If Monson and any of his other fellow financial con artists are under the impression that Westminster Magistrates Court in London is some inferior courtroom of little or no consequence, which deals only with the more mundane and insignificant of misdemeanors, they should feast their eyes on some of the latest cases and participants who have passed through its hallowed halls:

http://www.itv.com/news/story/2014-03-01/moazzam-begg-syria-terror-charges/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/rwanda/10675970/Kent-pastor-led-militia-which-hacked-enemies-to-death-in-Rwandan-genocide.html

http://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/432/0/catholic-education-service-adviser-in-court-on-child-porn-charges

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/Feb/26/ex-barclays-traders-appear-on-rate-rigging-charges/

Monson et al take note:

The Chief Magistrate of England and Wales, who is the Senior District Judge of England and Wales, sits at the court, and all extradition and terrorism-related cases pass through it.

I would guess that if there is a choice of Magistrate to file the case in, the choice of Magistrate was not a random one by Tom.

This is a joke post, right?

Do you really think that the US would extradite an 80+ yr old US citizen who leads a group of 5+ million other citizens? Really?

Do you think the UK would even ask? 5-6 US senators are Mormon (if memory serves) and several Mormons are in the House of Representatives. Senators wield a lot of power and Cameron knows this. Do you think he would risk doing something so politically foolish?

Regardless of the merits of the case, let's not go to fantasy land. Monson isn't showing up and nothing is going to come of it. I'd bet $500 on it and would be happy to pay up if I'm wrong.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/07/2014 05:52PM by Susan I/S.

Monson may have no plans to attend the hearing, but my bet is on him sending suitable representation. There is no chance they'll thumb their nose at this court and risk an arrest warrant.

ETA: The church can afford good representation and I'm sure they've been told to take this seriously.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/07/2014 05:31PM by Devoted Exmo.

IMO it's a lose-lose for the church.
They either have to answer the charges or ignore them.
By answering them they will inevitably reveal more of their non-answer position.
By not answering them they mock the UK, not just Tom Phillips.
And, this coincides with their loss of the tax-exemption case to the human rights court. Go ahead and mock them too.

The church just demonstrates how it's a law unto itself. Democracies trying to resist the theocratic truth of the universe. How dare they.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/07/2014 05:44PM by amos2.

What does the City of London want?

This case is really stupid. There is no way it is going anywhere. I really wish the guy who filed it wouldn't have. He will lose any sort of credibility he may have had with church members, and will just be viewed as a crazy fanatic from now on. It is unfortunate. Also, asking for donations was a terrible idea. When it gets thrown out (which it inevitably will), he will have a bunch of other peoples' money. Hopefully he will choose to do something noble with it at least so he doesn't lose all credibility.

You need to go to the top of the main page and educate yourself about this case. Because as of this posting, you're the one who looks rather silly.

How is the truth stupid? It is going, far enough to get people leaving the church even faster, its going, to get you to come here to troll.

Asking for donations is a TERRIBLE idea?...seems to have worked for TCOJCOLDS pretty damn well. I gave Tom money, he can do what he wants with it. I trust he wil ldo more with it than I would in furthering truth

Inevitable thrown out? are you the magistrate or God? becuase otherwise you are speculating, and rather ignorantly at that.

What Tom P has done is truly noble already. Coming here barking that you "are sure" or "know" is the opposite of noble. Tom put EVERYTHING on the line in order to do the "noble" thing. Hos own reputation, his own time, his own money...he could have cashed in, become a GA and lived off the hog forever, assring himself heaven was guaranteed. Dont impune a man and his mission until you are half the person they are, buffoon.

Above pretty much says what I would say, so no need to duplicate. I also donated a rather large sum to Tom because he's doing what I, frankly, would never do myself even though I believe 100% that it needs to be done. The least I can do is put my money where my mouth is to help defray costs so that is not another burden he has to bear alone.

But this case is not going to accomplish anything. The person you're replying to is right -- this is going to crash & burn, making ex-Mos look stupid and childish. The church's historical claims are too enmeshed with doctrine. The court will not want to take the risk of ruling the doctrine itself a fraud, and there is no way to separate the historical claims from the doctrine. All the church has to say is that they take their historical claims on faith, and it's over. Or they can bring in enough pseudo-historical apologists to confuse matters too much for a finding of fraud. Courts are not in the business of judging either religious beliefs or historical claims. This can go nowhere.

