Posted on 09/23/2011 7:06:00 AM PDT by nuconvert
TACOMA, Wash. -- The father-in-law of a missing Utah woman was charged Thursday with voyeurism and possession of child pornography after police investigating her disappearance came across thousands of images of women videotaped without their knowledge, some of his daughter-in-law, Pierce County authorities said.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
Since the father lived in Washington, and the Son/DIL lived in UTAH when she disappeared, is there any proof that the Father(in law) was anywhere near UTAH at the time and had the opportunity to murder her? I think this is a key issue if we are to consider the father in law as the murderer.
Likely just about as much as the rest of us.
I’m just another person on the Internet who has an opinion.
And we take those opinions, mix them up together, sort out the wheat from the chaff, and come up with the most likely 'truth'. Two heads are better than one, and hundreds of heads are a wealth of input. That's what this open forum discussion board (FREE REPUBLIC) is all about.
: )
Now you have prompted me to read up on this case as well - if you see more info and think of it, ping me please - I do think you are right that this new info on the FIL probably means his fantasies about the DIL were just that - in his head.
"out"?
Helping "others leave"?
You must be talking about the NOT-Mormons that practice polygamy etc?, not the REAL Mormons of the LDS church?
That should be made clear - and you both know it.
The legitimate LDS Church does not, as you imply, hold members unwillingly.
I joined the LDS church nearly 50 years ago. I have lived all over the states and attended in many places. The church is very consistent, not subject to the whims of different leaders - it's a lay church, largely.
I haven't been attending for over 15 years - no problem with the doctrine or anything else rather than I chose to not attend - too many meetings/time and I have a large family, and other obligations.
Church memebers continue to visit - but ONLY upon my invitation and always after calling first - and I have NEVER once been upbraided for not attending nor threatened with excommunication or anything. They do remind me, occasionally, that they'd love to see me at church, but there is NO pressure.
In the meantime, if I ever needed help, they'd be here - and have - in a minute.
So either you are NOT from the REAL LDS church or you are being deliberately disingenuous.
I thought that too, but apparently dear ol’ dad has a solid alibi for the time of the disappearance.
However, I can see it being used as a Jose Baez defense to bring in reasonable doubt.
I think hubby did it, and dad knows and is covering, hence the joint smear campaign.
I do remember reading that there were some issues with them because hubby went ‘inactive’ in the LDS church, but that usually doesn’t lead to death.
Based upon the family’s strident objections, I’m guessing the wife was promiscuous.
- - - —
I don’t think so. Her family did admit to her being sexually active as a teen, but her and her husband are LDS and she was what they called ‘active’ (believing, attending church member) and they have strict rules guarding sexual behavior. It is not uncommon for LDS teens to go through a ‘wild stage’ and then go through a lengthy ‘repentance process’ (and it is a real process) about the age of 18-19 either to go on an LDS mission or to get married in an LDS temple.
I think the dad is lying. IIRC he did have an alibi for the time of the disappearance.
What has been reported is that Josh (hubby) was controlling and abusive (although the examples I saw in the articles are not that uncommon in Utah/LDS culture), and that he threatened to take the kids and she was wanting a divorce. It is more likely that hubby went nuts when he found out about the divorce and killed her. This whole thing with his dad smells more like a setup for reasonable doubt if this goes to trial and to make the hubby look better.
Yes ‘out’ - I was one of the early ones to go through the name removal process after the LDS church no longer required a ‘bishop’s court’ and to be excommunicated in order to have your name removed from LDS membership records. Even then I had to fight them for 3 years to get my name removed.
Helping ‘others leave’ is exactly what it says. I tell people about the Biblical Christ and expose the problems with Mormon history and doctrine, that their eyes may be opened by God to the falsity of Mormonism.
But moreso, I help those who have already discovered that Mormonism is an unChristian cult and have left. I help them deal with the residual issues and in their transition to Biblical Christianity. That involves explaining the differences in Mormon definitions and Biblical definitions, how to properly read the Bible for context and basic Christian theology. My calling is specifically to those who have already left Mormonism and come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.
Yes, I was a memeber of the ‘real LDS’ church for several years. I was faithful, active, tithe-paying and temple attending. I had a strong LDS ‘testimony’. I even prepared to go on an LDS mission. I didn’t leave because I wanted to sin or it was ‘too hard’, I left because I found out that Mormonism is false - Smith was a false prophet, the Book of Mormon wasn’t ‘true’, the Book of Abraham was a fraud, and that the LDS church lied about their history and doctrine.
I’m not talking about the FLDS (polygamist groups). They in fact are the “REAL Mormons”.
I never said the held members unwillingly, at least not since the turn of the century when they did away with the “Blood Atonement” doctrine officially. However they did, up until the early 1990’s force those who wanted their name removed to go through a ‘Bishops court’ and if they were refused to be excommunicated in absence. There was even a lawsuit regarding this and the LDS church lost (or settled out of court) saying it was defamation of character. Hence the change in policy and the creation of the ‘name removal’ process.
From your description, you haven’t left Mormonism, you have just become ‘inactive’. I assume your wife and children are still active. Hence no reason for them to harass you, which does happen more often than people realize. Of course they wouldn’t excommunicate you, they are happy they still have you as a number on their rolls. Of course they would love to see you at church, and if you made a move to actually leave they would ‘love bomb’ you to get you back.
Yeah, they will ‘be there’ under their conditions. Like Church welfare having the requirement of paying back tithing in order to be ‘worthy’ of it.
Mormonism is a non-Christian cult in every sense of the word. I am not disingenuous in the least. I am sincere and honest about my experience as a Mormon and my journey out and into Biblical Christianity.
ping to #47
Sorry, I forgot to ping you.
Be there in a minute.
Well, you are lucky.
My lds aunt was in IUC for six weeks and another ten before released.
My lds uncle says not one person from their ward came to help with the four young kids, not one meal, not one house cleaning nothing. ZIP
Before you say, well maybe they didn’t know - my uncle was the bishop.
There was one exception, on Thanksgiving Day someone brought them a pizza.
Please, don’t tell me - be there in a minute.
Would I have helped, you betcha. However, because I would not join lds, I was in essence shunned.
The flds actually live according to the original lds dictates, it is the people in SLC that has left the fold, even though they claim to be the only true group.
Why would dad WANT to; if he's bangin' it?
Ha ha ha!
Who confers legitimacy upon a group?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sects_in_the_Latter_Day_Saint_movement
One would think that 'real' MORMONs would actually FOLLOW what their scripture tells them to do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.