Maybe those of us who were flamed for pointing out the inconsistencies in her stories and saying we didn't believe most of it want to revel in our vindication (see Mike Norton's video).

Yes, Joseph Bishop was a sleaze bag as are many mormon men who think their "power and authority" gives them license to abuse their charges, whether they're the bishop, the father, the president of the MTC. But I listened to her recording and actually thought he was being honest in what he remembered and what he didn't (because it didn't happen). She's a master gaslighter and a con artist. I'm finally, many years too late, starting to pick up on that personality. having been the victim of it and having made very bad decisions based on interactions with those kinds of people.

This issue is far bigger than her. She could be lying through her teeth, but it would have still happened to other people.

I think people understand that when one person is lying about something another person could be telling the truth about something.

Isn’t that how it’s worked for centuries?

It is not at all unusual for both people in a dispute to lie about it.

That was collateral damage from the recent troll cleanup.

You made me laugh at the term "troll cleanup" . Perfect !

There are at least four issues involved in the Denson case.

First, is she a bad person? It appears that way. In the interview with NNN she seemed to confirm that she has been diagnosed with borderline personality disorder, which is evidently plausible. BPD is also a disorder that stems from an abusive childhood, and there is indication that she was sexually molested when young. Moreover the behavioral traits she exhibits as an adult are certainly compatible with that diagnosis.

Second, did Bishop rape her? The important point is that bad people, if that is what Denson is, get raped too. The fact that she is a liar does not mean she is lying about the incident in question or that Bishop is telling the truth. Denson's record casts doubt on anything she says, to be sure, and perhaps she consequently wouldn't get "beyond a reasonable doubt" if a criminal trial were possible.

Third, would a "not guilty" finding in such a trial vindicate Bishop? Yes and no. An acquittal would exculpate him in a judicial sense but that does not mean, for example, that O.J. Simpson was innocent. There is a lot of evidence--from the suit at the university over which he presided, the sexual predation that he acknowledged in Denson's recording, etc., that indicates Bishop is very possibly a sociopath. I have not heard a single person outside of Bishop's immediate family say that he is a good man.

So where does that leave things? It could easily be that a bad man raped a bad woman. Troubled people deserve justice too, and shouldn't be disregarded simply because they behave as damaged people do. But she will have a hard time persuading a jury of much of anything with regard to Bishop.

Fourth, the church isn't out of the woods. The standard of proof in a civil trial is "more likely than not," meaning 51%. Denson may have enough to clear that much lower hurdle. And it is entirely possible that the church covered things up. Denson knew about that room in the MTC; she described it; it was real. Bishop admitted to lots of sexual misconduct and asked which victim Denson was. If the church concealed credible accusations from the authorities, it could lose a civil trial--which it should.

I think the odds of an out-of-court financial settlement are still high. The cost of buying Denson out just went down significantly, but I'd bet the COB does not want to comply with the discovery subpoenas. It may be possible for the Lord's Law Firm to argue that the church wanted to spare the Bishop family and other innocent parties the pain of a spectacular trial. An NDA would thus become an act of mercy rather than an exercise in the church's CYA strategy.

My thinking is the same. She may make for a poor witness, but that doesn't mean that Bishop is innocent of the crime.

Usually I'm on the same page as you and agree with almost everything you write. Unfortunately, I feel like I need to jump in here because you are promoting several myths about Mental Illness. I'll probably be flamed in response as I have been in the past regarding this topic, but I guess I'm a glutton for punishment.

"First, is she a bad person? ... she has been diagnosed with borderline personality disorder"

Having BPD doesn't automatically make someone a "bad person". My wife was diagnosed with it and she is not a bad person, she never was. Such blanket statements increase the stigma associated with this illness. Do people who have BPD often have negative personality traits, sure, of course a lot of them do, stereotypes and stigmas are built on such things, but not all of them and the stigma that is associated with the illness makes it very hard for people to get treatment, let alone accept that they have a it in the first place. Please don't automatically associate a mental illness with someone being a "bad person".

"BPD is also a disorder that stems from an abusive childhood"

This is a myth that has, if I remember right, been largely proven inaccurate. It blames the parent when they are often doing they best they can with a child that has a difficult, little understood mental illness. This too increases stigma and makes parents feel ashamed and scared to talk about what they are dealing with because of that stigma. Does abuse at a young contribute, yes, it can, but it's not the only cause. There's a whole bio-social theory being looked at to describe the causes for BPD that relate to genetic disposition for extreme fear and emotion response, lack of emotional development (stunted either by environment or mental development issues), and repeated and extreme invalidation.

I don't have time at the moment to pull up relevant articles to reference everything and unfortunately, due to the nature of the illness, it's hard to weed through the pop-sci articles, outdated articles, and the down-right inaccurate articles to get to more recent and researched based articles to cite. I'm also unfortunately going to be away from a computer till tomorrow, so I'm sure there will be a "healthy" discussion around my post... should be fun.

https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/borderline-personality-disorder/index.shtml

edited a couple spelling mistakes... I probably didn't catch them all.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/03/2019 05:58PM by Finally Free!.

