MrShorty Posted August 14, 2018 Report Share Posted August 14, 2018 I don't know that it is so much that J. Bishop has been exonerated as the judge determined that the statute of limitations has run out, so the judge decided that the case to determine if Bishop is innocent/guilty cannot proceed. In many ways, it leaves the question of Bishop's guilt/innocence more in limbo than anything. The interesting thing is that the judge is allowing the "fraud" case against the Church to proceed. I don't have a firm grasp of what these charges really consist of, but it seems that there will still be some looking into who in the Church leadership knew what when and what they did and did not do with that knowledge. Maureen and Grunt 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
estradling75 Posted August 14, 2018 Report Share Posted August 14, 2018 13 minutes ago, MrShorty said: I don't know that it is so much that J. Bishop has been exonerated as the judge determined that the statute of limitations has run out, so the judge decided that the case to determine if Bishop is innocent/guilty cannot proceed. In many ways, it leaves the question of Bishop's guilt/innocence more in limbo than anything. The interesting thing is that the judge is allowing the "fraud" case against the Church to proceed. I don't have a firm grasp of what these charges really consist of, but it seems that there will still be some looking into who in the Church leadership knew what when and what they did and did not do with that knowledge. Indeed the judge saying "Its to old now" is not the vindication I would want if me or a loved one was accused of such things. As for the fraud charge it simply means its "not to old yet" Thus the judge evaluated the merits of pursuing the charges... the charges themselves are still unjudged Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MormonGator Posted August 14, 2018 Report Share Posted August 14, 2018 2 hours ago, Anddenex said: Although I believe I am understanding the point, I feel the need to make this point (I assume a pedantic nature in me), if Joseph Bishop is innocent of this claim then his family, his relatives, and close friends all have reason to rejoice. I wouldn't consider their reason to rejoice as not being decent people. And if he's guilty of the charge , then it is really tragic that it's being dismissed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anddenex Posted August 14, 2018 Report Share Posted August 14, 2018 6 minutes ago, MormonGator said: And if he's guilty of the charge , then it is really tragic that it's being dismissed. We don't find disagreement, which is why I used the keyword "If" in relation to Joseph Bishop. One thing for sure, if guilty, no one is going to escape final judgement. "If" he is innocent though, this whole ordeal is just as tragic, if not more, as an innocent man is being accused of something he did not do, but for many he will be seen as he did it though, and that the Church is once again "hiding" things, which is also tragic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MormonGator Posted August 14, 2018 Report Share Posted August 14, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Vort said: If it were my father or brother who had been accused of rape, and I believed him not guilty of the charge, I would certainly be rejoicing. I do not believe that makes me an indecent person. I see that Anddenex has already made this point, but I thought it worth repeating. (And I'm not even worried about possibly being pedantic.) If it were my sister or mother who had been accusing someone of raping her, and I believed she was telling the truth, I would certainly not be rejoicing. So I can play that game too. I get it-if someone on "our team" gets accused of something, we circle the wagons. Human nature. Edited August 14, 2018 by MormonGator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MormonGator Posted August 14, 2018 Report Share Posted August 14, 2018 Just now, Anddenex said: We don't find disagreement, which is why I used the keyword "If" in relation to Joseph Bishop. One thing for sure, if guilty, no one is going to escape final judgement. "If" he is innocent though, this whole ordeal is just as tragic, if not more, as an innocent man is being accused of something he did not do, but for many he will be seen as he did it though, and that the Church is once again "hiding" things, which is also tragic. Yup, just raising a point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted August 14, 2018 Report Share Posted August 14, 2018 16 minutes ago, MormonGator said: If it were my sister or mother who had been accusing someone of raping her, and I believed she was telling the truth, I would certainly not be rejoicing. So I can play that game too. True but irrelevant. @NeuroTypical had said, "No decent person, on any side of an issue like this, ever has reason to rejoice." I was responding narrowly to that point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MormonGator Posted August 14, 2018 Report Share Posted August 14, 2018 1 minute ago, Vort said: True but irrelevant. @NeuroTypical had said, "No decent person, on any side of an issue like this, ever has reason to rejoice." I was responding narrowly to that point. He was 100% right. This case is an all around tragedy. The truth is that you don't know what happened. Neither do I. No one here can rejoice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted August 14, 2018 Report Share Posted August 14, 2018 18 minutes ago, MormonGator said: I get it-if someone on "our team" gets accused of something, we circle the wagons. Human nature. You often say that, MG, but you are mistaken more often than not. This is not about circling the wagons. If Bishop actually did forcibly rape her, I bet every person on this list would like to see him convicted. Speaking out against Groupthink and mob activism doesn't constitute circling the wagons. mordorbund and wenglund 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted August 14, 2018 Report Share Posted August 14, 2018 2 minutes ago, MormonGator said: He was 100% right. This case is an all around tragedy. The truth is that you don't know what happened. Neither do I. No one here can rejoice. No, he was not. If you believe your loved one was falsely accused of a heinous crime, you would rejoice if a judge ruled that he could not be tried for that crime. And no reasonable could blame you for rejoicing, even if they were not as convinced as you of your loved one's innocence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MormonGator Posted August 14, 2018 Report Share Posted August 14, 2018 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Vort said: You often say that, MG, but you are mistaken more often than not . In your opinion. I see it happen again and again, so yes, I say it when I see it happen. 32 minutes ago, Vort said: No, he was not. If you believe your loved one was falsely accused of a heinous crime, you would rejoice if a judge ruled that he could not be tried for that crime. And no reasonable could blame you for rejoicing, even if they were not as convinced as you of your loved one's innocence. And again, the opposite is true. If my loved one accused someone of rape, etc, etc, we'd be devastated by the ruling. So once again, you are only seeing your own side. This was a tragedy all around. Edited August 14, 2018 by MormonGator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted August 14, 2018 Report Share Posted August 14, 2018 1 minute ago, MormonGator said: In your opinion. I see it happen again and again, so yes, I say it when I see it happen. But you've been consistently saying it TO ME, and it's wrong. I'm not circling the wagons. I'm calling out Groupthink and mobocracy. 2 minutes ago, MormonGator said: And again, the opposite is true. But MG, that is not the point. The point is that NT was mistaken when he claimed that "No decent person, on any side of an issue like this, ever has reason to rejoice." In fact, decent people who believe their grandpa was falsely accused of forcible rape will certainly rejoice when a judge rules that he cannot be tried. That doesn't mean they rejoice in the false accusation leveled against grandpa, or that the whole situation exists, or that grandpa did something pretty filthy (even if it wasn't forcible rape). It means they rejoice in one point of justice that was correctly (in their view) established. Why this should even be a point of disagreement is beyond me. @Anddenex feared he was being "pedantic" even mentioning that NT overstated himself, doubtless because he (Anddenex) thought it was so obvious that some decent people might well rejoice in this or that ruling that no one would possibly disagree. I agreed with Anddenex except about the "pedantic" part, because I believed that there were indeed people who would fault anyone for rejoicing in anything that touched the issue in any way. I did not (and do not) understand why such people might hold this attitude, but I felt sure there were such people. I think you have proven me right. mordorbund and Anddenex 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MormonGator Posted August 14, 2018 Report Share Posted August 14, 2018 Just now, Vort said: But you've been consistently saying it TO ME, and it's wrong. I see it in humans. (Myself included) @Vort is a human. (sort of). Therefore, I see it in you. (and yes, kidding about the sort of comment) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.