Not sure. Either way "I didn't harass her because we hadn't implemented a sexual harassment policy yet" really instills a lot of confidence.Jersey Girl wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 5:02 amWhat is the effective date on that policy?jpatterson wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 4:58 am
According to the Open Stories Foundation's sexual harassment policy it is.
Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
-
jpatterson
- Regional Representative
- Posts: 673
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:17 am
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
-
jpatterson
- Regional Representative
- Posts: 673
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:17 am
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
What I Know
1) I know that John Dehlin lies. He lies about his motivations, he lies about his intentions, he lies about his character. He elevates selective editing to an art form. He uses the same kind of twisted logic and word games the very apologists he criticizes use to justify Book of Mormon historicity and Joseph's sexual endeavors. DP's "maybe horses were tapirs" is John's "we were equals."
2) I know that the allegations of harassment and abuse against John are anything but "baseless" as John has so often characterized them as. John's approach to this whole fiasco is very Bill Clintonian. Uses very precise wording to avoid blatant lies and yet spins the exact yarn he wants to tell.
3) I know that I believed John in 2014 when he told me Rosebud was a crazy psycho stalker and told me she was trying to take him down here on MD and via a frivolous lawsuit. I know that, at the time, that belief was backed up by my reading of Rosebud's posts here. I know that I carried that belief (crazy, psycho, stalker) and publicly and privately defended John and disparaged Rosebud's story for almost three years. I know I argued privately with Kate Kelly about it. I know that John is very good at telling people stories, getting them to believe him, then getting them to defend him vehemently.
4) I know that after spending several dozen hours examining reams of documents and hours of recordings, I now believe a completely different narrative than the one John wants everyone to believe: that Rosebud is crazy and that any allegations of impropriety are baseless.
5) I know that John and Rosebud were involved in an incredibly complex sexual relationship that cannot be boiled down to simple characterizations. Anyone who attempts to throw blanket statements around their relationship (it was all consensual or it was all sexual harassment/abuse) is being intellectually lazy. I also know that anyone using black-and-white arguments to criticize decision making in the midst of such a complex relationships (such as she consented once, so everything after that was fair game) is actively contributing to rape culture.
6) I know that trauma, especially related to sexual experiences or activity is also incredibly complicated, elicits intense feelings of shame which can warp perception and often takes a long time to sort through. I know that what someone believes about the nature of a relationship and specific interactions often look very, very different with time, separation and especially professional therapy. To make declarations about what someone believed or didn't believe while the person was in the midst of experiencing trauma and then assign finality to those beliefs, thus deriding any future insights they may form through time, separation and therapy is similarly shortsighted and completely flies in the face of published research about how our brains process trauma. I know that people who argue these issues in black and white (she said it was consensual at the time so she can't change her mind later) are either not arguing in good faith or are completely ignorant of the nuances of trauma and sexual violence. I know that power dynamics also play a major role in how consent is understood and processed in the moment and later.
7) I know that Rosebud told John in the summer of 2011 that he should go back to his wife and that a physical relationship between them would only end in disaster. I know that this response only made John pursue her more. I know that John sexted with Rosebud after the texts that were revealed on ML, undercutting his claim that he didn't want any sexual contact with her.
8) I know that once she had heard enough detail from both parties, Joanna Brooks' primary motivation was protecting the foundation from legal liability and potential litigation and that her decisions were based almost entirely on that framework.
9) I know that Rosebud offered contradicting claims, stories and statements in the midst of the period between Aug 10 and Aug 31, when she was terminated. I know at least one of those contradictions (between her and Joanna) was the result of John using intimidation tactics like unilaterally locking her out of the website in the midst of Joanna trying to negotiate a peace treaty. I know Rosebud also behaved irrationally in the months after her firing. I know that John fanned flames behind the scenes and then played innocent to those who controlled his fate.
10) I also know that John continues to present his side of the story, to this day, using his same selective editing techniques and continues to manipulate people into believing that any allegations are baseless and we should feel bad because he was just a guy trying to navigate some crazy stalker (see, look how crazy her texts and emails are). I know, for example, that Rosebud's sexual harassment claim was withdrawn not because of lack of merit, but because of lack of standing, an extremely important distinction that John continues to intentionally obfuscate. I know that Natasha at the very least lacked credibility, and at the most was flat-out lying in her ML interview. I also know the "blackmail" email was not presented in its full context and was a response to what Rosebud interpreted as John trying to control the narrative yet again.
11) I know that John has violated federal tax code. I know that John started the foundation in order to get people to donate more money than they normally would otherwise so he could pay for his PhD and for personal expenses. I know that John was advised against this approach but did it anyway. I know that John desired as little board empowerment as possible, at least in the early years of the foundation. I know that as a result of the Rosebud episode, he gained almost complete control over the foundation and raised his pay (including paying himself back pay) despite spending more time on his PhD pursuit and less time running the Open Stories Foundation.
12) I know that John financially benefited from Rosebud's firing as well as from his excommunication and would likely have been forced to make a new plan professionally if he had gone "all the way" with Rosebud, including abandoning or postponing his PhD. I know that Rosebud suffered financially, educationally and professionally as a result of being terminated from Open Stories Foundation.
