https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/these-mormon-twins-worked-together-on-an-irs-whistleblower-complaint-over-the-churchs-billions--and-it-tore-them-apart/2020/01/16/a6dcbb16-235f-11ea-bed5-880264cc91a9_story.html

"But it was Lars, acting alone, who decided to go public with the complaint. And after a lifetime of shared aims, that decision has opened a rift between the twins so deep that they stopped speaking to each other."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/17/2020 12:32AM by Beth.

that is sad when folks let religion or politics tear apart their good relations. what's the old saying "Blood is thicker than..."

I would have to see evidence of that . there are churchy factions who would love for us to think their bond is destroyed.

Sadly, they're quoted:

"David declined to be interviewed for this story and in a statement said Lars is not authorized to speak for him.

“ 'Any public disclosure of information that has been in my possession was unauthorized by me,' he wrote. 'Repeated attempts to dissuade my brother, Lars Nielsen, from making public disclosures have been ignored.'

"In a text to The Post, Lars said he hopes his brother can forgive him. 'I believe that both our decisions were ethical and true according to our individual values and circumstances,' he said. 'They say there is a good twin and a bad twin. I disagree. But if I’m wrong, then I’m not the good twin. I’m sorry, Dave. I hope I can tell you soon.' "



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/18/2020 12:27AM by Beth.

Another family broken up by Mormonism. Happens all the time.

I don’t believe it. David is trying to avoid being sued for breaking his non-disclosure agreement. He hopes that blaming it all on his brother will protect him from liability. They are colluding together.

I’m glad the info is out in the open anyway.

Do you have any evidence of an NDA? Because that isn't something you can simply assert.

The WaPo article states that David signed a NDA that was binding not only on him, but also on his heirs -- which sounds rather sketchy, doesn't it? The article further states (based on an interview with Lars) that David decided that he didn't want to take the allegations public on advice from his lawyers. David was apparently afraid that the church would sue him based on the NDA.

So IMO Lars made a unilateral decision that could potentially harm his brother. He also released private communications between the two of them. If I were David, I'd be unhappy with Lars as well.

OTOH, it's possible the public disclosure was made solely by Lars with the aim of giving David plausible deniability -- but I don't think this is the case. Again, the potential for harm is too great. You just don't do this to a sibling.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/18/2020 10:24AM by summer.

Do you think church leaders or a cult wack job would try to kill the Nielsen brothers or their entire bloodline? Every Mormon thinks they are criminals and bitter people doing this for a whistleblower payout. Thoughts?

I doubt it. Mormons are simply dismissing what the brothers have done because they are conditioned to make excuses for the church.

Thank you (and FakeNews) for straightening me out on that.

Yes, there is any way to bind one's progeny. That sounds a bit Old Testament, I'd think, with the legal restraint lasting unto the third and fourth generation.

I would be furious at my brother if he'd violated my confidences in this situation. Lars has created some serious legal liability for David, the one who is bearing all the risk.

FakeNews Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don’t believe it. David is trying to avoid
> being sued for breaking his non-disclosure
> agreement. He hopes that blaming it all on his
> brother will protect him from liability. They are
> colluding together.
>
> I’m glad the info is out in the open anyway.


Agree. There is some sort of power play going on here. I'm sure they talk on the phone every day.

You can listen to the http://infantsonthrones.com/ interviews with Lars on December 16 and January 17, 2020.

Wait a minute. Didn't David file a whistleblower complaint against Ensign Peak Advisors, for being a charity nonprofit that gives nothing to charity, makes lots of profit, and gives illegal off the book loans to businesses?

Also, NDAs are not enforceable WRT illegal behavior. David apparently had no problem going after LDS Inc. seems to me he is upset about this whole thing going public. I'm sure LDS Inc considers his divulging info to the IRS to violate his NDA. A court may or may not agree.

In any case, David was in legal jeopardy as soon as the whistleblower complaint was filed. He thought the potential reward was worth the risk. I assume Lars was the one who went public. Now they really do have to win with the IRS, or David is well and truly screwed. I think David thought he could remain totally anonymous. I think that is pretty naive.

Yes, David filed the whistleblower complaint with the IRS after consulting and planning with Lars. David did not want to go public on the advice of his lawyers. Lars was the one made the unilateral decision to take the complaint public (i.e. to the press.)

Unless David has said otherwise, I'm not sure that we can speculate as to his motivations for making the complaint, above being shocked at what he saw going on at Ensign Peak. IIRC, David still attends the Mormon church.

I'm starting to think whistle blower laws need serious revision. We see such activity revealed and attacked aggressively by politicians and others who cannot be expected to behave otherwise unless they are subject to condign penalties; and here we have this fiasco as well.

It's unreasonable to expect people who have doubts about their organizations not to seek the advice of others, but as soon as they file their complaints such advice becomes a violation of law. If NDAs prevent people from discussing their concerns with experts and/or family, they effectively block whistle blowing.

This stuff is a mess. If it is not clarified, no one will dare challenge big organizations.

Yes, I agree. I have also long felt that way about non-compete agreements that some employees are forced to sign. I signed a non-compete agreement once because I was young and naïve, and I felt that I didn't have any choice about it (the same company also signed me on as a contract employee to begin with, until they were certain of my work ethic and abilities. I felt that was a bait-and-switch since this was never discussed in the interview process.)

My then boyfriend, who had a MBA from a top school, told me that he didn't think the non-compete agreement was enforceable. But it still weighed on my mind. Eventually the company in question wanted to let me go (it was never the best fit for me in the first place.) My bosses did not object when I found a much better job elsewhere.

IMO companies such as Ensign Peak that are run for supposed charitable purposes need to have open books.