Brother of LDS apostle (Christofferson) charged with attempting to sexually exploit children in Utah and Ohio

[I Have Questions]

Here is a link to the affidavit: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72 ... tofferson/ It was originally sealed, but was unsealed on 12/8.

Board members, If you take the time to read this affidavit, and you should even though it’s hard to read, keep in mind that Henry B. Eyring, the current first counsellor on the First Presidency, took the decision (along with Hinckley and Monson) to remove a red flag on Wade Christofferson’s church record so that Wade could be called to serve in positions of trust and responsibility over the children of members, and so that Ward Leaders and other members would be unaware of the risk he poses to minors.

I noted that the affidavit mentioned a letter Wade Christofferson sent to one of the victims and signed it “Grandpa”.

[Everybody Wang Chung]

Here is a link to the affidavit: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72 ... tofferson/ It was originally sealed, but was unsealed on 12/8.

Board members, If you take the time to read this affidavit, and you should even though it’s hard to read, keep in mind that Henry B. Eyring, the current first counsellor on the First Presidency, took the decision (along with Hinckley and Monson) to remove a red flag on Wade Christofferson’s church record so that Wade could be called to serve in positions of trust and responsibility over the children of members, and so that Ward Leaders and other members would be unaware of the risk he poses to minors.

I noted that the affidavit mentioned a letter Wade Christofferson sent to one of the victims and signed it “Grandpa”.

The contents of the affidavit are profoundly disturbing. It also raises serious concern regarding the actual number of victims who were abused by this monster since the removal of his annotation by the prophet and apostles.

[Dr Moore]

Here is a link to the affidavit: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72 ... tofferson/ It was originally sealed, but was unsealed on 12/8.

The less evolved person within me can only think "grab the rope" when I read things as appalling as that.

Wow, this was difficult to read. I could not have been so charitable as these two fathers if it was my daughter. How exactly did this guy get his record flag removed? The people deserve details, and if not, D. Todd and Henry B. should both resign. Disgraziad!!

As much as this story is an unmitigated disaster, I think time will reveal it is just another part of the tip of the iceberg. As time goes on, we learn more and more about the church’s efforts to protect itself, even if doing so meant protecting sexual predators or engaging in illegal investment practices. The one recurring lesson is that the church has one and only one primary mission: to protect the church.

[I Have Questions]

I find the following a bit troubling.

The Salt Lake City-based church said in a statement Friday that one of its leaders in Ohio “learned of abuse allegations against Wade Christofferson” involving an alleged victim in Utah on the evening of Nov. 6, and the church reported to law enforcement the following day. It learned of an additional alleged victim in Ohio on Nov. 11, the church said, and reported to law enforcement the next day.

The official affidavit that Res has very kindly linked to upthread, states that the Ohio police first heard about it when the Ohio father reported it on the 12th. The Church’s statement says that one of its leaders in Ohio reported it to Ohio police on the 7th. Would it be unusual for the affidavit to omit the details of the first contact that the police received? (Affidavits don’t contain “everything”, just sufficient information to justify bringing charges, but omitting the first contact seems unusual to my untrained eye). From the affidavit

DPD began working the case with the FBI’s Columbus Child Exploitation and Human Trafficking group after the report made by JD1.

This would mean they only began working the case a week after the Church official in Ohio supposedly reported it.

[I Have Questions]

The less evolved person within me can only think "grab the rope" when I read things as appalling as that.

Wow, this was difficult to read. I could not have been so charitable as these two fathers if it was my daughter.

On the face of it I think similar. Although this is two brothers discovering that their father has been grooming and abusing their children, his grandchildren, over an extended period of time, decades even. I can’t even begin to think how they, and the wider extended family, will process this. Added to that, they now know that their Uncle (an Apostle and part of the current First Presidency) and the other counsellor on the current First Presidency, have known for decades about the risk he posed to children and not only didn’t do anything to warn and protect others, they took action to hide knowledge of the risk he posed to children.

How exactly did this guy get his record flag removed? The people deserve details, and if not, D. Todd and Henry B. should both resign. Disgraziad!!

As much as this story is an unmitigated disaster, I think time will reveal it is just another part of the tip of the iceberg. As time goes on, we learn more and more about the church’s efforts to protect itself, even if doing so meant protecting sexual predators or engaging in illegal investment practices. The one recurring lesson is that the church has one and only one primary mission: to protect the church.

I’m inclined to agree. How many more abusers have been facilitated by the Brethren?

