Remember the LDS church does not work (on many levels) as Christian churches do. “Repentance” only starts AFTER your jail term is over and your rights have been restored.
Do you have a copy of the Handbook of Instructions? Many LDS do not even know what is in it since it is only available to those in leadership positions.
I have a copy, however I am on a business trip (and away from my library) for the next few months. I have asked a few other freepers if they have copies to provide a source for you.
That being said, it is not the LDS “deferring” to government, it is the idea that if you are convicted of a felony, you must have been involved in behavior against LDS standards and therefore need to be excommunicated.
I worked as a secretary for one of the psychologists in the prison system there. I also personally knew people who were excommunicated for so called “minor” felonies (like DUI).
I stand by my statement, however I will allow that since he is “high profile”, it is possible that the LDS First Presidency will allow only for dis-fellowshipment since they can override the local leadership.
Nope, not true. Repentance starts immediately. Except for murder, and usually incest as well, conviction of a serious crime is not automatic grounds for excommunication (see CHI excerpt posted by delacoert). If someone hasn't been excommunicated, then they're still a member, and certainly aren't expected to refrain from beginning a repentance process until some government agency says they're done with their sentence.
if you are convicted of a felony, you must have been involved in behavior against LDS standards and therefore need to be excommunicated.
Again, not true, which is why the CHI specifies only two crimes for which excommunication is mandatory (though, oddly, it specifies that the First Presidency may make an exception in the case of incest). The people you recall having been excommunicated for "minor" offenses were almost people who had repeated the offenses multiple times and/or lied to their priesthood leader about what they had done, etc.
The issue of initial baptism is completely different. For whatever reason, the Church policy is not to baptize new converts while they are still serving a prison term or parole, etc, though exceptions can be made and are probably made quite often in the case of lesser crimes and in cases where the court of jurisdiction is in a country with a sketchy judicial system. But it is definitely not Church policy to excommunicate anyone who wouldn't currently be eligible for first-time baptism, so lots of people retain Church membership even though their legal status is such that they would not be eligible for baptism if they were new converts.
Godzilla: You are misunderstanding the passage you quoted. It does not refer to excommunication, but to any status resulting from a Church Discipline proceeding -- such a status could be disfellowshipment or even some lesser impairment. And that's assuming a Church Discipline proceeding was held at all. In many cases, it wouldn't be, especially business/finance type cases, where failure to comply with certain arcane provisions of accounting rules, tax or securities regulations, etc., may constitute a crime, even though it may not be entirely clear whether the person realized they were committing a crime. While some convictions on such grounds result in a prison term, many more result in punishment such as being barred from the securities industry -- sometimes for life. No way is the Church is going excommunicate somebody and keep them excommunicated over a conviction for front-running or misclassification of a line item on audited financial statements. In fact it's very unlikely that a Church Discipline proceeding would held in most cases of this nature, in which case the convict wouldn't even be disfellowshipped.