What I Believe but Don't Know
13) I believe that Rosebud's relationship with John was both toxic and intoxicating. I believe they loved each other but were both very very bad for each other. I believe part of that was the fact that John was afraid if he had intercourse, he would be excommunicated for adultery. I believe John had pinned all his professional hopes on a honorable and public excommunication for agitating against the church. I believe Rosebud was being gaslighted on a frequent basis because of John's confliction between wanting to leave his wife and be with her and wanting to keep his family intact and get his honorable excommunication. I believe all of these elements caused him to toy with her on an ongoing basis. I believe this manipulation explains her irrational behavior at many turns and at many critical moments. I refer to No. 5 above.
14) I believe that the description Rosebud gives of her and John's sexual interaction in Idaho would, by most legal definitions, be considered at least misdemeanor sexual battery. I believe she is telling the truth about this encounter.
15) I believe that Rosebud has many, many, many, many regrets about the decisions she made along the way, many of the things she said along the way. I believe she has a different understanding about the nature of her relationship with John than she did as things were transpiring. I refer to No. 6 above.
16) I believe that John set in plan a motion to intimidate and push out Rosebud after it became clear that Open Stories Foundation conferences were becoming a success and Rosebud was gaining more authority and decision-making abilities within the organization that he founded. I believe he was afraid that if conferences became the primary breadwinner of Open Stories Foundation that his podcast would suffer and he would lose his chance at an honorable excommunication. I believe his ultimate conflict was between wanting Rosebud and wanting a September Six-type legacy.
Given everything above,
17) I believe that Rosebud was sexually harassed, according to both legal definitions and the Open Stories Foundation's current policy (which conveniently wasn't implemented until its leader had already sexually harassed a subordinate).
18) I believe Joanna Brooks was in the unenviable position of having to choose between two potential futures of Open Stories: One where John would lead or one where Rosebud would lead. I believe Joanna, in that moment, chose John. I believe she has deep regrets about this decision.
19) I believe Joanna's decision in No. 18 was further indication to Rosebud that John had all the power. I believe that further exacerbated her trauma. I believe that caused her to make even more rash, poor decisions.
20) I believe that Nos. 18 and 19 adequately explain the two pieces of evidence John presented during the ML interview. I believe Rosebud was goading John about having sexual intercourse because she knew he couldn't because he was saving himself for a "righteous" excommunication and because he only really enjoyed his cat-and-mouse pursuit of her. I believe John was lying in wait for this very kind of ammunition since he had already decided to get rid of her. I also believe, given further context, the October "blackmail" email is easily interpreted as facetious on Rosebud's part...but still very much ill-advised.
20) I believe that both parties made statements and carried out actions that were contradictory during the fallout. I believe both sides simultaneously wanted the truth out and their secrets kept. And I believe the failure of all parties (John/Margi, Rosebud/her husband/Open Stories Foundation board) to come to an agreement on how to handle the public fallout of what had happened set off a chain reaction of back-and-forth retaliation, threats that extend until today.
21) I believe Rosebud was well within her rights to file a sexual harassment claim, something that many victims can never bring themselves to do. I believe it was a brave act and any attempts to frame that act in a disparaging way (including by John) have a chilling effect on victims and contributes to a culture where harassment is allowed to thrive
22) I believe John's actions, lies, manipulations and harassment make him uniquely unqualified to be talking about or holding himself up as an activist or leader on many of the issues he talks about within Open Stories Foundation properties and activities.
23) I believe that John's actions, character and lack of integrity make him uniquely unqualified to run a public charity that handles tax-exempt donations.
24) I believe that the only way for John to find the peace he has been looking for all these years is to finally, finally be honest with himself and with others. I believe we are all redeemable. I believe the hill is very, very high for John to climb. But I believe he can do it.
Finally,
I believe there is nothing more dehumanizing than trying to erase someone. I believe Rosebud, for all of her self-admitted faults, is someone who has experienced ten lifetimes of trauma. I believe her best days are ahead of her. And I believe not that she is stronger because of all of this, but that she has emerged and will continue to emerge from this because she is strong.
1) I know that John Dehlin lies. He lies about his motivations, he lies about his intentions, he lies about his character. He elevates selective editing to an art form. He uses the same kind of twisted logic and word games the very apologists he criticizes use to justify Book of Mormon historicity and Joseph's sexual endeavors. DP's "maybe horses were tapirs" is John's "we were equals."
2) I know that the allegations of harassment and abuse against John are anything but "baseless" as John has so often characterized them as. John's approach to this whole fiasco is very Bill Clintonian. Uses very precise wording to avoid blatant lies and yet spins the exact yarn he wants to tell.
3) I know that I believed John in 2014 when he told me Rosebud was a crazy psycho stalker and told me she was trying to take him down here on MD and via a frivolous lawsuit. I know that, at the time, that belief was backed up by my reading of Rosebud's posts here. I know that I carried that belief (crazy, psycho, stalker) and publicly and privately defended John and disparaged Rosebud's story for almost three years. I know I argued privately with Kate Kelly about it. I know that John is very good at telling people stories, getting them to believe him, then getting them to defend him vehemently.
