Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

[Dr Exiled]

Rosebud, the cancerous pursuer keeps playing "I have secret evidence" and will not show the world the goods. And that makes me believe that we may have all of the relevant emails/texts.

What blows my mind here is that the texts provided to Mormonism Live make it look like Rosebud was trying to convince John to eject Joanna from Open Stories Foundation, while also trying to persuade him to give her administrator-level access to the Facebook group. I get the sense that her real play in August was to take control.

The power play angle makes sense and perhaps why she pursued JD in the first place. Perhaps it was mostly about taking control and not much about anything romantic. JD was a means to an end.

[Lem]

I agree Rosebud, including all her permutations, are thoroughly unreliable. But the text messages documented in this thread apparently show a superior telling a subordinate he wants her 'gone' due to his romantic entanglement with her. That abuse of power is sexual harassment no matter how unsavory anyone finds the victim, and that conclusion does not depend in any way on her flaky recitations, but only on Dehlin's texts.

I struggle with this conclusion, as it was John trying to break things off and Rosebud pressing for more. They were both married at this point. John wanting to stop and be professional, and her begging for more and for sex. Was it harassment when he made it clear they could never be in the same town together, or near each other without a chaperone? When she kept pressing, was it harassment for him to encourage her to leave for both of their marriages? Is it possible John being as generous as possible under the circumstances in that moment? I ask that in sincerity.

You are making great points, but yes, it is still the case that if a superior uses their influence, either through personal persuasion or by influencing others behind the scenes, to force a subordinate out of their employment due to their romantic/sexual relationship, I believe it is sexual harassment.

There were no winners by then, so it would have been choices of less-bad outcomes. Lots of people presumably saw these texts, and others, and other evidence, testimony and context, and all concluded this was not a case of harassment.

The one legal case I saw ended in a withdrawal because of the technicality of too few employees. Not all on this thread have concluded no harassment occurred.

Messy and winnerless, yes, but I don't think John was abusing his power by asking her to leave given the context of those text messages. Arguably, she was harassing him and he was being generous by first laying out super clear guidelines of professionality, and then encouraging her to leave if being professional was too much to ask. Or that's one way to look at things.

Yes it is, but it is not possible to rule out that another way to look at it is that a superior used his disproportionate power to get a subordinate out of her employment.

By this time, as well, all parties at Open Stories Foundation would likely have realized what kind of person Rosebud was turning out to be. I know a few things about her and her family, which I don't want to post here, because we share a number of friends in common.

It doesn't matter what the victim is like. Being goaded into abuse is not an excuse. The harassment here is entirely the responsibility of the perpetrator. I am not at all excusing Rosebud's behavior. I think it was, and continues to be abominable. But, this topic was about the allegations against Dehlin. in my opinion, there is a legitimate case of sexual harassment against him.

[Kishkumen]

Yeah. That makes more sense.

Then imagine her emotional reaction when John refuses to back her play and resigns, leaving Rosebud with no choice but to do the same or fight Open Stories Foundation. She chooses to fight.

[Kishkumen]

The power play angle makes sense and perhaps why she pursued JD in the first place. Perhaps it was mostly about taking control and not much about anything romantic. JD was a means to an end.

I would guess that the motives were mixed. She had a vision of what her life would be standing next to John as part of a power couple.

[Dr Exiled]

Welcome to the rosebud rabbit hole. Anyway, I missed the employee requirement thinking that the state act would give more bite than the federal law. Anyway, Rosebud could have pursued common law wrongful termination claims but I think we would reach the same conclusion as rosebud was the pursuer, assuming of course we have all the relevant information.

Thanks for the welcome. I think.

I got lucky because I looked at the statute to see if the limit was there. Otherwise, I’d have probably missed it too.

Does a common law wrongful termination in Utah have to be based on breach of contract or statute or violation of public policy? I’ve never gotten into the weeds in this area of law.

I don't practice in Utah but looked up a Utah SC case. It said, basically, that one can hire or fire except if it is against law and public policy violations are against law. There is a prima facie case that has to be made by the plaintiff and then the defendant can rebut. Assuming sexual misconduct fits into the public policy box (I didn't look to see if it did but is does in Nevada where I am), Open Stories Foundation could use what we have to show that Rosebud was the pursuer for control purposes and that would be pretty good evidence to rebut her prima facie case, assuming she could make one.

