More drama from June Hughes/Mckenna Denson

[unixknight]

4 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

I'm thinking it's likely that Joseph Bishop did do something horrible, and she really is a victim of something.  That said, you can be a victim and still have zero credibility due to your irrational and misguided behavior.  A second alleged victim came forward in 2010. 

https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/statement-former-mission-president-alleged-abuse-joseph-l-bishop-march-2018

 

Yeah I read the timeline right after you posted it (I didn't see it unril after I posted my last), and the second accuser does make the case more believable.  

And now I'm sad.

Edited September 5, 2018 by unixknight

[NeuroTypical]

Just now, unixknight said:

Yeah I read the timeline right after you posted it, and the second accuser does make the case more believable.  

Yes, but the case of what though?  She's alleging rape.  There seems to be zero evidence for it, and much counterindications (including her own previous claims).  The second woman didn't allege rape either.

I think Vort has it right.  Folks do some horrible, horrible things to each other all the time, that don't sink to the levels of abuse, rape, or even being against the law.

[unixknight]

1 minute ago, NeuroTypical said:

Yes, but the case of what though?  She's alleging rape.  There seems to be zero evidence for it, and much counterindications (including her own previous claims).  The second woman didn't allege rape either.

I think Vort has it right.  Folks do some horrible, horrible things to each other all the time, that don't sink to the levels of abuse, rape, or even being against the law.

I don't disagree.  It's just that there seems to be a pattern emerging, and that's disappointing.

[zil]

21 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Holy mackerel.  

That's just a belief of the flounders.

[NeuroTypical]

Folks, lets remember site rules.  Please don't link to antimormon websites.  Including ones that encourage people to steal church property.  (Whether we all go there or not)

[lostinwater]

19 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Folks, lets remember site rules.  Please don't link to antimormon websites.  Including ones that encourage people to steal church property.  (Whether we all go there or not)

Apologies - thank-you for the reminder.  My error.

[Blackmarch]

On 9/4/2018 at 10:43 AM, Fether said:

McKenna Denson, Sam Young, Jeremy Runnels... it’s ironic that the current biggest sources of anti-Latter-day Saint movements are coming from members (or in Jeremy’s case an ex-member) that claim they love the church. 

Judas comes to mind.

[clwnuke]

June Hughes' (now McKenna Denson) character has been in question long before this incident and the start of this entire episode. IMHO everything has been orchestrated and planned well before she "decided" to reveal who she was. Some of you might remember that I posted that I thought I knew who it was immediately after the the news broke. If fact my entire Mission district knew who it was before she ever revealed her name. That's because there were huge issues at the MTC with this Sister, and a wake of disaster in the mission field afterwards.

Many of us have been interviewed by defense lawyers in the case, but none of the information has made it into the news. I think all the media outlets are afraid. In almost every news story, the first thing reporters do is seek out people who were there and ask about the applicable person - in this case Sister June Hughes. But not one article that I have seen has does this. I personally confronted this Sister because of her behavior toward an Elder in my district, and I know that several others were affected as well.

While I can't tell you whether what McKenna Denson says happened actually happened with President Bishop, I can tell you that there is so much more to the story that people don't know that any conclusions drawn from what the media has reported will be incomplete. I really think this latest incident should make her character in the MTC fair game and it's time for the press to seek out the many Elders and Sisters who experienced her behavior in the MTC and report the facts - even if they choose to keep the names anonymous (yes, it was that bad).

Edited September 6, 2018 by clwnuke

[Just_A_Guy]

37 minutes ago, clwnuke said:

June Hughes' (now McKenna Denson) character has been in question long before this incident and the start of this entire episode. IMHO everything has been orchestrated and planned well before she "decided" to reveal who she was. Some of you might remember that I posted that I thought I knew who it was immediately after the the news broke. If fact my entire Mission district knew who it was before she ever revealed her name. That's because there were huge issues at the MTC with this Sister, and a wake of disaster in the mission field afterwards.

Many of us have been interviewed by defense lawyers in the case, but none of the information has made it into the news. I think all the media outlets are afraid. In almost every news story, the first thing reporters do is seek out people who were there and ask about the applicable person - in this case Sister June Hughes. But not one article that I have seen has does this. I personally confronted this Sister because of her behavior toward an Elder in my district, and I know that several others were affected as well.

While I can't tell you whether what McKenna Denson says happened actually happened with President Bishop, I can tell you that there is so much more to the story that people don't know that any conclusions drawn from what the media has reported will be incomplete. I really think this latest incident should make her character in the MTC fair game and it's time for the press to seek out the many Elders and Sisters who experienced her behavior in the MTC and report the facts - even if they choose to keep the names anonymous (yes, it was that bad).

