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.
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.
- - - - - -
WRONG. I suppose it does depend upon your status in the ward and your Stake pres but you assume WAY too much about them.
BTW, you are NOT LDS are you? Much less a Stake Pres.
Don’t assume the LDS will tell you the truth. They will lie in order to make the “church” appear in the best light. I found that out the hard way.
Had you read my entire response, you would have seen that I made the above inclusions. As you point out - any disciplinary action - will necessitate the implimentation after ANY crimial punishment period.
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.
However, as cited in the CHI, that 'convict' would not be eligible for full benefits of membership - ie temple worthy, until his/her entire sentence - including probation (specifically mentioned in the CHI) have been fulfilled to the satisifaction of the court.