The MTC Abuse Story


Guest LiterateParakeet
 Share

Recommended Posts

I was in the MTC at the same time these events reportedly occured in 1984. I previously  posted on this board that I thought I knew exactly who this sister was based on some very bad experiences that I and my mission district had with her. I have since spoken to some of my mission district members and we all agree that it is probably her. We believe the name of the sister was J*** H****s.

If the woman who has made these allegations turns out to be the former "Hermana/Sister H****s" when she reveals herself, I would suggest that people be cautious about throwing your well meant support her way until all the evidence comes forward. Just be patient, the story is just beginning and there may be more unfortunate casualties.

[Mod edit:  While the supplemental info is appreciated, for the sake of avoiding libel in case we’re wrong let’s avoid putting specific names to the accuser until we have a more solid confirmation as to her identity.  Thanks—JAG]

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
14 hours ago, clwnuke said:

I was in the MTC at the same time these events reportedly occured in 1984. I previously  posted on this board that I thought I knew exactly who this sister was based on some very bad experiences that I and my mission district had with her. I have since spoken to some of my mission district members and we all agree that it is probably her. We believe the name of the sister was J*** H****s.

If the woman who has made these allegations turns out to be the former "Hermana/Sister H****s" when she reveals herself, I would suggest that people be cautious about throwing your well meant support her way until all the evidence comes forward. Just be patient, the story is just beginning and there may be more unfortunate casualties.

And what if it's not Sister H****s????   

[Mod edit:  Let’s avoid putting specific names to the accuser until we have solid confirmation.  Thanks—JAG]

Edited by LiterateParakeet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, LiterateParakeet said:

And what if it's not Sister H****s????   

LP:  What if it is all made up?  Have you even considered that possibility?

[Mod edit:  Let’s avoid putting specific names to the accuser until we have solid confirmation.  Thanks—JAG]

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand why you would want to be cautious, so to that end JAG you still need to edit one of the replies above quoting my post. We know who she is. I hope she's a different person now, but she left an impression so strong then that after 34 years we immediately presumed it was her.

Edited by clwnuke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes I forget what it's like to live in Utah.   I live in California, and have for about 20 years, but I grew up in Salt Lake City.   I have a ROKU instead of cable, and it allows me to watch pretty much any news broadcasts in the country, so last night after my local news ended, I switched over to KUTV (I think), and the headline was "first audio interview with the victim."   Here in California, this is a non-story, as in, no one at all would have heard of it, or even cared.  So, it was a bit shocking that the news was covering it so salaciously.  It came across as more gossip than news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, bytebear said:

...Here in California, this is a non-story, as in, no one at all would have heard of it, or even cared....

How do you know no one would care? Are you saying Californians only care if abuse happens in their state? Please explain why you think Californians would NOT care.

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Doesn't that describe pretty much all news in today's world?

Sadly, yes.  Although I also find that on the national level, reporters (commentators) talk a lot more about what they hope happens (like impeaching the president) than what actually is reality. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Maureen said:

How do you know no one would care? Are you saying Californians only care if abuse happens in their state? Please explain why you think Californians would NOT care.

M.

If I hadn't heard about this here on this message board, I would have not heard a peep about this.  This is simply not hitting the news here.  At all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Maureen said:

How do you know no one would care? Are you saying Californians only care if abuse happens in their state? Please explain why you think Californians would NOT care.

I thought Californians were all about consensual sexual relations between adults.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bytebear said:

If I hadn't heard about this here on this message board, I would have not heard a peep about this.  This is simply not hitting the news here.  At all.

That makes sense but you gave the impression that if this story was news in California, people still wouldn't care.

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is MHO with regards to the quoted post ( @Carborendum - I believe Carb provided a good run down)

1) Anyone who begins with a hashtag "MTCabuse scandal" isn't about open discussion. They are opening with a disingenuous attack towards the Church. In most cases I would stop reading this because it is the Great and Spacious building "pointing the finger of scorn" hoping to "shame" the active partakers of the tree of life.

2) Anyone claiming "privy" information when they do not have all the information themselves is hoping to gather the naive on their side. Personally, a pathetic attempt to gain authority, while I will patiently wait for due process.

3) If the MTC president is found to be guilty, then proper discipline by the Church will occur. On Facebook I have a friend stating that the populace should demand "excommunication" for the MTC President. Naivety and ignorance is all over social media.

4) "This post is about how we are all complicit in letting abuse thrive in our faith community." This is disingenuous and false. I am not complicit, and no one I know is complicit in letting abuse thrive in the "Mormon" faith community. I know that the Church has been doing what it can (Article of Faith #9) in preventing these measures, and sadly, due to human nature (the natural man) these things happen. Someone who disagrees with a person's measures (thoughts and ideas) is not "complicit" to anything. This is just as disingenuous with the whole gun control and now people are claiming the NRA has a "war on children" and they don't care about children's lives. The NRA is not "complicit" with mass murders, nor have they claimed a "war on children." The Church is not complicit with abuse. The members are not complicit with abuse.

