his case got referred to the POST board by his very own sheriff...his employer.

    If your own boss submits your case to the POST board, that means they not only want to fire you, but it is a means to ensure you never get employed in that state or other states in LE ever again. Usually it is because you are a liability, corrupt, incompetent or all three.

  7. 31 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

    I’m not saying you’re a liar, insofar as I doubt you’re deliberately making stuff up.  But you’re certainly repeating lies.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.heraldextra.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/court-audio-contradicts-intentions-of-deputy-involved-in-byu-student/article_c8442c96-b100-54a9-84d4-8e0a0d1f3be1.amp.html

    may as well call me a liar then as I don’t accidentally make stuff up. Nothing is made up here. That deputy stole that report. BYU used it and they knew it was stolen. They know the protocol for getting these reports and when it lands in your lap without you requesting it or having the victim bring it to you??? Well that is a stolen report and It is unethical to use it.

    Re the link you referenced. The deputy resigned his certification and retired. No innocent cop does that. I was a cop for 20 yrs and the only ones who went out like that was the ones who wanted resume preservation.

     

     

  8. 32 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

    1.  I work in child protection, yes.  Not closely enough to actually interview victims; but closely enough that I often watch the video recordings of the interviews and have to present them to third parties.

    2.  The point, your apparent anti-BYU bile aside, is that the technique doesn’t always get a prosecutor where he wants to be vis a vis a jury.

    1...you will never get trained in it. Be a sex crimes detective and you may.

    2. I do believe I said it does not always result in conviction or something to that effect. Doesn’t invalidate the method

     BYU means  nothing to me. I just thought their handling was so... 1850 ish.  Any modern university has had protocol in place for a long time as to how to handle this stuff and how to legally get police reports if needed.

  9. 10 minutes ago, Vort said:

    Be specific. What did BYU do that was "unethical"?

    Knowingly accepting privileged info from the cop to honor code the girl. Also, co mingling title 9 and honor code folks is just a nice way of discouraging the reporting of sexual assault. 

    The cop got disciplined for essentially stealing a policecreport and delivering it to byu. Byu then used it against the girl. That is not ethical....the ends does not justify the means..well maybe at byu it does.

  10. 8 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

    I’ve never been trained on that technique; but the doubletalk (at least, as contained within this description of it) seems remarkable:  1) confront the suspect using language specifically calculated so as to *not* elicit a denial, and then 2) argue at trial that the absence of a denial constitutes guilt. :rolleyes:

    By the way, Madi Barney did the same thing to her rapist; and he was still acquitted at trial.

    Are you a sex crimes detective? If not, why in the world would you expect to be trained in confrontational calls?

    Funny you mention Barney. So what with the aquittal...so was OJ. We did find out that byu was extremely unethical in the handling of the case. Thanks for bringing that up. I never even heard of it and had a good read. Byu is not impressive in their handling of it.

  11. Just now, NightSG said:

    Gundecking the paperwork.

    Ok...don't get me started on scouting lol....best thing ever to happen is for us to get out of it. Amazingly I was a big scout supporter till I got high enough in the program to see rampant fraud.....back to home teaching,,,ministry whatever

  12. 5 hours ago, Grunt said:

    Or, more likely, just made the whole thing up.

    Could be...problem is it is believable. Since it is believable, what does that say about our culture...good, bad or whatever?  We even had an example presented by an exalted member of this forum of a bishop who is the bowtie police and no one doubts her.

  13. We will see how this new program works out. As for the old one, well quotas, stats, numbers, "the other ward is better than  us" etc just doesnt work. It is no different than a workplace quota. Once you start mandating a level of production and then punish, reassign chastise or whatever for failure to meet that stat; people get turned off. Esp when they start telling you just a phone call, a hallway chat or just dropping off a treat suffice. That just let's us know the actual visit isn't really all that important. People just start doing whatever it takes to get the stat because all that  is important is that we get the boxes checked so the eq and bp presidents dont get chewed out.

    I had not had a ht  visit for almost three yrs. Didn't even know who they were and frankly didn't care. Was asked one time how I liked my HTs  and I replied I didn't know who they were.  Found out they had not missed a visit in a couple years..the ones prior who I didn't know either apparently visited us about 75% of time. Lol. I'm sure there are more like that.

    Will see what the new one is all about.

  14. I have no idea if this guy is guilty or not. Interesting article reference confrontational phone calls by the police. Although the accuser is not a cop, her confrontation of the accused was pulled off in a manner like she has read up on this technique. Not perfect, but she did a good job. The agency I worked for routinely uses these calls to lock suspects into statements, get confessions etc. They do not always work, but they often do and people go to prison.