4) I know that after spending several dozen hours examining reams of documents and hours of recordings, I now believe a completely different narrative than the one John wants everyone to believe: that Rosebud is crazy and that any allegations of impropriety are baseless.
5) I know that John and Rosebud were involved in an incredibly complex sexual relationship that cannot be boiled down to simple characterizations. Anyone who attempts to throw blanket statements around their relationship (it was all consensual or it was all sexual harassment/abuse) is being intellectually lazy. I also know that anyone using black-and-white arguments to criticize decision making in the midst of such a complex relationships (such as she consented once, so everything after that was fair game) is actively contributing to rape culture.
6) I know that trauma, especially related to sexual experiences or activity is also incredibly complicated, elicits intense feelings of shame which can warp perception and often takes a long time to sort through. I know that what someone believes about the nature of a relationship and specific interactions often look very, very different with time, separation and especially professional therapy. To make declarations about what someone believed or didn't believe while the person was in the midst of experiencing trauma and then assign finality to those beliefs, thus deriding any future insights they may form through time, separation and therapy is similarly shortsighted and completely flies in the face of published research about how our brains process trauma. I know that people who argue these issues in black and white (she said it was consensual at the time so she can't change her mind later) are either not arguing in good faith or are completely ignorant of the nuances of trauma and sexual violence. I know that power dynamics also play a major role in how consent is understood and processed in the moment and later.
7) I know that Rosebud told John in the summer of 2011 that he should go back to his wife and that a physical relationship between them would only end in disaster. I know that this response only made John pursue her more. I know that John sexted with Rosebud after the texts that were revealed on ML, undercutting his claim that he didn't want any sexual contact with her.
8) I know that once she had heard enough detail from both parties, Joanna Brooks' primary motivation was protecting the foundation from legal liability and potential litigation and that her decisions were based almost entirely on that framework.
9) I know that Rosebud offered contradicting claims, stories and statements in the midst of the period between Aug 10 and Aug 31, when she was terminated. I know at least one of those contradictions (between her and Joanna) was the result of John using intimidation tactics like unilaterally locking her out of the website in the midst of Joanna trying to negotiate a peace treaty. I know Rosebud also behaved irrationally in the months after her firing. I know that John fanned flames behind the scenes and then played innocent to those who controlled his fate.
10) I also know that John continues to present his side of the story, to this day, using his same selective editing techniques and continues to manipulate people into believing that any allegations are baseless and we should feel bad because he was just a guy trying to navigate some crazy stalker (see, look how crazy her texts and emails are). I know, for example, that Rosebud's sexual harassment claim was withdrawn not because of lack of merit, but because of lack of standing, an extremely important distinction that John continues to intentionally obfuscate. I know that Natasha at the very least lacked credibility, and at the most was flat-out lying in her ML interview. I also know the "blackmail" email was not presented in its full context and was a response to what Rosebud interpreted as John trying to control the narrative yet again.
11) I know that John has violated federal tax code. I know that John started the foundation in order to get people to donate more money than they normally would otherwise so he could pay for his PhD and for personal expenses. I know that John was advised against this approach but did it anyway. I know that John desired as little board empowerment as possible, at least in the early years of the foundation. I know that as a result of the Rosebud episode, he gained almost complete control over the foundation and raised his pay (including paying himself back pay) despite spending more time on his PhD pursuit and less time running the Open Stories Foundation.
12) I know that John financially benefited from Rosebud's firing as well as from his excommunication and would likely have been forced to make a new plan professionally if he had gone "all the way" with Rosebud, including abandoning or postponing his PhD. I know that Rosebud suffered financially, educationally and professionally as a result of being terminated from Open Stories Foundation.
What I Believe but Don't Know
13) I believe that Rosebud's relationship with John was both toxic and intoxicating. I believe they loved each other but were both very very bad for each other. I believe part of that was the fact that John was afraid if he had intercourse, he would be excommunicated for adultery. I believe John had pinned all his professional hopes on a honorable and public excommunication for agitating against the church. I believe Rosebud was being gaslighted on a frequent basis because of John's confliction between wanting to leave his wife and be with her and wanting to keep his family intact and get his honorable excommunication. I believe all of these elements caused him to toy with her on an ongoing basis. I believe this manipulation explains her irrational behavior at many turns and at many critical moments. I refer to No. 5 above.
14) I believe that the description Rosebud gives of her and John's sexual interaction in Idaho would, by most legal definitions, be considered at least misdemeanor sexual battery. I believe she is telling the truth about this encounter.
15) I believe that Rosebud has many, many, many, many regrets about the decisions she made along the way, many of the things she said along the way. I believe she has a different understanding about the nature of her relationship with John than she did as things were transpiring. I refer to No. 6 above.
16) I believe that John set in plan a motion to intimidate and push out Rosebud after it became clear that Open Stories Foundation conferences were becoming a success and Rosebud was gaining more authority and decision-making abilities within the organization that he founded. I believe he was afraid that if conferences became the primary breadwinner of Open Stories Foundation that his podcast would suffer and he would lose his chance at an honorable excommunication. I believe his ultimate conflict was between wanting Rosebud and wanting a September Six-type legacy.
Given everything above,
17) I believe that Rosebud was sexually harassed, according to both legal definitions and the Open Stories Foundation's current policy (which conveniently wasn't implemented until its leader had already sexually harassed a subordinate).