Tom is not alone in this fight for God and truth. Many of us are as deeply passionate about this case going forward one way or another. As far as the future is concerned not another noble and wise person will join this fraudulent church. It is ok for you to stay strong and faithful to the end of your life for it is only worth that much in value.

Dear Sir or Madam:

Since you are referring to Tom Phillips, a household name on this board, you do not know what you are talking about as you address him as "the guy who filed this."

Why don't you edit that to "the former Stake President who also received the Second Anointing exonerating him for any future sins."

It is a ridiculous suggestion that a person who was willing to risk his brilliant ecclesiastical future AND his family over his respect for the truth - can lose credibility because of filing an accurate lawsuit, whether it wins or loses...

or that you have any as a drop-in know-nothing.


Anagrammy
momo

The "guy who filed this" has in fact been ordained a god by your priesthood leaders who still to this day have not excommunicated him. So have some respect. Anagrammy is correct.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/07/2014 10:21PM by azsteve.

Thanks to Observer 2, here is a letter (potentially) I may send to Elders Oaks and Packer (WITH Observer 2's permission, of course--taken from another, closed, thread)
It may change your outlook.

Why Does A Living Prophet of God Need Lawyers?

The LDS church has always taught the following:
God is the creator of worlds without number.
God has all power.
God has the power to “soften” or “harden” hearts.
God knows all things past, present and future.
God through the power of the Holy Ghost can reveal the truthfulness of all things.
God knows what everyone is thinking even before they think it.
Prophets are God’s living oracles on the Earth and God speaks through them.
The living Prophet is more important to follow than all past dead Prophets.

All of this would make a true Prophet an awesome force in a courtroom!

The scriptures are loaded with stories of Prophets so courageous, fearless, and powerful they seem like super heroes. In the Old Testament we read about Noah building the Ark while the whole population was mocking him, Moses boldly contending against Pharaoh, Elijah contending against the wicked priests of Baal, Daniel cast into the lion’s den, to name a few. In the New Testament we read about John the Baptist losing his head for his beliefs, Paul writing his epistles while in prison, Jesus being tried and executed for his teachings, and the stoning of Stephen. In the Book of Mormon we have the stories of Nephi beheading Laban to get the Plates of Brass and building a ship from scratch, Ammon boldly going into enemy territory to preach the gospel, Abinadi fearlessly preaching against wicked King Noah and being burned to death for his trouble, captains Moroni and Helaman leading troops into one blood drenched battle after another, we could go on and on but this should be enough to make the point.


There is not one scriptural account of a Prophet so fearful he has to hide behind lawyers. According to the Church the living Prophet is easily the equal of the ancient Prophets of scriptural history. So what happened? How did God and his living Prophets become so seemingly fearful?

Any one of the ancient Prophets mentioned above if ordered to appear in court would have seen it as a great missionary opportunity, possibly the greatest missionary opportunity in Earth's history, to fearlessly show up, alone, at court knowing that the Power of God was with him and at the very least deliver a powerful and convincing argument on behalf of himself and the Church. If President Monson really is a living Prophet of God and the LDS Church really is true and on solid ground, with nothing to hide, he should enthusiastically and fearlessly do the same.

Another serious issue is that by using strictly secular legal means to defy a court official’s order is a huge act of hypocrisy. The church has constantly condemned secularism, but it will be through secular means that the Church will deal with President Monson’s situation. Additionally it would defy the church’s own Articles of Faith as found in its scriptures. The 12th Article of Faith states: “ We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. “ If these words mean nothing to the living Prophet why should they mean something to his followers...who could start to wonder, “where is Abinadi when we need him?”

Thank you for your kind consideration.

Sincerely,

XXX XXXX

PS:

Should President Monson choose not to appear at the March 14 Summons it would likely be that the world, especially the membership, would question whether President Monson really believes in the God of Creation and the God of the Kingdom of God on Earth, i.e., The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, of whom he has so vehemently testified.

