- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
For those who only participate here and are also interested in this case, here’s the report made Tom’s “team.” Given it’s the press release from those claiming fraud, you can read it with the appropriate pinch of salt needed: Quote:Saturday, March 15. After a full day of arguments in front of a British magistrate yesterday, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ legal counsel failed to get dismissed fraud charges against the Church’s Prophet, Seer and Revelator, Thomas Monson. Instead, Church leaders will wait until Thursday, March 20, to learn the next steps in the case. On that day, the judge will announce whether the fraud case will proceed to Crown Court for trial.
At yesterday’s hearing, Church attorneys attempted to discredit the case in two ways. First, they argued that the fraud charges emanated from a grudge. They claimed that Thomas Phillips, the British subject who instigated the fraud charges, was a “disaffected” Mormon whose problems with the church were personal, not legal in nature. Second, the Mormon legal team declared that religious teachings and matters of belief are outside the sphere of criminal law. They argue the charges against Monson are on the basis of his beliefs and not about facts which Monson may or may not have spoken.
Phillips’ legal team clarified that religions are not above the law. They cited examples of lay and clerical members of religious institutions convicted of serious crimes in the United Kingdom. Focusing in on the case at hand, Phillips’ attorneys showed how specific LDS Church representations, particularly its deceptive use of the term, “translate,” are consistent with the illicit acts covered in the United Kingdom’s Fraud Act of 2006. These particular representations, argues Phillips, are statements of fact by LDS leaders, including Monson, and subject to scrutiny under the Fraud Act. The Act stipulates three types of fraud Phillips’ counsel affirmed that the Church carried out: fraud by false representation; fraud by failing to disclose information; and fraud by abuse of position. If the case proceeds to trial in Crown Court, Phillips’ team will need to further substantiate, corroborate and verify each charge in detail.
SamBee wrote:The claim it is a stunt is true, there are better ways ti reform the church.
This person doesn’t want to reform the church, he wants to embarass it.Quote:“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ legal counsel failed to get dismissed fraud charges against the Church’s Prophet, Seer and Revelator, Thomas Monson”
That statement is hilarious and shows exactly the mindset of the litigants. This is standard procedure. The decision is going to be made in the normal time frame in which these decisions get made. They took a total non-issue and twisted it to fit their side.
Again, let’s wait until we have something substantial to discuss.
Curtis wrote:Quote:“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ legal counsel failed to get dismissed fraud charges against the Church’s Prophet, Seer and Revelator, Thomas Monson”
That statement is hilarious and shows exactly the mindset of the litigants. This is standard procedure. The decision is going to be made in the normal time frame in which these decisions get made. They took a total non-issue and twisted it to fit their side.
Again, let’s wait until we have something substantial to discuss.
I think some people were expecting it to get thrown out on the very first day, but I agree with you, all that has happened is the judge has listened to both sides of the argument and will go away to consider a decision by Thursday.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.