18) I believe Joanna Brooks was in the unenviable position of having to choose between two potential futures of Open Stories: One where John would lead or one where Rosebud would lead. I believe Joanna, in that moment, chose John. I believe she has deep regrets about this decision.
19) I believe Joanna's decision in No. 18 was further indication to Rosebud that John had all the power. I believe that further exacerbated her trauma. I believe that caused her to make even more rash, poor decisions.
20) I believe that Nos. 18 and 19 adequately explain the two pieces of evidence John presented during the ML interview. I believe Rosebud was goading John about having sexual intercourse because she knew he couldn't because he was saving himself for a "righteous" excommunication and because he only really enjoyed his cat-and-mouse pursuit of her. I believe John was lying in wait for this very kind of ammunition since he had already decided to get rid of her. I also believe, given further context, the October "blackmail" email is easily interpreted as facetious on Rosebud's part...but still very much ill-advised.
20) I believe that both parties made statements and carried out actions that were contradictory during the fallout. I believe both sides simultaneously wanted the truth out and their secrets kept. And I believe the failure of all parties (John/Margi, Rosebud/her husband/Open Stories Foundation board) to come to an agreement on how to handle the public fallout of what had happened set off a chain reaction of back-and-forth retaliation, threats that extend until today.
21) I believe Rosebud was well within her rights to file a sexual harassment claim, something that many victims can never bring themselves to do. I believe it was a brave act and any attempts to frame that act in a disparaging way (including by John) have a chilling effect on victims and contributes to a culture where harassment is allowed to thrive
22) I believe John's actions, lies, manipulations and harassment make him uniquely unqualified to be talking about or holding himself up as an activist or leader on many of the issues he talks about within Open Stories Foundation properties and activities.
23) I believe that John's actions, character and lack of integrity make him uniquely unqualified to run a public charity that handles tax-exempt donations.
24) I believe that the only way for John to find the peace he has been looking for all these years is to finally, finally be honest with himself and with others. I believe we are all redeemable. I believe the hill is very, very high for John to climb. But I believe he can do it.
Finally,
I believe there is nothing more dehumanizing than trying to erase someone. I believe Rosebud, for all of her self-admitted faults, is someone who has experienced ten lifetimes of trauma. I believe her best days are ahead of her. And I believe not that she is stronger because of all of this, but that she has emerged and will continue to emerge from this because she is strong.
-
Moksha
- God
- Posts: 7788
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
- Location: Koloburbia
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
jpatterson wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 5:45 am
I believe that John Dehlin lies.
Lies about his motivations
Lies about his intentions,
Elevates selective editing to an art form.
I'm a Rosebudite
And a Rosebudite just believes!
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
-
Dwight
- 2nd Counselor
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Sun May 02, 2021 3:33 pm
- Location: The North
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
I think Joanna did the best with what she knew at the time. Which we don’t even know, and unless she has copious notes she may fall into unreliable memory. I also don’t think she has any compelling reason to get involved yet again.
I also think it isn’t fair to characterize that Joanna asked them to resign and become contractors to A) absolve any sexual harassment claims B) sneaky way to get rid of Rosebud and only get JD as a contractor. They even hired Rosebud back for a time after she was fired. I think Joanna absolutely showed that she wanted this to work with JD doing one thing and Rosebud doing the other and she never wanted the streams to cross. Unfortunately that meant Rosebud losing access to some of the things she was doing as it was hard to keep the line between the podcast and conferences otherwise.
Where I consult right now the policy is you can fraternize with someone in a separate chain of command, I don’t know how far away, but you can’t share a manager and maybe a manager’s manager nor can you have one be the manager of the other. Anything taken to HR is basically both are put on paid suspension and an investigation is done, they don’t ask, they just do it. They ultimately are protecting the company and they will see if there is a way to let both come back, but they are going to offer severance to one or both just to make it go away since it is ultimately a distraction and potential quagmire.
It was a sticky bad situation and I think Rosebud regrets it and I think JD regrets it. Rosebud seeks to put all the blame on JD or the lion’s share, but that isn’t supported from her own testimony. JD would like to never speak of it again, but isn’t shy to defend himself. I’m not here to defend JD, but I am interested to know as much of the truth of it as I can and I will poke holes and question things and right now it is mostly Rosebud and her allies that is putting out new information to look at.
I think much of Rosebud’s interpretation and analysis is different now then it was then. I am getting snippets though that show she might interpret it one way today, but that wasn’t how she saw it at the time. I don’t think JD was a master manipulator, he could have just been a person having an affair and having conflicted feelings about it. Which I think John doesn’t look good, under current Open Stories Foundation policy he sexually harassed Rosebud, it doesn’t vindicate Rosebud, it doesn’t really win her much, but I guess if it helps her sleep at night I will go on the record and say under current Open Stories Foundation policy she had been sexually harassed. I still think ultimately she will be in a worse place off after the dust settles from this latest round.
