Abuse Allegation Against Members Of Nelson Family

[NightSG]

52 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

Why was President Nelson mentioned in this article AT ALL?

If Elizabeth Grau goes postal, do you think the articles will neglect to mention who she's related to?  

[NeuroTypical]

1 hour ago, carlimac said:

Ok. Interesting this is in the news two days before General Conference. There is a method to the madness it seems.

Ugh - there's a nasty thought.  This is a pre-game warm-up to some sort of protest at/in GC.  

Live broadcasts and a captive worldwide audience?  We've seen the folks shouting "opposed", but there are all sorts of ways this could get worse.  If it does, the church will stop doing them live, which would be a shame. 

Heck, the very thought of what's possible might have the church change their broadcast methods.  

Watch GC live folks!

[carlimac]

32 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I think the backlash against the “believe all accusers” trope, as exhibited in this thread, is a good thing to the extent that it pulls us away from “guilty until proven innocent” into “well, we’ll see” territory.  

I also suppose it’s a very good thing that no prophet, latter-day or ancient, has ever raised a kid who turned out to be a dirtbag (or married a dirtbag). 

if you're directing this at me, I've never been in the "guilty until proven innocent" camp.  I'm always non-committal and firmly in the "we'll see" camp. 

[Just_A_Guy]

2 minutes ago, carlimac said:

if you're directing this at me, I've never been in the "guilty until proven innocent" camp.  I'm always non-committal and firmly in the "we'll see" camp. 

Not directed at any forum member.   

[NeuroTypical]

48 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I also suppose it’s a very good thing that no prophet, latter-day or ancient, has ever raised a kid who turned out to be a dirtbag (or married a dirtbag). 

Poor Lehi.  Sometimes we remember him for the stuff he did, but a lot of the time we just remember Laman and Lemuel beating the crap out of Nephi and trying to turn him into fish food and all.

[askandanswer]

52 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I also suppose it’s a very good thing that no prophet, latter-day or ancient, has ever raised a kid who turned out to be a dirtbag (or married a dirtbag). 

(Old Testament | 1 Samuel 8:1 - 3)
1  AND it came to pass, when Samuel was old, that he made his sons judges over Israel.
2  Now the name of his firstborn was Joel; and the name of his second, Abiah: they were judges in Beer-sheba.
3  And his sons walked not in his ways, but turned aside after lucre, and took bribes, and perverted judgment.
 

[JohnsonJones]

1 hour ago, NightSG said:

If Elizabeth Grau goes postal, do you think the articles will neglect to mention who she's related to?  

It depends...

HOWEVER...in normal reports on cases one does NOT report who the criminal is related to, and normally they do not name the victim's extended family.  They may name the victim's parents, but normally it is EXCESSIVELY ODD to name a victim's grandparent.

In addition, the article insinuates that he may be among others charged with no reason or rhyme for stating that.  It falls VERY borderline on libel and slander.  Probably not in that category (though some lawyers may try to push that it is if they sniffed out money) but it's playing with fire.

To put it in perspective...do you know who Kavanaugh's grandparents were and are they normally named in articles about him (or even his parents, it's not like they are unknowns and they would be more closely aligned to a case than a grandparent, unless that grandparent has direct custody or were the guardians during the time of the crime) in relation to the accusations.  How about Ford's grandparents?

If someone doesn't have anything to do with the case, normally there is no reason to name them.

If it is a parent is one thing, but once you start getting into extended family, that's normally a faux pas. 

IF it is a passing of a loved one where a famous extended family member is in GREIVING or other facet at times it is appropriate, but typically because just listing someone in connection to a crime can ruin a life, you don't list those who are not connected.  Parents may be listed at times due to direct connection, but not extended family.  Most who try to do sensationalistic journalism to that degree, I believe, are frowned upon.  If they push it too far when, especially with celebrities (normally Hollywood), even if it is true that the celeb is related, if the celeb can prove financial or other harm due to some journalist trying to connect them to a crime they did not commit or connected to, even if simply listing them as an extended family member, they have sued for libel.

 

Edited October 4, 2018 by JohnsonJones

[Suzie]

Can someone explain to me exactly who are the alleged perpetrators and victims? I read the link but I am confused as to who is who and who are the alleged victims. Sorry, my brain is fried today.