5) "It's rooted in our survival after two centuries of distrust from outsiders and it's also morphed into the idea that if we make our church look bad, no one will convert. That sounds trite, but the need to push conversion is also a strong, benevolent belief." False. The Church (and its good standing members) are not more concerned about converts than people being abused. We are concerned about falsehoods being spread as any organization is concerned with. We simply don't like lies. Name a person or entity that does? We are concerned with people who naively believe false witness and then hate you just because you are "Mormon." I am more concerned with the spread of falsehoods that lead to hate crimes, not people who choose not to join the Church.

6) "Mormons need to talk more with one another. We need to believe each other. We need to be able to have someone express their position, empathize with it, and not feel like we have to adopt it as our own." This statement I agree with but this isn't what she truly is expressing. What is being expressed, we want to talk and we want you to believe us, and we want you to change to make us happier. I fully agree with level headed open discussion that isn't agenda driven, sadly this post is agenda driven, and they want their agenda heard and their agenda applied.

7) Overall, the post is "The MTC President is guilty -- it is a "scandal" -- and the sister is 100% correct." Reality, let us actually exercise love and compassion toward both while all things are worked out. How the MTC President is punished, if found guilty, is none of our business (but the Great and Spacious scorns want it to be public). Unless of course, you are OK with the Church publishing "every" disciplinary action of every member involved?

If MTC President is not guilty of said crime, he now by so many others will still be seen as guilty and that the Church let a criminal go without punishment (even though innocent).

 

 

Edited by Anddenex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is an interesting article about this story - https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona-investigations/2018/03/24/amid-quiet-life-chandler-explosive-sexual-assault-allegations-hit-mormon-leader/449975002/ .  I've also clipped out a portion but I suggest reading the entire article. This reporter is being far more fair than many. The sad thing is that this is exactly what I would have expected based on my interactions with Sister H****s.

________

"Greg Bishop said his father did not remember making that statement to police.

He also said the accuser's background is relevant because it includes multiple rape claims, false police reports and other manipulations.

As recently as February, the woman was arrested in New Mexico on suspicion of identity theft. According to a police report, she used an ex-boyfriend's name and Social Security number to obtain utility services and to lease an apartment. Detectives obtained a phone recording wherein the woman posed as the ex-boyfriend, using his name, according to the police report. That case is pending.

Another police report, from South Carolina, describes a 1999 case in which the woman claimed she was pistol-whipped and locked in the trunk of a car by two men outside a restaurant where she had worked. Detectives learned she had been fired shortly before the incident and had made inquiries about the restaurant's security liability. They concluded she was dishonest and her report "unfounded."

In separate interviews with The Republic, the woman's former husband and another family member also questioned her motives and credibility.

On at least two additional occasions, they said, the woman reported being raped — once while on her Mormon mission in Washington, D.C.

The ex-husband, who is not named in this report so as not to reveal the woman's identity, said, "This is an insult, especially, to women who have gone through something like that and really have been hurt."

Greg Bishop said he supports the #MeToo movement but is trying to defend his father against a false charge.

"I'm living a nightmare," he said. "This is the dark side of #MeToo, where somebody wants to manipulate the system, has a history of doing it, and has been successful."

Edited by clwnuke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, clwnuke said:

The ex-husband, who is not named in this report so as not to reveal the woman's identity, said, "This is an insult, especially, to women who have gone through something like that and really have been hurt."

@NeuroTypical,

In case I didn't may my point clear before.  This ^^^ is what I'm saying.  That's why we should spend energy finding out just what happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep - so we know who is the victim and who is the perp.  So we know who to punish and who to comfort.  I get it.

My overall point (also not clear I guess), is sometimes people can end up suffering/burdened/traumatized/broken in situations where there isn't a clear line like that anywhere to be drawn.  Yes, it's true that working through the trauma to come to accept truth and reject false beliefs, is part of what brings healing.  My point is, when you come across such a person, knowing what helps and hurts, what love looks like and what it doesn't, may not be as easy as it seems.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, clwnuke said:

"Greg Bishop said his father did not remember making that statement to police.

OK, so now she's got the police lying too?

2 hours ago, clwnuke said:

He also said the accuser's background is relevant because it includes multiple rape claims, false police reports and other manipulations.

If her statement was the only evidence against him, then that might be relevant, but it's not; he confessed to at least one substantially similar occurrence, and repeatedly declined to clearly deny her accusation.

2 hours ago, clwnuke said:

As recently as February, the woman was arrested in New Mexico on suspicion of identity theft. According to a police report, she used an ex-boyfriend's name and Social Security number to obtain utility services and to lease an apartment. Detectives obtained a phone recording wherein the woman posed as the ex-boyfriend, using his name, according to the police report. That case is pending.

Really?  This is what they've got?  That she had bad credit and used her ex's name on the utilities to avoid (frankly ridiculous) deposits?  First time I had to get electric service after my divorce, the deposit would've been $450 (for a tiny apartment that never had a $100 monthly bill) because I hadn't had service in my name for nearly a decade.  I went prepaid instead, but had a couple of friends offer to let me put it in their names.  