Finally Free! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Having BPD doesn't automatically make someone a
> "bad person". My wife was diagnosed with it and
> she is not a bad person, she never was. Such
> blanket statements increase the stigma associated
> with this illness. Do people who have BPD often
> have negative personality traits, sure, of course
> a lot of them do, stereotypes and stigmas are
> built on such things, but not all of them and the
> stigma that is associated with the illness makes
> it very hard for people to get treatment, let
> alone accept that they have a it in the first
> place. Please don't automatically associate a
> mental illness with someone being a "bad person".

You are right. I should have said that the behavioral patterns Denson exhibits are compatible with some forms of BPD, which is true. My shorthand concealed a lot of the complexity in a very complex disorder.



--------------
> "BPD is also a disorder that stems from an abusive
> childhood"
>
> This is a myth that has, if I remember right, been
> largely proven inaccurate. It blames the parent
> when they are often doing they best they can with
> a child that has a difficult, little understood
> mental illness. This too increases stigma and
> makes parents feel ashamed and scared to talk
> about what they are dealing with because of that
> stigma. Does abuse at a young contribute, yes, it
> can, but it's not the only cause. There's a whole
> bio-social theory being looked at to describe the
> causes for BPD that relate to genetic disposition
> for extreme fear and emotion response, lack of
> emotional development (stunted either by
> environment or mental development issues), and
> repeated and extreme invalidation.

I will quarrel a bit with this although I acknowledge that once again I used shorthand too boldly. As you state, there is a significant genetic element in BPD: the odds go up or down depending on prevalence in one's family. But childhood experience, problems in bonding in the better sense and abuse and/or neglect in the worse, play a major role. The NHS in the UK, for instance, lists these factors as major influences:

- being a victim of emotional, physical or sexual abuse.
- being exposed to chronic fear or distress as a child.
- being neglected by one or both parents.
- growing up with another family member who had a serious mental health condition, such as bipolar disorder or a drink or drug misuse problem.

That description seems fairly close to what we know of Denson's childhood, so I believe it reasonable to assume the diagnosis of BPD is good and helps explain her adult behavior. But that does not invalidate your critique. I wrote too hastily and am grateful for the corrections.



https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/borderline-personality-disorder/causes/

Thanks for the reply, and I agree with it, and I understand your "quarrel". You acknowledge the complexity of the issue and the list of factors that are major influences isn't wrong.

I will say that I tend to be a bit defensive. I've been on many boards and in many "Family of Someone with BPD" meetings where parents have been incorrectly blamed for an illness that in those cases wasn't their "fault". Raising a child with BPD is hard enough. The parents and people I meet in those meetings tend not to be the abusive ones. To be clear, I'm all too aware the people who cause those factors and how large an impact they make.

I also tend to be a little protective as I've seen what the stigma has done and still does to my wife even though she's been through a very intensive treatment program and you wouldn't know today that she was diagnosed with BPD in the past.

I don't know much about Denson, except the threads about her here. At the risk of making a broad statement myself, the assumption of BPD sounds like it makes sense.

If you don't mind, what style of therapy did your wife do? DBT? For the longest time the consensus was that therapy didn't work but I hear that some of the newer forms are producing good results.

Best of luck to both of you--and apologies for being too imprecise in my post.

Yes, it was DBT. For those who don't know what that is, it's Dialectical Behavioral Therapy (DBT). It's a newer-ish program (25-30 years old) that's been gaining strength as people realize it's effectiveness. It's an intense program with a minimum 18 month commitment, usually lasting longer than that. "Good" DBT programs have three major components:

First, meeting with a specialized trained therapist weekly to set goals, discuss emotional reactions, and analyze stressful situations. It is not standard talk therapy. Goals are written out and tracked on spreadsheets along with a weekly emotion based diary, and skills usage tracking (DBT Diary Cards).

Second, during the same period as meeting with the therapist, clients also go through a weekly skills training group program. This is not a standard mental health group. This is a class to teach participants what their emotions are, where they come from, why we have them, and tools to help deal with them more effectively. This includes how to deal with internal emotions as well as how to cope effectively in social interactions. There's homework and participants are expected to participate, provide examples of when they try skills and how well, if at all it worked.

The third component is for when emotions for the client get too big. If they feel their emotions are getting out of control and they are about to do something "ineffective" (self harm, damage an important relationship, etc) they can call/text their therapist at any time to get skills coaching and support during these crisis times. (There are limits, to avoid reinforcing self harm behaviors, the client is blocked from this for 24 hours after a self harm incident, the incident will be then discussed in great detail at the next therapist session)

This, as far as I know, is the only effective treatment for BPD. People with BPD essentially have had their emotional development stunted. They are essentially stuck with a toddlers understanding and set of emotions, but the mind and body of an adult. DBT tries to fill in the gap in that knowledge and help people understand what their feeling, why and how to cope with what is often for them, much stronger emotions than the typical person feels.