[mordorbund]

12 minutes ago, Suzie said:

Can someone explain to me exactly who are the alleged perpetrators and victims? I read the link but I am confused as to who is who and who are the alleged victims. Sorry, my brain is fried today.

The text of the lawsuit is actually quite readable (narrative-wise, it is graphic in parts) (and now @Just_A_Guy is going to charge me legal fees as he takes credit for that). Maureen provides a good narrative synopsis.

3 hours ago, Maureen said:

My understanding is that children (who are now adults) were sexually assaulted by their father known as the Perpetrator. The children told their mother and they eventually divorced, Perpetrator eventually remarried and sexually assaulted his step-children. Perpetrator eventually took his own life. The children of Perpetrator are also saying that the Miles' were also involved in these sexual assaults (known as male and female defendants).

M.

The Miles (male and female defendants) are the daughter and son-in-law of President Nelson. He's mentioned in the suit as showing up in a random church meeting, establishing the relationship to the defendants, but is really not relevant. There is a claim that Elder Maxwell knew of the abuse and essentially did nothing about it, but the suit is not including the Church or its leaders although the plaintiffs reserve the right to add more defendants to the suit.

[JohnsonJones]

29 minutes ago, Suzie said:

Can someone explain to me exactly who are the alleged perpetrators and victims? I read the link but I am confused as to who is who and who are the alleged victims. Sorry, my brain is fried today.

Step-Children, children, and friends of those children of Brenda and Richard Miles.  For obvious reasons, the names of the victims are not given out.  Richard and Brenda Miles were not given out in the court documents, but by the attorney for those individuals.

From the case, it appears the Father of the children from the first marriage was most likely the perpetrator.  In addition, when one of their children was 16, they were also a victim, but also became a perpetrator on children they were babysitting.

The Father apparently (at least how it is phrased) was the one committing the abuses.  The Mother divorced the father (the Mother is the one who is related to General Authorities) and the Father then remarried another woman.  The Step-Father/perpetrator committed suicide/died.

The step-children of that marriage also joined in the case.  Both mothers appear to have filed police reports that were not followed up on. 

The case alleges that the church helped them cover up the crimes of the cases and this is why the police did not pursue the case.  The reason it states is because of the daughter and son-in-law's connection to an apostle in the church.  It also is trying to enforce that the church is legally required to take church action in such cases (from what it appears to say in the article) and because the church did not, it should be forced to (or something similar to that effect).

I'd put the onus on the police having to take action regardless of any outside entity.

Edited October 5, 2018 by JohnsonJones

[Maureen]

22 minutes ago, Suzie said:

Can someone explain to me exactly who are the alleged perpetrators and victims? I read the link but I am confused as to who is who and who are the alleged victims. Sorry, my brain is fried today.

The plaintiffs and the Perpetrator are not named. Only the 2 defendants have been named.

M.

[zil]

7 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

Step-Children, children, and friends of those children of Brenda and Richard Miles.

No.  Children of "Perpetrator" (not Brenda or Richard Miles), also step-children of Perpetrator.  They allege Brenda and Richard Miles were in on it, but these weren't the children of Brenda and Richard Miles.

9 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

In addition, when one of their children was 16

A babysitter - doesn't appear to be any of the children/step-children of Perpetrator.

10 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

the Mother is the one who is related to General Authorities

No.  See my first quote of you and reply to that.  The mothers of the abused children are unnamed.

[The Folk Prophet]

3 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I also suppose it’s a very good thing that no prophet, latter-day or ancient, has ever raised a kid who turned out to be a dirtbag (or married a dirtbag).

Just think how the Corianton situation would have gone down in our day.

[The Folk Prophet]

2 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Poor Lehi.  Sometimes we remember him for the stuff he did, but a lot of the time we just remember Laman and Lemuel beating the crap out of Nephi and trying to turn him into fish food and all.

 

2 hours ago, askandanswer said:

(Old Testament | 1 Samuel 8:1 - 3)
1  AND it came to pass, when Samuel was old, that he made his sons judges over Israel.
2  Now the name of his firstborn was Joel; and the name of his second, Abiah: they were judges in Beer-sheba.
3  And his sons walked not in his ways, but turned aside after lucre, and took bribes, and perverted judgment.
 

 

1 minute ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Just think how the Corianton situation would have gone down in our day.

I believe @Just_A_Guy, that makes 3 examples so far.