CWLNuke, I remember when you gave a positive ID on her even before her lawsuit had been filed.  Major props for calling that one right! 

For my own part, I often find it hard to distinguish between what’s “relevant background”, in these sorts of cases.  Certainly, anything that shows a history of dishonesty IMHO ought to be fair game.  Otherwise, I do appreciate the concern of not having an alleged rape victim finding every aspect of her life suddenly under scrutiny.  Where the accuser appears to be a highly dysfunctional individual, I suppose specific incidents of past drama become more of a situational issue involving a lot of shades of gray.  (And at one point does an “alleged victim” become a “vindictive snake in the grass”, and does that matter?)

For example, by way of comparison—on the recent Madi Barney case, local media deliberately ignored the readily-available fact that Barney had as a BYU student had deliberate and voluntary sexual contact with a gentleman in her apartment; because they wanted to paint her as an innocent young maiden who was an incidental victim of BYU’s big, bad Honor Code.  In context of Barney’s overall campaign against BYU and the narrative being spun by her Pulitzer-winning allies in the press, I think that was a highly relevant factoid that the media deliberately concealed.

So in Denson’s case, I believe the media’s silence on her character is more a product of anti-LDS malice than a result of some sort of fear of Denson herself.  (The exception being KSL, which I think is trying to avoid being seen as the Church’s media attack dog.)  I disapprove of Bishop’s son’s releasing Stoel Rives’ dossier on Denson to the press—but once it was out there, I think the press was ethically bound to run down its contents and report on it.  They haven’t, and I don’t think they will as long as they think doing so might significantly harm Denson’s case in either the courts of law or the courts of public opinion.

Anyways—I look forward to reading any anecdotes you feel it would be appropriate to share; and I’ll just give you a friendly lawyer’s caveat that if you anticipate being subpoenaed and/or deposed in Denson’s litigation, you might want to bear in mind that the lawyers may be asking you who else you’ve told your story to—and that might include this forum.  

Edited September 6, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[clwnuke]

I'm not familiar with the Madi Barney case. I'll have to look that one up. I actually tried to get a copy of all the police reports and the dossier on Denson early on, but nobody would forward a copy. I did get the police reports later just to confirm the time frame in which these events were reported to have happened.

I don't anticipate that my information would be the most damaging. I have shared my story of confronting Sister Hughes and asking her to stop touching one of the Elders in our group, and being treated with contempt by her. She also invited him to "go on a walk" which he wisely declined. But I have deliberately not shared further knowledge that is much worse. I don't think it takes much imagination for people (especially church members and missionaries) to conclude what much worse might include.

Several of us text and talk in the background about Ms. Denson. Some of us even thought about crashing one of her SLC press conferences and pointing out that she never mentioned any of the recent allegations at that time despite sharing just about every other intimate physical detail from her life. Her actions more than anything leads me to be skeptical of the complete veracity of her story. It's just a very sad situation for everyone.

Edited September 6, 2018 by clwnuke

[Just_A_Guy]

51 minutes ago, clwnuke said:

I'm not familiar with the Madi Barney case. I'll have to look that one up. I actually tried to get a copy of all the police reports and the dossier on Denson early on, but nobody would forward a copy. I did get the police reports later just to confirm the time frame in which these events were reported to have happened.

I don't anticipate that my information would be the most damaging. I have shared my story of confronting Sister Hughes and asking her to stop touching one of the Elders in our group, and being treated with contempt by her. She also invited him to "go on a walk" which he wisely declined. But I have deliberately not shared further knowledge that is much worse. I don't think it takes much imagination for people (especially church members and missionaries) to conclude what much worse might include.

Several of us text and talk in the background about Ms. Denson. Some of us even thought about crashing one of her SLC press conferences and pointing out that she never mentioned any of the recent allegations at that time despite sharing just about every other intimate physical detail from her life. Her actions more than anything leads me to be skeptical of the complete veracity of her story. It's just a very sad situation for everyone.

I had missed your post from back in April where you went into more detail.  Thanks, and I agree with your assessment.

[carlimac]

4 hours ago, clwnuke said:

June Hughes' (now McKenna Denson) character has been in question long before this incident and the start of this entire episode.

When did she change her name?

[clwnuke]

I don't know when she changed her name but she has used several different version of her names in her lifetime. There is only one news article that I've seen that delved into her past and here is the link: 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 believe there are extensive dossiers and reports on her because her conduct was so extensive and alarming that entire districts of missionaries like myself could readily identify even after thirty years who would be making the allegations just by reading the headlines - and well before she "revealed" who she was without mentioning that her name was June Hughes in the MTC. The police appear to be familiar with her as well.