It's not for everyone. First, not everyone who has BPD has an easy time accepting that they have a mental illness. Second, even accepting it, getting to a point where they want help, via a 2 year, intense program with a lot of time commitment, is difficult. And sometimes it just isn't intense enough, unfortunately. The person with BPD has to be the one to sign up and they have to want to do it. It can't be forced.

That said, DBT is an amazing program, it is no exaggeration to say that it has been life changing, perhaps even life saving for my wife and me. It's not perfect, there is no "cure". Her emotions are still "bigger" than "normal" and they can still be overwhelming for her, but she has much better skills and tools to deal with those situations when they come. I have read the materials myself and have gone through the family version of the program so that I can better understand what she's dealing with.

I have to say, personally, I think something like DBT should be taught in schools (some schools are actually piloting programs to do just that). Imagine having a fact based, science backed training for your emotions. I think a lot of people could benefit from it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/04/2019 10:33AM by Finally Free!.

Thank you for this, FF! I have heard that some of the other new approaches have also yielded success but yes, DBT is the one that seems most intriguing.

Misplacement.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/04/2019 01:37PM by Lot's Wife.

Why wait for the schools?

I took that path as a parent - much to the chagrin of many. I can’t prove causation but the results are what I envisioned.

From my experience, the stereotype of bpd is spot on. They are right up their with other evil cluster B's. Evil and manipulative. Odds of someone recovering from bpd are very slim. Your life will always be painful if you stay with one.

>Fourth, the church isn't out of the woods. The standard of proof in a civil trial is "more likely than not," meaning 51%. Denson may have enough to clear that much lower hurdle. And it is >entirely possible that the church covered things up. Denson knew about that room in the MTC; she described it; it was real. Bishop admitted to lots of sexual misconduct and asked which >victim Denson was. If the church concealed credible accusations from the authorities, it could lose a civil trial--which it should.


Unfortunately, there may never be a trial. Denson's lawyers have quit the case:

https://www.sltrib.com/news/2019/06/03/mckenna-denson-looking/

Wow. That's great news for the church.

After everything Bishop admitted to in the recording with regard to other women and his sexuality, there is probably a lot that the church has buried. It would be nice to get that out in the open but I am skeptical that other women will come forward. They've had a long time to consider what choices make sense for them and their families.

Interesting that her lawyers quit on her. She has 3 weeks to find new ones. Me thinketh that something stinketh.

To "lot's wife" ....

Some of us have already come forward, we have for a while now. Our stories have been told to those that need them.We are not in the public limelight and have no desire to be.

britintexas, I'm in danger of probing too far so please ignore any or all of this.

Are you talking about abuse in the church in general or specifically about Bishop? Have the discussions been with the church, with the police, with lawyers, or with others? What sort of reaction have people received?

Again, I won't be offended if you do not respond to this. These are obviously extremely sensitive topics and I would not want to increase the discomfort of people who are dealing with them.

to Lot's wife ....

my story is abuse by Joseph Bishop in 1985 while he was MTC President. I was NOT a sister missionary. The church know of it, so do the police and lawyers. There is also another victim who's name i will not share due to keeping her private. Her abuse happened after her mission, Joseph was her mission President in Argentina. But her abuse happened while he was MTC president. All abuse happened on church owned property but in different places.

Thank you for this.

I am inclined to believe Bishop raped Denson (simply because she knew the room, described things that other sources have confirmed, and he did not deny the charges) but her credibility problems are so pronounced that if serving as a juror I probably could not vote for a conviction on the basis of her testimony. But my heavens, the man had a porn room in the basement of his office, lost a law suit for mistreatment of women in an era when such things were not taken seriously, and admitted in his recorded statement that he was a sexual predator. It therefore seemed highly likely that there would be other victims, victims with better records for honesty.

I'm sorry you and the other woman were caught up in the Bishop scandals. (I suspect there were others still.) Such an experience must be very painful still.

You have my best wishes.

Re-reading the "interview" that McKenna did with Bishop I was struck by one sliver of honesty on his part.

Didn't he say that the young women coming to him with their problems was "triggering" for him? He admitted that he had fought a sexual addiction all his life and he had appealed to the higher ups for counselors as he knew he was in over his head - especially with the threatened suicide of one young woman?

He seemed to realize that "take it to your bishop" was bad advice.

Anyone else remember that part in better detail?

And when Denson told him what he had done to her, he didn't deny it. He asked if she were someone else--pretty much admitting that couldn't keep the victims straight. His words indicate that he assaulted several women.

So if Denson, by dint of her record and assuming that the latest claims of poisoning and broken bones are false, has lost her credibility and cannot muster a winning case, we can still hope that others come forward.

auntsukey Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Anyone else remember that part in better detail?

I don't but why accept the calling? Sounds like a monster.

I indirectly experienced church cover-up and bury any sexual allegations. I was at the MTC with the next MTC prez that replaced Bishop. The church had an established protocol during my experience (I was not the victim, but was told to stay quiet after witnessing an elder sexually assault the female classroom teacher.)

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,2048959