I also think it isn’t fair to characterize that Joanna asked them to resign and become contractors to A) absolve any sexual harassment claims B) sneaky way to get rid of Rosebud and only get JD as a contractor. They even hired Rosebud back for a time after she was fired. I think Joanna absolutely showed that she wanted this to work with JD doing one thing and Rosebud doing the other and she never wanted the streams to cross. Unfortunately that meant Rosebud losing access to some of the things she was doing as it was hard to keep the line between the podcast and conferences otherwise.
Where I consult right now the policy is you can fraternize with someone in a separate chain of command, I don’t know how far away, but you can’t share a manager and maybe a manager’s manager nor can you have one be the manager of the other. Anything taken to HR is basically both are put on paid suspension and an investigation is done, they don’t ask, they just do it. They ultimately are protecting the company and they will see if there is a way to let both come back, but they are going to offer severance to one or both just to make it go away since it is ultimately a distraction and potential quagmire.
It was a sticky bad situation and I think Rosebud regrets it and I think JD regrets it. Rosebud seeks to put all the blame on JD or the lion’s share, but that isn’t supported from her own testimony. JD would like to never speak of it again, but isn’t shy to defend himself. I’m not here to defend JD, but I am interested to know as much of the truth of it as I can and I will poke holes and question things and right now it is mostly Rosebud and her allies that is putting out new information to look at.
I think much of Rosebud’s interpretation and analysis is different now then it was then. I am getting snippets though that show she might interpret it one way today, but that wasn’t how she saw it at the time. I don’t think JD was a master manipulator, he could have just been a person having an affair and having conflicted feelings about it. Which I think John doesn’t look good, under current Open Stories Foundation policy he sexually harassed Rosebud, it doesn’t vindicate Rosebud, it doesn’t really win her much, but I guess if it helps her sleep at night I will go on the record and say under current Open Stories Foundation policy she had been sexually harassed. I still think ultimately she will be in a worse place off after the dust settles from this latest round.
-
Meadowchik
- Elder
- Posts: 322
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:54 am
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
I didn't say she is wholly unreliable. Lem and I have confined our responses about her knowledge of those events to reliability re those events. I have not said (and as far as I know Lem has not said) she is an unreliable witness in any other context.Kishkumen wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 10:32 pmInteresting. I say that she is not reliable in a very specific way (her memory vs. contemporary documents for August 2012) and suddenly she’s being accused of being wholly unreliable. Guess I should have expected that.Meadowchik wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:23 pm
One wonders why they would invite Natasha as a witness if she cannot be relied upon?
(Ftr as a therapist she might be criticised for her remarks on the podcast, but for issues unrelated to witness reliability.)
-
Meadowchik
- Elder
- Posts: 322
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:54 am
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
What do you mean by winged monkeys?consiglieri wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:57 pmHi, Meadowchik! I hope you are doing well. Good questions both.Meadowchik wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 7:46 pm
1)Why didn't the podcast announce the theme beforehand? By making the topic a surprised, it reduced the opportunity for interested listeners to listen live and call in.
2) Can you confirm, who prepared the texts between Dehlin and Rosebud? Did you have eyes on the source (phone, etc...) or did Dehlin prepare them for you?
1. It was my decision to not announce the content of the podcast beforehand to avoid a coordinated real-time response of any sort from winged monkeys. I didn't know what they might try, but that is the problem with winged monkeys. They are hard to predict. Best to avoid them altogether if you can.
2. I can confirm that it was John Dehlin who prepared the transcripts of the texts between him and Rosebud. They are taken from a statement sworn to by John Dehlin under penalty of perjury and included as an attachment to the Open Stories Foundation response to Rosebud's NH complaint in 2013. Natasha Helfer said she had confirmed at the time the statement was being prepared that John Dehlin had accurately transcribed the texts from his cell phone.
I hope that answers your questions.
Take care!
Ftr you have (or had) regular listeners who were disappointed by that decision.
-
Dwight
- 2nd Counselor
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Sun May 02, 2021 3:33 pm
- Location: The North
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
I know that JP is biased and had a bad interaction with JD. I don't know what it was, but during his employment or shortly thereafter. I wouldn't want to work with John either.
I know that JP sees JD's focus on money in always the worst light possible and puts the worst possible light on it. I know that lots of people might think it's a scam, myself included, but the tax law and code allows me to buy myself computers, iPhones, iPads, and a large screen OLED tv that is in my living room on my company's dime and write it off, because it is all directly related to my work. My colleagues that are employees and not consultants do not get to do that with even with their pre-tax earnings. I know that JP turns a complete blind eye to Rosebud's even bigger obsession with money. Rosebud is allowed to have regrets but JD is not.
I know that JP characterizes Rosebud's blackmail letter as facetious, even though we have clear evidence that she is pursuing option 2 right now to the best of her ability.
I know that JP sees JD's focus on money in always the worst light possible and puts the worst possible light on it. I know that lots of people might think it's a scam, myself included, but the tax law and code allows me to buy myself computers, iPhones, iPads, and a large screen OLED tv that is in my living room on my company's dime and write it off, because it is all directly related to my work. My colleagues that are employees and not consultants do not get to do that with even with their pre-tax earnings. I know that JP turns a complete blind eye to Rosebud's even bigger obsession with money. Rosebud is allowed to have regrets but JD is not.