[Dr Exiled]

The power play angle makes sense and perhaps why she pursued JD in the first place. Perhaps it was mostly about taking control and not much about anything romantic. JD was a means to an end.

I would guess that the motives were mixed. She had a vision of what her life would be standing next to John as part of a power couple.

I call Rosebud to the stand your honor.

[Dr Exiled]

I struggle with this conclusion, as it was John trying to break things off and Rosebud pressing for more. They were both married at this point. John wanting to stop and be professional, and her begging for more and for sex. Was it harassment when he made it clear they could never be in the same town together, or near each other without a chaperone? When she kept pressing, was it harassment for him to encourage her to leave for both of their marriages? Is it possible John being as generous as possible under the circumstances in that moment? I ask that in sincerity.

You are making great points, but yes, it is still the case that if a superior uses their influence, either through personal persuasion or by influencing others behind the scenes, to force a subordinate out of their employment due to their romantic/sexual relationship, I believe it is sexual harassment.

There were no winners by then, so it would have been choices of less-bad outcomes. Lots of people presumably saw these texts, and others, and other evidence, testimony and context, and all concluded this was not a case of harassment.

The one legal case I saw ended in a withdrawal because of the technicality of too few employees. Not all on this thread have concluded no harassment occurred.

Messy and winnerless, yes, but I don't think John was abusing his power by asking her to leave given the context of those text messages. Arguably, she was harassing him and he was being generous by first laying out super clear guidelines of professionality, and then encouraging her to leave if being professional was too much to ask. Or that's one way to look at things.

Yes it is, but it is not possible to rule out that another way to look at it is that a superior used his disproportionate power to get a subordinate out of her employment.

By this time, as well, all parties at Open Stories Foundation would likely have realized what kind of person Rosebud was turning out to be. I know a few things about her and her family, which I don't want to post here, because we share a number of friends in common.

It doesn't matter what the victim is like. Being goaded into abuse is not an excuse. The harassment here is entirely the responsibility of the perpetrator. I am not at all excusing Rosebud's behavior. I think it was, and continues to be abominable. But, this topic was about the allegations against Dehlin. in my opinion, there is a legitimate case of sexual harassment against him.

Do you think Rosebud is responsible for continuing to pursue JD after he asked to have it stop?

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Do you think Rosebud is responsible for continuing to pursue JD after he asked to have it stop?

Of course she’s responsible for her behavior. She’s also accountable. She was forced to take a contractor position or get fired. She’s divorced. Her reputation is in the toilet. I don’t even know if she’s hirable (hireable? sp?) at this point. The best thing for Rosebud at this point is to get her CDL and hit the road for a while.

- Doc

[Lem]

You are making great points, but yes, it is still the case that if a superior uses their influence, either through personal persuasion or by influencing others behind the scenes, to force a subordinate out of their employment due to their romantic/sexual relationship, I believe it is sexual harassment.
The one legal case I saw ended in a withdrawal because of the technicality of too few employees. Not all on this thread have concluded no harassment occurred.
Yes it is, but it is not possible to rule out that another way to look at it is that a superior used his disproportionate power to get a subordinate out of her employment.

It doesn't matter what the victim is like. Being goaded into abuse is not an excuse. The harassment here is entirely the responsibility of the perpetrator. I am not at all excusing Rosebud's behavior. I think it was, and continues to be abominable. But, this topic was about the allegations against Dehlin. in my opinion, there is a legitimate case of sexual harassment against him.

Do you think Rosebud is responsible for continuing to pursue JD after he asked to have it stop?

Absolutely. Her behavior was abominable. Reading her texts was shocking.

It does not change the apparent situation that after engaging in a romantic and/or sexual relationship, in an attempt to end it a superior arranged for a subordinate to lose their job.

These scenarios of whether the victim's actions mitigate the claim of sexual harassment mimic almost exactly several of the scenarios we had to go through in our most recent module on sexual harassment. Every single time, the simple answer was "sexual harassment is wrong, regardless of the victim's behavior."

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Lem,

Exactly. Let’s think of it this way. What would’ve happened had John Dehlin acted in a professional manner?

That’s the bottom line.

- Doc