[Equality]

I spend next to zero time in faithful Mormon spaces. Is this story breaking through to the sheeple? How are they reacting?

If I were still a faithful Mormon, I think this would rock my testimony. I'd be demanding some fetchin' answers.

[Xenophon]

I spend next to zero time in faithful Mormon spaces. Is this story breaking through to the sheeple? How are they reacting?

If I were still a faithful Mormon, I think this would rock my testimony. I'd be demanding some fetchin' answers.

I pretty rarely read over at mormondialogue, but I did pop over to see if this was being discussed. The only thread I saw on the topic was here:https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/11 ... tofferson/ . A short, 2-pager and not even in their primary forum. If I'm being generous, activity over there looks even slower than here so it might just be that I'm not hip to the new pro-Mormon spaces that I should look at.

[I Have Questions]

I spend next to zero time in faithful Mormon spaces. Is this story breaking through to the sheeple? How are they reacting?

If I were still a faithful Mormon, I think this would rock my testimony. I'd be demanding some fetchin' answers.

I read online some speculation that the Church news release about the age reduction for female missionaries was timed, a few days after the news about Christofferson broke, was a calculated move to swamp the LDS socials etc with a big positive change. The rationale for this speculation was:
1. When the age reduction for males was announced it was done at General Conference, not on a random day of the week in a random month.
2. When news was breaking about Nelson’s relative being involved in child sex abuse, he called for a church-wide social media fast for a week under the pretence of encouraging members to draw closer to God.
3. Such a big announcement as reducing the age females can serve a mission, could have been made at October General Conference, or April General Conference, rather than an arbitrary Tuesday in November.

That speculation might be stretching, but we do know the Church works hard to hide things.

[Res Ipsa]

I find the following a bit troubling.

The official affidavit that Res has very kindly linked to upthread, states that the Ohio police first heard about it when the Ohio father reported it on the 12th. The Church’s statement says that one of its leaders in Ohio reported it to Ohio police on the 7th. Would it be unusual for the affidavit to omit the details of the first contact that the police received? (Affidavits don’t contain “everything”, just sufficient information to justify bringing charges, but omitting the first contact seems unusual to my untrained eye). From the affidavit

DPD began working the case with the FBI’s Columbus Child Exploitation and Human Trafficking group after the report made by JD1.

This would mean they only began working the case a week after the Church official in Ohio supposedly reported it.

IHQ, you are again treating your own speculation as fact. Please go back and read what the Church spokesman is actually reported to have said. He did not say that the church notified “Ohio” police about the first victim it learned of, who lives in Utah. From the information we have, there are two victims, one in Utah and one in Ohio. The abuse of each victim was discovered by that victim’s father. The abuse of the Utah victim was discovered a week before the abuse of the Ohio victim. For you to insist that the church knew of the Ohio victim a week before anyone knew of that victim makes no sense.

As I’ve said, Utah law enforcement has been completely silent, even though they’ve been involved in the investigation. What hasn’t been charged yet is the molestation that took place in Utah and Ohio. Those are state crimes. The federal charges are more trafficking related.

Also, unless you’ve investigated cases as an LEO, what makes sense to you is irrelevant. While a case is under investigation, It’s safe to assume that law enforcement knows more than the public. Utah law enforcement may have lots more to investigate than the facts as we know them.

[I Have Questions]

The official affidavit that Res has very kindly linked to upthread, states that the Ohio police first heard about it when the Ohio father reported it on the 12th. The Church’s statement says that one of its leaders in Ohio reported it to Ohio police on the 7th. Would it be unusual for the affidavit to omit the details of the first contact that the police received? (Affidavits don’t contain “everything”, just sufficient information to justify bringing charges, but omitting the first contact seems unusual to my untrained eye). From the affidavit This would mean they only began working the case a week after the Church official in Ohio supposedly reported it.

IHQ, you are again treating your own speculation as fact. Please go back and read what the Church spokesman is actually reported to have said. He did not say that the church notified “Ohio” police about the first victim it learned of, who lives in Utah. From the information we have, there are two victims, one in Utah and one in Ohio. The abuse of each victim was discovered by that victim’s father. The abuse of the Utah victim was discovered a week before the abuse of the Ohio victim. For you to insist that the church knew of the Ohio victim a week before anyone knew of that victim makes no sense.

The Church statement said an Ohio Church leader learned of abuse on the 6th and reported it to police. My mistake might be to assume he reported it to Ohio police, when in fact he may have reported it to Utah police. Who do you think the Ohio Church leader reported it to on the 7th?