    Enjoy:

    https://www.denver-colorado-criminal-lawyer.com/colorado-state-sex-crimes/attacking-the-investigation-of-date-acquaintance-sexual-assault-the-pretext-phone-call-part-ii-of-ii

     

  15. On 2/26/2018 at 5:53 PM, JohnsonJones said:

     

    There is a blessing though.  Because of this experience, when called to leadership finally, I can sympathize with the many Hispanics in our ward (and even our stake).  When they talk about the blatant discrimination in the LDS church and point out to the fact that almost NO Hispanics are High Priests in our area, despite around 1/3 of the membership being Hispanic, or that the entire High Council and Stake Leadership is white...and to add insult to injury, that even the Bishop of the Spanish Branch is now white...I can understand a little bit of the pain and anguish they feel when it appears that others are being placed in positions...NOT because of righteousness or any other item (as I said, probably 1/3 of those or more who were High Priests during my time as an Elder are either inactive or out of the church completely...as in apostasy...great call on those with strong testimonies...NOT)...but because of who they are related to, or how much people like them, or any other reason with the added inclusion that they are WHITE...yes...I can now sympathize with them.

     

    We have Hispanic branches here where the leadership is partly white....branches that have been here for half a century or at least seems that way. Strange. 

     

    As for your commentary on young vs old elders and rank envy of sorts. I'm an old elder and I don't care. I don't thi k anyone cares except a few and their wives who view church positions as status. They can have that, I'll spend more time with my family thank you very much.

  16. 2 hours ago, NightSG said:

    I think the goal is to slowly pull everybody into one meeting, then announce that they're eliminating that one too and Sacrament Meeting will extend to fill the time. 

     

    Longer sacrament because 1 hr and 15 min of screaming crying kids isn't enough. My current ward.....oh so loud I don't even bother to pay attention any  more. Can't hear. 

  17. Well now I'm outta Mormonhub jail...that said, I have had time to reflect on communications and discovered something irrelevant. I can thank Vort for calling me worse than Hitler in order for something to be learned. Not by you guys...by me.

     

     

    A few days ago on another thread I was called “worse than Hitler” by a forum member. My visceral hate for Hitler caused me to respond with some profanity and I got sent to jail.

    Well MormonHub jail was a good thing, because I learned something this past week which has liberated me.

    So this week I was going through some stuff and found my patriarchal blessing which I probably have not read in decades and never really put much stock in it. For the most part it is very non-specific and relatively free of anything one can point to and know what they are supposed to do with the info.  I read it and mind you this was given to me before I even went into the military… one line stuck out.

    “you will rise to positions of responsibility and bring great credit to your name and your country.”

    There was no mention in the entire blessing of a mission…not one reference. While the statement cited above does not say I was supposed to be in the Army, it totally validates the service. Anyone who has been in the Army or has read an award citation written by an Army Officer will nearly always see the two words, “great credit.” It is an Army thing. My patriarch would not know that phrase because he had no more to do with the military than to watch old war movies or whatever. That phrase is there for a reason.

    Anyway- so this week has been good. My response to being compared to Hitler (jokingly I guess) and the timeout I got for it was a very worthwhile investment.  

     

  18. 6 hours ago, Grunt said:

    I don’t.  Nobody has mentioned that I should.  

    One thing to keep in mind is the further you get from Utah, Arizona or Idaho, the less people stress over this stuff. as you can see, on this forum we cant even agree on what the church manuals tell us. Arguments are won here by whoever shouts out you are disobedient first. Kinda like calling someone  a racist in a political argument they are not winning.

    The manual says it is not a pre-condition to participating in sacrament preparation or admin. That said, whoever mentioned (Bishop discretion) is correct. The bishop can add to the standard for a variety of reasons. In places like Utah or other extremely Mormon populated areas...they are very strict about it. Even though it is not a rule, it is the culture. Growing up, I never even owned any color of dress shirt other than white. My parents would have left me at home rather than darken the door of the chapel in anything but a white shirt. My father didn't even own any color of dress shirt other than white. Probably because he was transiting so much between work and church stuff it was easier.

    Anyway- the comment about you not hearing about it because you are new is fairly correct. Also, you are on the east coast. There are like two Mormons there so no one wants to get anyone mad and not come back. Where I'm at entire wards can be as small a boundary as 1 square mile. If you don't show up, no one notices. 

    I usually wear white shirts. For a few years I wore dress shirts from an old job I had. Didn't want them to go to waste in my closet because they were not needed anymore. I did have one person say something to me about it and I told them to go buy me a white one and I would wear it if they cared so much. They never did.

    Wear whatever color dress shirt you like- the book says white isn't mandatory. Temple is probably the only exception.

  19. 1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

    That's interesting that you KNOW I think I'm funny.  If that's what you got from my intent to "analyze this" then yeah, we're not talking on the same planet so the discussion is pointless.

    So, if one bishop in the Church is enough to leave a lasting impression (and I'm going to assume you also mean only 1 impressionable early RM), then you believe that's enough for Apostles and GA's to stop saying it is a Young Man's duty to serve a mission? 

    Im answering your question of how many people does it take to leave a lasting impression on the early rm and I said, "1 if its the Bishop."  I dont believe i said anything in regards to justifying not going at all. Where did i say that in the response? 

    Eh... pointless question really in light of our respective planets.  No need to answer.

     

    So what did you think of the two papers?