I am begging you to encourage President Monson to appear at court in the UK on March 14th. The repercussions on our beloved Church by his refusal to appear could be more devastating than obeying the Magistrate's Summons...plead "not guilty" and let God handle it from there.

to begin with. Not because they have nothing of value to say, but because a TBM would never consider the evidence.

In this case, it doesn't matter what the TBM thinks. The only thing that matters is what the judge thinks.

If you haven't listened to the "infants on thrones" podcast, including about 2.5 hours of interview with Tom Phillips, then you don't understand what the case is about, or how British law is different than US law (including the fact that the UK pays a portion of tithing for members of the church). American citizens may think they can thumb their nose at a summons, but I don't recommend it.

By agreeing to hear the case, the British court has already decided that it has merit. The British court has a large financial interest in getting to the bottom of the fraud allegations.

Who CARES if you lose credibility with a Mormon or ALL Mormons?

Mormons don't have much credibility in the rest of the world, at least for what they believe. Lip service might be paid here and there to some aspect of Mormonism but it's just to be polite. This is not a group of people worth impressing or even associating with. Good riddance to bad rubbish! Mormons only really respect those with the same low morals so losing cred with them is a sign you are rising above the hoi polloi.

Ya'll remember those little characters in the '90s who had crazy hair? Kind of like these dudes with the pink hair...http://www.thedrum.com/news/2013/01/31/one-90s-kids-internet-explorers-nostalgia-trip-tops-viral-video-chart

woobitywoo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This case is really stupid. There is no way it is
> going anywhere. I really wish the guy who filed it
> wouldn't have. He will lose any sort of
> credibility he may have had with church members,
> and will just be viewed as a crazy fanatic from
> now on. It is unfortunate. Also, asking for
> donations was a terrible idea. When it gets thrown
> out (which it inevitably will), he will have a
> bunch of other peoples' money. Hopefully he will
> choose to do something noble with it at least so
> he doesn't lose all credibility.

Lost other peoples money? Would that be somewhat like the strong arming of affluent Mormons to donate during the Prop 8 thingy?

I do not think Tom is claiming a divine power of discernment, as happened in that incident.

I'm in for a C note.

As am I, CJ...

Woobitywoo

As I mentioned on another thread, UK newspapers are wising up to the LDS & pretty soon they’ll be all over it. The Wizard’s bluff has been called & the Land of Oz is falling apart.

It’s clear from your post that you’re a person who has very little idea of what goes on outside of the Mormon bubble so I say to you, welcome to the real world my friend, welcome to a world where truth still matters, welcome to the world of the UK judiciary which, contrary to what you might think, isn’t modelled on & cannot be bought by, the LDS. Neither will it be influenced by any political considerations from yours or my side of the pond.

Do you really imagine that Tom Phillips is worried about his credibility with members of the cult? If you do then you are demonstrating to all ex-members here just what an incredibly arrogant organization the LDS really is.

I think we all know that Monson won't show up. Regardless of whatever view people have of the case, he will send appropriate legal council. Happens all the time here in the USA and for defendants of less reknown.

You could be right, angela, but the fact remains that Monson will need to get the UK Court's permission for him to send his legal representatives.

How many times will it take to get through to some posters here that we are "not in Kansas anymore"--at least from a UK legal perspective.
What MIGHT HAPPEN in the US is not relevant to this case.

If Monson was a real profit, he would show up and confound his enemies. Won't happen? Maybe not a real profit.

Oh the smart money is very much on him not showing up.

But the church won't simply blow off the court.
The court has real power and the church has assets
and people in the UK. The church knows that.

So likely the church will send attorneys instead who
will oh-so-respectfully explain their client
is simply physically unable to appear, m'Lawd.
This will be represented as the utmost in cooperation
and will in fact be delay and prevarication.

Indeed chances are the church is right now at least
attempting privately to negotiate something that
accomplishes the same delay and prevarication without
having to put in a public appearance.

The fact that nothing has been announced yet suggests
that the court is either not interested or has not
yet gotten an offer it considers satisfactory.
It's a good guess that church attitude has been
thick as usual, and resulted in little progress in
any negotiations.

My guess is it's going to go down to the wire:
either something will be announced just before the date,
or church attorneys will make their appearance etc..
My preference is of course the latter; the more that
happens in public view, the better.