I know that JP characterizes Rosebud's blackmail letter as facetious, even though we have clear evidence that she is pursuing option 2 right now to the best of her ability.
-
drumdude
- God
- Posts: 7156
- Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
A discussion between Glenn and Matt of infants on thrones is illuminating. Matt is the one who gave the introduction to Rosebud's 3 hour audio recording. (Time stamp is around minute 20).
http://infantsonthrones.com/episode-457 ... pi-part-1/
http://infantsonthrones.com/episode-457 ... pi-part-1/
Matt: "I was interested in the victimology of it (prosecuting sex crimes), and how counter intuitive these offenses are. The things that you look at in normal crimes are different and it requires more sophistication. It requires a strong rhetorical approach. I loved working sex crimes."
Glen to Matt: "Because you're a prosecutor, you're going after the men (Dehlin) who perpetrate these crimes. Is that consistent with also defending the victim (rosebud), or helping the victim? Was that your motivation?"
Matt. "That was a motivation. These kids (Rosebud) have no one. I immediately empathize with them. If I can get a conviction, I can take that monster (Dehlin) from that child's (Rosebud's) life.
Glenn: "The conviction will equal healing for the child (rosebud) somehow. Somehow that will make it all better.
Matt. "Somehow. That's what this child (rosebud) needs. Because not only, when I get a conviction, that sends a message to the child (rosebud) that the jury believes them. And it makes sure to take that offender away from the child. That's the dual part of the process, not just to say 'I believe you', but to say 'I will make sure that others believe you' ."
Glen. "Did it?"
Matt. "Did it what?
Glen. "Help the kids (rosebud) that way?
Matt. "Sigh. I don't think so."
-
Dwight
- 2nd Counselor
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Sun May 02, 2021 3:33 pm
- Location: The North
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
Epic catch relevant to the discussion drumdude.
I was going back to hear about the Idaho encounter that JP believes was clearly misdemeanor sexual battery, I'm not sure. Apparently JD touching Rosebud breast was consensual before. While she had set a boundary of him not coming into the room, she did not express that she did not consent to groping until he had done it, and she admits he stopped and left.
I was also struck again that Rosebud feels that her contributions matched and exceeded John's, so the board should have worried about retaining her and not John. "[one donor] said what do we have left if [Rosebud] leaves?" I don't think it is an unreasonable question, but I think the board, and most outside observers look at Open Stories Foundation and what was going on and that really the podcast was the biggest thing. Rosebud boasted of having 350 people at a conference and getting people like Claudia Bushman was all her doing, but I think in general while Open Stories Foundation/Mormon Stories/her conferences were influencing things, the whole exmo/tbm dynamic was changing in the wider world. She really exaggerates her contributions and downplays John's and then in that framework it looks really like the board must be protecting John for irrational reasons of the patriarchy or fear of his attacks. It was her reality, but I don't think it was the reality.
I was going back to hear about the Idaho encounter that JP believes was clearly misdemeanor sexual battery, I'm not sure. Apparently JD touching Rosebud breast was consensual before. While she had set a boundary of him not coming into the room, she did not express that she did not consent to groping until he had done it, and she admits he stopped and left.
I was also struck again that Rosebud feels that her contributions matched and exceeded John's, so the board should have worried about retaining her and not John. "[one donor] said what do we have left if [Rosebud] leaves?" I don't think it is an unreasonable question, but I think the board, and most outside observers look at Open Stories Foundation and what was going on and that really the podcast was the biggest thing. Rosebud boasted of having 350 people at a conference and getting people like Claudia Bushman was all her doing, but I think in general while Open Stories Foundation/Mormon Stories/her conferences were influencing things, the whole exmo/tbm dynamic was changing in the wider world. She really exaggerates her contributions and downplays John's and then in that framework it looks really like the board must be protecting John for irrational reasons of the patriarchy or fear of his attacks. It was her reality, but I don't think it was the reality.
-
Dwight
- 2nd Counselor
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Sun May 02, 2021 3:33 pm
- Location: The North
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
from around 1:54:00
She talks about the time JD was facing pressure that someone was about to release a hit piece on him. That JD was doing everything to squash it. JD was mean to her, it wavers between an implication that he was generally not a pleasant person to be around for everyone and that he was directly mean to just her. She decided to have a sexual interaction with him and then he was nice towards her.
[1:56:53] She gets an attorney and feels better. She then rants that John’s repentance thing is not real, that he is manipulating everyone, his wife, the public, Rosebud, himself.
I believe that she believes that this was the reality she was living in. I don’t know where you can draw the line between the power John had and the power she perceived John to have, but I think that they were different.
[1:58:05] New Hampshire complaint on the last day of the statute of limitations cause that only required six employees vs. fifteen in Utah.
She goes back to the fall and when she was managing things better, but maybe still suicidial. She then claims that she was predicting John, what he would do, and his motivations. Now there is case law that you can be held responsible for encouraging someone to commit suicide and bully them, but on the other hand we have John proclaiming that he was worried about her mental health and trying to minimize this (which also benefits him clearly). I don’t know that we can say John knew she was suicidial, or that he is responsible for her mental health. Did he do crappy things that contributed to it? Undoubtedly. Even though I don’t care for John I can’t quite hold him responsible for how she felt.