Here are some excerpts from the article that I think are most important: 

"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."

and

"In a brief phone conversation, the accuser said LDS Church lawyers had prepared an extensive dossier on her background. She refused to address specific allegations but said, "Some of it's true. A lot of it isn't."

The woman referred further questions to her attorney, Craig Vernon, who said trauma from sexual abuse led, in part, to his client's troubles. He would not address particular events except to acknowledge that she had fabricated the alleged rape in Washington, D.C."

 

[clwnuke]

What frustrates me most about this recent Sacrament Meeting incident is that I had pretty much convinced myself to let the whole thing go and let the Lord handle it.  Then this happens and wham - all the bad emotions from the MTC come right back.  I'm simply tired of her playing the media and the public the same way she played with people at the MTC. 

[Festus]

clwnuke

I just signed up for the forum, because I've been interested in this case since early this year.      I smelled BS from the beginning, and did much digging to find the other side of the story.     Like the azcentral link you posted.    And noting her story changed between her "interview" and her lawsuit.    First he didn't rape her because . . .  [gory detail omitted by mods.  —JAG].  And supposedly ripping her clothes and then running from the basement - must be many witnesses, since crawling with people.

I've been fascinated by our supposedly unbiased media omitting politically incorrect information.      Feminism now rules our country, so all reporting must comply with that narrative.

Stories sell best that paint men as rapists.       Even if evidence shows otherwise, men can now be convicted in the media and public opinion, and their lives ruined.

Essentially modern day lynch mobs, as we learned with Duke Lacrosse case, and the Rolling Stone published lies about U. of Virginia and countless others.

I have been trying to post the other side of Denson/Hughes story on various forums.     Just became aware of your experience.

What am I missing here?     Why hesitate to share all the stories you have on her?

Aren't we supposedly all about the Truth?      Or do we now have to consult our lawyer and PR department on everything we say?

Denson doesn't seem to care, and somehow she gets away with saying whatever she wants - why can't you?

 

Edited September 7, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[Just_A_Guy]

Welcome, @Festus! 

[clwnuke]

Welcome to the site.

I have openly shared my experiences with Sister Hughes in the MTC, and even sent them to reporters who showed absolutely zero interest. Many of my posts on media sites were denied approval because I was "sharing information that was not included in the news articles". But the additional information that I am aware of is highly personal and should only be shared by those involved. Perhaps at some point it will have to come out, but I really would prefer that it didn't for the sake of all those who managed to move on in life.

My point is simply this - the story Ms. Denson told to the press and public about being an innocent and naive Sister missionary at the MTC that was groomed by a predator, and was then raped, is not an accurate or complete portrayal. She was an adult, and one who was sexually experienced and mature by her own admission. I would describe her as clever and wise to the world. Scheming and conniving would also unfortunately be words I would use to describe her. She actively and openly pursued Elders in the MTC and treated me with complete contempt when I confronted her and asked her to stop seeking out and physically touching an Elder in my district. These impressions are based on my own interactions with her at the MTC. Others may have had very different interactions and impressions. 

My prayer is that everyone involved can find a fair and private resolution grounded in humility, accountability, and forgiveness.

 

[carlimac]

7 hours ago, clwnuke said:

Welcome to the site.

I have openly shared my experiences with Sister Hughes in the MTC, and even sent them to reporters who showed absolutely zero interest. Many of my posts on media sites were denied approval because I was "sharing information that was not included in the news articles". But the additional information that I am aware of is highly personal and should only be shared by those involved. Perhaps at some point it will have to come out, but I really would prefer that it didn't for the sake of all those who managed to move on in life.

My point is simply this - the story Ms. Denson told to the press and public about being an innocent and naive Sister missionary at the MTC that was groomed by a predator, and was then raped, is not an accurate or complete portrayal. She was an adult, and one who was sexually experienced and mature by her own admission. I would describe her as clever and wise to the world. Scheming and conniving would also unfortunately be words I would use to describe her. She actively and openly pursued Elders in the MTC and treated me with complete contempt when I confronted her and asked her to stop seeking out and physically touching an Elder in my district. These impressions are based on my own interactions with her at the MTC. Others may have had very different interactions and impressions. 

My prayer is that everyone involved can find a fair and private resolution grounded in humility, accountability, and forgiveness.

 

These days she would never have made it to the mission field. She would have been sent home from the MTC.  What mission was it?

[clwnuke]

I agree with you. I'm grateful they raised the bar.

I'm not certain what mission Sister Hughes was assigned to in the MTC. Her name tag had Hermana Hughes but I think she ended up in Indianapolis.

