https://www.sltrib.com/news/2019/05/15/with-byu-police/?fbclid=IwAR3u7ZIJ0TdSy2bLPnJ9JBrW9QpY0Pcqqio4-2BgfjxkFoBo6wXTfzQFPQI

With BYU police explicitly covered by open-records laws, Salt Lake Tribune seeks documents about Honor Code investigations.

The Tribune reiterated its request for correspondence between the police department and the Honor Code Office, first made by a reporter in 2016 amid reports that BYU was disciplining students who reported sex crimes if they were found to have violated the Honor Code when they were assaulted.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/15/2019 06:07PM by koriwhore.

I smell a late night shredding party at the HCO.

babyloncansuckit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I smell a late night shredding party at the HCO.

They'll produce the correspondence as soon as we see Individual 1's tax returns.

Hahahahahaha... individual 1... hahahahahaha!

HH =)

I smell the fragrance of the spheres.

I love the smell of napalm in the morning.

Are you afraid to surf this beach? I'm not afraid to surf this beach!

The horror. . .

The horror

I Smell a GROAN & from out-of-sight is heard:

Hey Guys! Welcome!!
This is what it's like to play with the big guys!!

The new law requires them to produce records that are “prepared, owned, received, or retained” by a governmental entity.

“I believe [records of police correspondence with Honor Code officials] are currently being retained by BYUPD, an entity subject to GRAMA,” Tribune reporter Jessica Miller wrote in the request.

BYUPD has probably already shredded the records in question so they can claim they don't have any "retained" records.

If they did that, people would go to jail. Once a request has been issued and a court's intervention arranged, destruction of evidence is a major crime. That would get the perpetrators thrown in the Big House and BYU sued to high heaven.

>If they did that, people would go to jail

Provided you can get the Utah County DA to prosecute anyone from BYU.

As I learned the hard way, the Cult records are theirs to do with as they please. They made it very clear they do not have to hand them over to anyone and they can do with them what they please.

As for other Cult records, financial, etc. I would not be surprised if these are kept on super secret VPN servers. They have lots of secrets and information they do not want released. Perhaps these new allegations will gather enough steam to have Washington come after them.

The church can say whatever it wants about its records. The fact remains that in many situations those records are subject to subpoena. In fact we just saw that with the BYU case. We've also seen it with the Denson case and the molestation case in West Virginia, in which cases the plaintiffs were given discovery and even the right to compel church witnesses to participate in the trials.

One of the reasons the church pays off those plaintiffs is to forestall the need to produce those records.

Exactly. People that have never lived in Utah can't comprehend how the law works, compared to the rest of the US. You have most lawmakers, prosecutors, Sheriffs,Police Chiefs, cops, investigators, Judges, AG's etc. etc. that swore an oath to the church, in a temple ritual, that they place above any and all other oaths they may have taken to the country, state, city, spouse, etc. The Utah bubble is truly a different world.

I lived in Utah for a short while. It was really weird. Today I assume that literally everyone in Utah is Mormon, and the non-Mormons are living in the wrong state. Like why live there if you are not Mormon?!

stillanon, when federal courts rule that the church must conform with their rulings, and the church balks, the FBI becomes involved. In a case like this, it would be malfeasance by Utah officials "acting under color of law," which is precisely when civil rights enforcement becomes a matter for the FBI.

The Utah bubble is real. So too is the Sword of Damocles held aloft by the Federal government.

I would just point out that this is currently just a state case - federal courts are not involved. The previous suit was filed in Utah state court, and appeal is currently pending before the Utah State Supreme Court.

Also consider this from the SLTrib article:

"After a two-year investigation, state authorities said they believed a BYU police lieutenant was taking information from other departments’ private records and passing it to university officials, including Honor Code enforcers.

That finding is consistent with internal BYU records The Tribune obtained in 2016, showing that an Honor Code worker in one case asked former BYU Lt. Aaron Rhoades for information on a woman who had reported a rape to Provo police. Rhoades used a shared digital storage system to review the Provo police case documents and then shared with Honor Code enforcers intimate details from the woman’s sex assault medical exam records.
...
Prosecutors declined to charge Rhoades, who retired from the police department in 2018 and gave up his police certification."

Also consider what started this whole affair - the BYU student who was raped and then the HC office refused to allow her to register for classes. In that case, it was a Utah County sheriff's officer who inappropriately accessed the Provo Police Dept. records from the victim's report and gave it to BYU. The prosecutor also refused to file any charges against that officer.

Understood.

But the Utah SC decides that BYU doesn't need to produce the records, the case would be a natural for appeal to the Feds. Denying civil rights under color of law (the police, the courts) is, I think, likely to receive critical Federal attention.

But the suit that was filed wasn't about denial of civil rights. The suit was filed by the Tribune regarding obtaining records under Utah's public records law (GRAMA). I don't see an issue of federal law in this case - but I could well be wrong.

In theory, that's how it's supposed to work. However, here, many Federal positions are filled with mormons. Including FBI posts. We watched how 2 Utah Attorney Generals were indicted and subpoenaed to turn over documents and property, both state and personal. They somehow managed to lose cell phones, a laptop, have their work and home computers hard drives wiped or crushed, I-pads stolen, etc. etc. Any other state and they'd be in prison. Here, they were given a walk.

Here a jury failed to convict. That requires only 1 holdout. They were indicted, charged, tried and also removed from office even though they were both members of the locally blessed political party.

Where do you get your "facts"? Shurtleff wasn't removed from office. He wasn't in office. Swallow resigned. Swallow wasn't tried by a jury. BYU Judge Dee Benson (Utah good ole boy) dismissed the case. This isn't AM radio. You can't just make up stuff to fit your narrative.

A guy named Swallow would have trouble in prison.

babyloncansuckit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A guy named Swallow would have trouble in prison.

Haha, awesome.

The Trib is collapsing under financial mismanagement and resorting to digital panhandling, so how are they gonna fund a 'massive lawsuit' when last year they fired 1/3d of their heavenly host of enlightened progressive axe-grinders?

HWint Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Trib is collapsing under financial
> mismanagement and resorting to digital
> panhandling, so how are they gonna fund a 'massive
> lawsuit' when last year they fired 1/3d of their
> heavenly host of enlightened progressive
> axe-grinders?
LOL, adapt or die.
What newspaper isnt behind a paywall these days?