She asked to be treated professionally and the entire board resigns except Helfer. Helfer sends a message that Rosebud doesn’t agree with, but she also doesn’t have the mental energy to respond to.
[2:00:20] So John is basically left to respond to the New Hampshire thing. He cherry picks things that would humiliate her, and chose from the things when she was the most messed up, which she implies is all John’s fault. But he emailed it to her attorney instead of the commission and offered to settle. This wouldn’t become public in New Hampshire anyway, so her attorney declinced and it was sent and kept private.
[2:02:00] She revisits JD recording her masterbating, and now him telling her a week later was a sexual control power thing.
[2:02:24] She now realizes she needs to get out of the relationship with her husband cause that is the source of a lot of misery in her life.
Her therapist can’t diagnose, but encourages her to read up on autism. She does and now Rosebud’s relationship with her husband all makes sense to her.
[2:08:43] Rosebud questions when John’s faith crisis was, that he wasn’t excommunicated for advocating for women and LGBT, but implies it was really cause of their dirty sordid affair. It’s also very troubling to her that John ‘repented’ and then was doing workshops in which he and Margie talked about things and how they repaired their relationship. (I am reading in here that I guess she thinks John couldn’t possibly be over her, that is uncharitable reading of it, but she is really uncharitable of John and Margie and their relationship and if they are genuine. Also I will make a note that my own exit from the church was not some straight line, it wasn’t filled with the ups and downs of John’s, but lots of people start down the path a recommit one or more times)
[2:10:20] Sunstone after JD was exed he pulled out cause Rosebud was going to be there with Mormons Building Bridges. A lot of people ignored it, a lot of people didn’t know about it. Someone from Feminist Mormon Housewives made it a point to go up and shake her hand and Rosebud doens’t know how she feels about it. She was being shamed [by Sunstone attendees] and in the next breath the shame is all internal to Rosebud.
[2:12:00] Rosebud’s ex-husband files fault on the divorce. “This is common for people with autism to do, to feel abused when they haven’t been”. He accuses spousal abuse, child abuse, and the affair, but doesn’t name JD. This was so JD wouldn’t have to come defend himself. I am not sure who the affair was with is relevant in cases of divorce or that John could be compelled to come, but her own admission she consented to the affair at times. She dug her own grave with that.
Her husband was using JD excommunication publicity to get fault and get the kids and stop paying alimony. He was extorting her cause he knew she was trying to keep the affair quiet. Rosebud agrees to only three years alimony. Her husband is making $200,000 or something. I'm questioning her opinion of her husband's motivations and such and awareness of the situation with JD and his excommunication and what it all meant. She didn't really provide anything to support why she thought her ex-husband was doing what he was doing. There is context we just don't have.
She strongly implies that her husband being able to use the affair to make it a fault divorce decree is on JD's shoulders. She takes absolutely no responsibility for it.
[2:14:57] She felt like without a good reference she would have a hard time getting a new job. Her thesis took a long time, so she wasn’t done with school. So she decided to get a franchise.
[2:16:25] It goes rocky, and they are basically mining data and selling it via recorded telephone conversations. “Because she knew of John’s crime against her and wiretapping I knew that was a crime”. She doesn’t specify John’s crime, I assume recording her masterbating after she asked him not to, but again Utah is a one party consent state so while it is deplorable it wasn’t illegal. I can’t comment about this franchising company she got herself involved in.
[2:16:50] She tried to get out of the contract and they sued her. She ended up reporting them, and somehow they still won the case, and it was cause they were able to squash her. A state attorney general and then US attorney were made aware of the company's practices and how these calls were being done in two party consent states. (She is apparently aware of two party consent, but has completely ignored that Utah is one party consent) She had to use proof of how she was against wiretapping from how she reacted to JD’s recording of her. That feels weird, if it is illegal it is illegal, but this feels more like she is making a case that she didn't know about this aspect and she is against recording people. She now owes the franchise company $350,000 it’s being appealed. She doesn’t know what is going on with everything or stuff. She had recordings as evidence, but that got squashed as inadmissible, so she lost. Weird that she is against 'illegal' secret recordings and then was trying to rely on them herself. I feel she is naïve about the law in this issue and it has caused her a lot of stress and heartache.
Her recounting of the court case(s) is weird to me, it sounds like a personal case to get out of the contract is mixed in with a possible criminal case and I can’t dissect it. I get the feeling that she blames John that she got into this situation. I guess John used the patriarchy to get her to get a franchise with some shady people.
[2:18:24] Rosebud ends and the interviewer begins asking her questions.
I am going to hit pause and pick up the final hour later.
She talks about the time JD was facing pressure that someone was about to release a hit piece on him. That JD was doing everything to squash it. JD was mean to her, it wavers between an implication that he was generally not a pleasant person to be around for everyone and that he was directly mean to just her. She decided to have a sexual interaction with him and then he was nice towards her.
[1:56:53] She gets an attorney and feels better. She then rants that John’s repentance thing is not real, that he is manipulating everyone, his wife, the public, Rosebud, himself.
I believe that she believes that this was the reality she was living in. I don’t know where you can draw the line between the power John had and the power she perceived John to have, but I think that they were different.