2 hours ago, clwnuke said:

Another police report, from South Carolina, describes a 1999 case in which the woman claimed she was pistol-whipped and locked in the trunk of a car by two men outside a restaurant where she had worked. Detectives learned she had been fired shortly before the incident and had made inquiries about the restaurant's security liability. They concluded she was dishonest and her report "unfounded."

It's South Carolina; they just didn't want it getting out that this is what they use in lieu of a pickup line.  

2 hours ago, clwnuke said:

In separate interviews with The Republic, the woman's former husband and another family member also questioned her motives and credibility.

I continuously question my ex wife's motives and credibility.  It's what exes do.  Frankly, when I find someone with no animosity whatsoever toward a former spouse, I really have to question their respect for the entire concept of marriage.

2 hours ago, clwnuke said:

On at least two additional occasions, they said, the woman reported being raped — once while on her Mormon mission in Washington, D.C.

And what was the outcome of these reports?  Absolutely, undeniably false or just unable to be proven?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

Um, NightSG?  Are you being serious or sarcastic?  I honestly can't tell, what with statements like "getting pistol whipped and locked in a trunk" is just "what they use in lieu of a pickup line". 

Well, compared to what they do in lieu of writing traffic tickets, it's fairly tame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NightSG said:

[1]OK, so now she's got the police lying too?

[2] If her statement was the only evidence against him, then that might be relevant, but it's not; he confessed to at least one substantially similar occurrence, and repeatedly declined to clearly deny her accusation.

[3] Really?  This is what they've got?  That she had bad credit and used her ex's name on the utilities to avoid (frankly ridiculous) deposits?  First time I had to get electric service after my divorce, the deposit would've been $450 (for a tiny apartment that never had a $100 monthly bill) because I hadn't had service in my name for nearly a decade.  I went prepaid instead, but had a couple of friends offer to let me put it in their names.  

. . .

[4] I continuously question my ex wife's motives and credibility.  It's what exes do.  Frankly, when I find someone with no animosity whatsoever toward a former spouse, I really have to question their respect for the entire concept of marriage.

[5] And what was the outcome of these reports?  Absolutely, undeniably false or just unable to be proven?

1.  Not necessarily; but it may go to his mental state at the time of the “confession”.  And I’ve interviewed enough cops about their reports to know that sometimes their reports contain conclusory summations that don’t fully reflect the nuances of a suspect’s statement or the context in which it was given.

2.  What second “occurrence” did he confess to, and what specifically did that occurrence entail?  Please be particular, and cite your sources.  

3.  She incurred a loan using the credit of a third person who did not agree to it.  That’s fraud; and most likely the only reason her ex even found out what had happened was that she defaulted on her payment and the utility came after him for payment.  You may think it’s appropriate and even funny for her to exact that sort of revenge on an ex-lover who ended the relationship because he was tired of dealing with her crap.  But the law disagrees.

4.  “Ex” is a funny word.  You seem to have no problem with the idea that the accuser may be an “ex” Mormon, for example.  

5.  Does it matter?  We know via the restaurant incident and the identity fraud that she’s not an honest person; and that she tells lies for money.  And her current story is the crux of an impending lawsuit against the LDS Church.

I think Greg Bishop tries to prove too much when he suggests that nothing untoward occurred; and his defense of his father seems staggeringly tone-deaf.  My guess is that Joseph Bishop did engage in inappropriate conversations, that he induced the accuser to expose herself to him and at least tried to do so with at least one other sister missionary at nearly the same time, and that—while legal—the encounter provided additional trauma to an unfortunate woman who had already grown up with a pedophile stepfather.  

But do I think he went so far as to rape her and/or rip her clothing off her, as she claims?  On the former issue:  I genuinely don’t know; and I don’t think anyone has a sound basis for reaching a conclusion either way.  On the latter issue:  I find that somewhat unlikely; because I think someone would remember a sister missionary with a torn blouse walking across the MTC campus back to her dorm and from @clwnuke‘s statements it sounds like the legal eagles have been in touch with the people who were best in a position to remember such a thing.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to ensure there is consensus - there is no expectation that only honest and virtuous (however you define those) people get horrifically abused.  Souls bleed after being cut.  Some are really messy bleeders, too.  And yes, i agree that goes both ways.

Note, i know that nobody was saying otherwise explicitly - but just want to mention it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, lostinwater said:

Just to ensure there is consensus - there is no expectation that only honest and virtuous (however you define those) people get horrifically abused.  Souls bleed after being cut.  Some are really messy bleeders, too.  And yes, i agree that goes both ways.

Note, i know that nobody was saying otherwise explicitly - but just want to mention it.

Totally agree.  The issue here, though, is that some folks want us to believe that any person a “damaged soul” bleeds over, must have necessarily cut that soul in a particular way.

I’m happy to mourn with the accuser as a rape victim (though it sounds like as a male, I may need to do so from a safe distance).  But when her idea of “mourning” demands that I condemn another man as a rapist (not just a boor and a predator and a hypocrite, but a rapist)—I want to weigh the evidence first; and in this case I find the available evidence somewhat deficient.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • pam unfeatured this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share