This particular court does not make negotiations. Therefore, there are no negotiations going on behind the scenes of any kind. They don't have that ability. This is very unlike the courts in the US.

The question shouldn’t be, will Monson appear? But, what will happen if he doesn't?

I have no wish to offend anyone & I say this with the greatest respect for everyone posting here (apart from the trolls) but it gets a little tedious having to constantly correct the views of people whose knowledge of English law is sometimes almost non-existent. I’m not pointing the finger at anyone in particular so if I do cause offence I apologise in advance.

Monson has been 'summoned' to appear at a hearing to determine if he should be sent to a crown court for trial. This isn't a polite request from some 3rd world dictator it's a summons from the highest Magistrates court in the UK, a country with one of the oldest & most respected judicial systems in the world.

I have no idea whether Monson will turn up, I have no idea if the court will allow a representative to appear for him, it seems unlikely unless the LDS can provide a reason acceptable to the court. I have no idea if there will be an adjournment & a date set for another hearing, again it’s unlikely but possible. The one thing I do know for sure is that if Monson doesn’t appear without the prior permission of the Judge the hearing will most likely go ahead in his absence.

As to the ‘impossibility’ of extradition, the view among many of our US friends seems to be that UK courts stand in awe of US politicians. It should be understood that if a UK court issues a warrant for Monson’s arrest the UK government will have no choice but to apply for extradition. Yes that’s right, over here the government is subject to the law administered by UK courts.

Everyone in the UK knows that the current treaty between the US & the UK isn’t working as it should & many are angry at the cynical way the treaty is applied. I’ve said this before & it’s true, at the moment it’s all one-way traffic & the UK electorate is getting rather tired of seeing our citizens being extradited to the US while we wait in vain for one of yours. "How dare they try to extradite one of our citizens" seems to be the watchword at times.
The US government doesn't hesitate to apply for extradition of those they want to see in US courts so please don't imagine that we will continue to bow the knee to a few US politicians no one over here has ever heard of, especially when the man before the court is accused of defrauding UK taxpayers out of tens of millions of pounds. Remember there's an election coming along next year & even if Cameron was able to make a choice between the wishes/demands of US senators or the wishes of the British electorate, guess which he will choose.

Thank-you, IO!

There could be another option.

The real powers that could send Tommy to fall on his sword.

If the sight of Tommy, handcuffed, being led to a prison cell would be the best option financially, I would not put it past them.

Perhaps a smaller financial hit, and less assets seized.

And...another martyr created.

I think there is a lot of money in martyrs, and the story becomes easier to spin.

A martyr might be good for making the already-deluded even more deluded, but for people considering joining the Morg and for people in the Morg who are starting to doubt their religion of choice, having one of your prophets permanently branded as a fraud would be a major point against being a member of the organization.

And this case isn't just about Monson. Its about proving, in a court of law, that some of the core teaching of the LDS faith are factually inaccurate. Even the most deluded of Mormons would have reason to pause if that were to happen.

If Thomas S. Monson the President of the Corporation of the President, chooses not to respond to the summons, a warrant will be issued for his arrest. I think it is doubtful that the UK will seek extradition, but at the very least, Thomas S. Monson and perhaps his successor will not be able to set foot in Britain or Wales without being arrested. Now that is a video I would love to see on Youtube. Much better than watching him fall into a chair in Arizona.

I certainly don't know anything about British law, other than what I have heard Mr. Phillips explain on a recent podcast, but I hope that something significant comes from his action.

I don't understand why people on the ex-Mormon boards are so critical. He has seen harm done and he is trying to do something about it.

If there are more productive plans in the works, I would love to hear about them. Is someone preparing a July surprise? I hope that one of you nay sayers will have a great project of your own to share with us soon.

I, for one, am joyfully waiting for the Ides of March.

the pawns and pieces are artfully arrayed on the British board of battle

white knight to the cornered clown king q-2


and checkmate


blessed be ye mate!

I am also wanting to know this. How can England demand that a non UK citizen be ordered to appear? Lets say that someone in Africa didn't like the way I looked at them...could he sue and then the court demand that I appear in their court? Just wondering how the international law is going to play out in this case?

did you read any of the links?

get a clue