[1:58:05] New Hampshire complaint on the last day of the statute of limitations cause that only required six employees vs. fifteen in Utah.
She goes back to the fall and when she was managing things better, but maybe still suicidial. She then claims that she was predicting John, what he would do, and his motivations. Now there is case law that you can be held responsible for encouraging someone to commit suicide and bully them, but on the other hand we have John proclaiming that he was worried about her mental health and trying to minimize this (which also benefits him clearly). I don’t know that we can say John knew she was suicidial, or that he is responsible for her mental health. Did he do crappy things that contributed to it? Undoubtedly. Even though I don’t care for John I can’t quite hold him responsible for how she felt.
She asked to be treated professionally and the entire board resigns except Helfer. Helfer sends a message that Rosebud doesn’t agree with, but she also doesn’t have the mental energy to respond to.
[2:00:20] So John is basically left to respond to the New Hampshire thing. He cherry picks things that would humiliate her, and chose from the things when she was the most messed up, which she implies is all John’s fault. But he emailed it to her attorney instead of the commission and offered to settle. This wouldn’t become public in New Hampshire anyway, so her attorney declinced and it was sent and kept private.
[2:02:00] She revisits JD recording her masterbating, and now him telling her a week later was a sexual control power thing.
[2:02:24] She now realizes she needs to get out of the relationship with her husband cause that is the source of a lot of misery in her life.
Her therapist can’t diagnose, but encourages her to read up on autism. She does and now Rosebud’s relationship with her husband all makes sense to her.
[2:08:43] Rosebud questions when John’s faith crisis was, that he wasn’t excommunicated for advocating for women and LGBT, but implies it was really cause of their dirty sordid affair. It’s also very troubling to her that John ‘repented’ and then was doing workshops in which he and Margie talked about things and how they repaired their relationship. (I am reading in here that I guess she thinks John couldn’t possibly be over her, that is uncharitable reading of it, but she is really uncharitable of John and Margie and their relationship and if they are genuine. Also I will make a note that my own exit from the church was not some straight line, it wasn’t filled with the ups and downs of John’s, but lots of people start down the path a recommit one or more times)
[2:10:20] Sunstone after JD was exed he pulled out cause Rosebud was going to be there with Mormons Building Bridges. A lot of people ignored it, a lot of people didn’t know about it. Someone from Feminist Mormon Housewives made it a point to go up and shake her hand and Rosebud doens’t know how she feels about it. She was being shamed [by Sunstone attendees] and in the next breath the shame is all internal to Rosebud.
[2:12:00] Rosebud’s ex-husband files fault on the divorce. “This is common for people with autism to do, to feel abused when they haven’t been”. He accuses spousal abuse, child abuse, and the affair, but doesn’t name JD. This was so JD wouldn’t have to come defend himself. I am not sure who the affair was with is relevant in cases of divorce or that John could be compelled to come, but her own admission she consented to the affair at times. She dug her own grave with that.
Her husband was using JD excommunication publicity to get fault and get the kids and stop paying alimony. He was extorting her cause he knew she was trying to keep the affair quiet. Rosebud agrees to only three years alimony. Her husband is making $200,000 or something. I'm questioning her opinion of her husband's motivations and such and awareness of the situation with JD and his excommunication and what it all meant. She didn't really provide anything to support why she thought her ex-husband was doing what he was doing. There is context we just don't have.
She strongly implies that her husband being able to use the affair to make it a fault divorce decree is on JD's shoulders. She takes absolutely no responsibility for it.
[2:14:57] She felt like without a good reference she would have a hard time getting a new job. Her thesis took a long time, so she wasn’t done with school. So she decided to get a franchise.
[2:16:25] It goes rocky, and they are basically mining data and selling it via recorded telephone conversations. “Because she knew of John’s crime against her and wiretapping I knew that was a crime”. She doesn’t specify John’s crime, I assume recording her masterbating after she asked him not to, but again Utah is a one party consent state so while it is deplorable it wasn’t illegal. I can’t comment about this franchising company she got herself involved in.
[2:16:50] She tried to get out of the contract and they sued her. She ended up reporting them, and somehow they still won the case, and it was cause they were able to squash her. A state attorney general and then US attorney were made aware of the company's practices and how these calls were being done in two party consent states. (She is apparently aware of two party consent, but has completely ignored that Utah is one party consent) She had to use proof of how she was against wiretapping from how she reacted to JD’s recording of her. That feels weird, if it is illegal it is illegal, but this feels more like she is making a case that she didn't know about this aspect and she is against recording people. She now owes the franchise company $350,000 it’s being appealed. She doesn’t know what is going on with everything or stuff. She had recordings as evidence, but that got squashed as inadmissible, so she lost. Weird that she is against 'illegal' secret recordings and then was trying to rely on them herself. I feel she is naïve about the law in this issue and it has caused her a lot of stress and heartache.
Her recounting of the court case(s) is weird to me, it sounds like a personal case to get out of the contract is mixed in with a possible criminal case and I can’t dissect it. I get the feeling that she blames John that she got into this situation. I guess John used the patriarchy to get her to get a franchise with some shady people.
[2:18:24] Rosebud ends and the interviewer begins asking her questions.
I am going to hit pause and pick up the final hour later.