[Suzie]

Oh well, now I am even MORE confused. Please tell me if I am wrong.

Married couple has kids. Man allegedly sexually abused them, mother divorced him and filed a police. Man re-married and the step-children of that marriage are joining the lawsuit.

The Miles (daughter and son-in law related to Pres. Nelson) are NOT this couple but they are being accused as being part of some sort of "touching parties" where they also allegedly sexually molested these children.

Correct?

[Vort]

2 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I believe @Just_A_Guy, that makes 3 examples so far.

Did you miss JAG's tongue-in-cheek meaning, or did I wrongly infer it?

[Suzie]

Oh well, now I am even MORE confused. Please tell me if I am wrong.

Married couple has kids. Man allegedly sexually abused them, mother divorced him and filed a police report. Man re-married and the step-children of that marriage are joining the lawsuit.

The Miles (daughter and son-in law related to Pres. Nelson) are NOT this couple but they are being accused as being part of some sort of "touching parties" where they also allegedly sexually molested these children.

Correct?

[The Folk Prophet]

1 minute ago, Vort said:

Did you miss JAG's tongue-in-cheek meaning, or did I wrongly infer it?

Probably?

[zil]

2 minutes ago, Suzie said:

Oh well, now I am even MORE confused. Please tell me if I am wrong.

Married couple has kids. Man allegedly sexually abused them, mother divorced him and filed a police. Man re-married and the step-children of that marriage are joining the lawsuit.

The Miles (daughter and son-in law related to Pres. Nelson) are NOT this couple but they are being accused as being part of some sort of "touching parties" where they also allegedly sexually molested these children.

Correct?

Yes.

[zil]

Meanwhile, I recommend against reading the actual complaint (for those who haven't already).  Someone is/was very, very disturbed (to put it mildly), and you don't want to read about it.

[mordorbund]

2 minutes ago, zil said:

Meanwhile, I recommend against reading the actual complaint (for those who haven't already).  Someone is/was very, very disturbed (to put it mildly), and you don't want to read about it.

My bad.

[Just_A_Guy]

14 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

 

 

I believe @Just_A_Guy, that makes 3 examples so far.

Perish the thought!  Guess I’ll go out and apostatize now.

[carlimac]

49 minutes ago, zil said:

No.  Children of "Perpetrator" (not Brenda or Richard Miles), also step-children of Perpetrator.  They allege Brenda and Richard Miles were in on it, but these weren't the children of Brenda and Richard Miles.

A babysitter - doesn't appear to be any of the children/step-children of Perpetrator.

No.  See my first quote of you and reply to that.  The mothers of the abused children are unnamed.

nevermind

 

Edited October 5, 2018 by carlimac

[zil]

Just now, carlimac said:

So it's not the prophets grandchildren who were abused. Right? Let's just get that clear. 

The complaint asserts more children were abused, but doesn't specify beyond that they were in the same ward (and in one document, children and nieces of Perpetrator).  But as far as I could see, no one is alleging the Miles children (if there even are any) were abused or otherwise involved.

[SpiritDragon]

For those confused, this article is easier to keep straight who is accused of doing what to who:

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900034840/bountiful-couple-denies-decades-old-allegations-of-abuse.html

As far as I can tell the people involved are as follows:

Plaintifs 1-3 (Jane Doe 1&2, John Doe 1) Children Of Perpetrator

Plaintifs 4-6 (Jane Doe 3&4, John Doe 2) Step Children of Perpetrator

Perpetrator - some random guy who had kids and lived in the Bountiful area who may or may not have abused his children and step children. (no relation to president Nelson or the Miles as far as we know)

Brother and Sister Miles - Daughter and son-in-law of President Nelson, accused of taking part in events with perpetrator sometimes at large public molest fests involving several others according to the allegations.

Babysitter - 16 years old at time was allegedly both a victim and a predator.

Exhibits 7-9 - the mothers of the children involved and psychiatrist (who planted false memories that some children don't recall, but others assure them did indeed happen?)

President Nelson: associated by relation to the accused and rumours stiring of being involved in some kind of high-power church cover-up to hide facts from law-enforcement.

Elder Maxwell: purportedly gave a blessing to help victims heal and forgive - somehow suggesting that indeed wrong was done. Although such a blessing could be given for much more benign reasons if it was given at all.

Edited October 5, 2018 by SpiritDragon