[Edit on 9/11/2018: Sister Hughes was assigned to the Columbia Cali mission in the MTC and was eventually sent to the Wisconsin mission, not the Indianapolis. She also had an interim period in Washington DC between the MTC and Wisconsin.]

Edited September 11, 2018 by clwnuke

[Just_A_Guy]

2 minutes ago, clwnuke said:

I agree with you. I'm grateful they raised the bar.

I'm not certain what mission Sister Hughes was assigned to in the MTC. Her name tag had Hermana Hughes but I'd have to reach out to some friends to remember exactly where she ended up going and how long she was there.

From what I understand it was DC, Spanish-speaking.

[clwnuke]

I've read that too. I wonder if she got moved from the DC, Spanish Speaking to Indianapolis at some point. 

Sorry about the change in my post. A friend texted just as I posted it so I went to edit it with the updated information. 

[Edit on 9/11/2018: Sister Hughes was sent to Washington D.C. to wait for a visa, then lived in Provo for a time before being sent to the Wisconsin mission]

Edited September 11, 2018 by clwnuke

[clwnuke]

One of the Elders who was in my MTC district happens to be in the same ward as someone who was in the Indianapolis mission when Ms. Denson was there. Apparently there was some significant drama there that resulted in the end of her mission. It's hard for me to believe that what I've been told could have actually happened, so I'd rather be on the safe side and not share it until I can confirm it better. Of course the Church would already know from their records if it is true.

One thing I find interesting is that her ex-husband considers her actions an insult to women who have actually been raped. I would assume that if exposing President Bishop's actions had been a life quest for Ms. Denson, then he would be completely familiar with her concerns, but he does not seem to be. She also didn't mention it to my friends who got to know her very well after her mission. I'd love to see some interviews with her family and ex just to get their perspectives on the matter.

[Edit on 9/11/2018: It was not the Indianapolis mission, it was the Wisconsin mission.]

Edited September 11, 2018 by clwnuke

[carlimac]

33 minutes ago, clwnuke said:

I've read that too. I wonder if she got moved from the DC, Spanish Speaking to Indianapolis at some point. 

Sorry about the change in my post. A friend texted just as I posted it so I went to edit it with the updated information. 

 

Oh, I got the impression she was in your mission, too. Not just the MTC.  It reminds me of a disfunctional companion I had on my mission.  She was cute and a flirt with men, but nothing this bad. Even that much was awkward to deal with. 

[myrmidon]

I think the bigger picture is not whether or not Bishop raped her. It has been established not only by her own taped interview of Bishop and also the BYU PD interview that he likely did not rape her. 

She seems like a wingnut, but one thing was definitely established and I believe it is much more important that her antics. What has been established is that Bishop did acknowledge to taking her alone to a room at the MTC behind two locked doors. He convinced her in that room to show him her breasts and "she complied" according to Bishop. That much we know because he admitted that to the police. That language he used in his interview sounds much more like an exercise of power rather than trying to get lucky. "She complied." Sounds to me like he demanded she do it or at least he understood that she took that request as a demand. It may even be that she did it under duress which is not anywhere close to the category of hankey pankey.

Some will focus on smearing her, discrediting her and what not. What is disturbing to me is few seem to really be all that concerned with the fact Bishop admitted to taking her by herself to a room and attempted anything with her. Being selected to be the MTC president not only is supposed to be inspired of the Lord and all, but it is a position of an inordinate amount of power. As long as I have been a member and as many Mission Presidents as I have had exposure to (many) it is very clear they are to be taken seriously. Anyone who has served a mission as a young adult knows they are taught to strictly obey these guys. Can anyone see this is a bit more serious than Bishop trying to get a little action? This is not only a big-time violation of his vows, but probably one of the most serious abuses of power one in a position of authority in the LDS church can commit. I would think it is clearly ex-communication material if it indeed did happen.

We are more worried about her, her credibility and her past. It matters not. There will be no rape charges or trial. What are they going to do with him?

[pwrfrk]

I watched her video, and I find it disturbing.  Not as much that she and her whoever/whatever did it, but it gets me to wonder how much of what happens there is videoed by outsiders.  Or even members.  It can be done with ease.  She is inadvertantly showing us how little privacy we really have.  Some of the stuff people tell during their testimony, I mean that's some very personal stuff.  I don't think they want the whole world to know.

But going back to McKenna Denson, she is having a lot of difficulty with this issue, but then it's never easy to go s far as she went.  She needs, if anything, prayers.  I don't think what she did was right especially when she pre-planned it (0:06-1:37).

But I must ask, exactly what instruction do the church leaders get regarding such allegations?  Back years ago when I was interim pastor for a Christian non-denominational fellowship, we were given instruction on reporting such allegations to the police.