Mormon Truth Discovers claim Radio Free Mormon podcast makes that “The LDS Church Covers Up Abuse Cases Weekly” has no public evidence to back it.
Public dialogue around these topics should carry the careful research and measured approach that victims deserve.
Podcast: Mormon Newscast (Radio Free Mormon & Bill Reel)
Episode/Title: “New 1st Presidency Answers Questions”
Bill (01:06:17): “If only members got this upset when the church covers up child abuse cases.” Source File
Bill (01:06:54): “Meanwhile, sex abuse cases seem to happen multiple times on the weekly in this in this institution.” Source File
RFM (01:07:26): “We can’t cover them all on this show.” Source File
All quotations are taken word‑for‑word from the user‑uploaded transcript and include timestamps; the transcript does not supply line numbers.
Core Claim
The Church “covers up” child‑abuse cases so frequently that it happens “multiple times weekly,” with so many incidents that hosts “can’t cover them all.”
| Start | End | Claim Summary | Category | Evaluation | Key Sources |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01:06:17 | 01:07:26 | “The Church covers up abuse; it occurs multiple times weekly (too many to cover).” | False / Not Provable (frequency); Contentious (cover‑up characterization) | “Multiple times weekly” is a quantified factual assertion unsupported by any comprehensive dataset. Major reporting documents particular cases and legal disputes (often about clergy‑penitent privilege), not a verified weekly rate. Courts and statutes show fact‑specific, jurisdiction‑dependent questions rather than evidence of an institutional weekly “cover‑up.” | AP investigation (Arizona, Aug 4 2022); AP: AZ court upholds privilege (Apr 11 2023); AZ Ct. App. reversal/remand (July 29 2025); Church Newsroom (Aug 17 2022); General Handbook 32.6 (immediate contact of civil authorities); AP: Utah 2024 clergy‑reporting reform |
Logical Questions
- Type: Quantified factual claim (“multiple times weekly”) + reputational accusation (“cover‑up”).
- Questions: Where is the dataset or time‑bounded study supporting a weekly rate? What legal/policy definition of “cover‑up” is intended—non‑reporting despite mandates, evidence destruction, interference with investigators, or lawful reliance on clergy‑penitent privilege?
Facts
1) No public evidence supports a “multiple times weekly” frequency.
Major reporting (e.g., the Associated Press’ Arizona investigation and later Goodrich recordings story) documents specific matters and serious allegations, but it does not present a Church‑wide statistical rate—let alone a verified “weekly” cadence of institutional “cover‑ups.” Assertions of frequency require data; journalism provides case studies.
2) Law and policy are complex; many disputes turn on clergy‑penitent privilege and duty‑to‑report boundaries.
Arizona (Adams/Bisbee matter): On April 11, 2023, the Arizona Court of Appeals recognized the scope of clergy‑penitent privilege in part (AP coverage). On July 29, 2025, in related litigation, the same court reversed summary judgment for Church defendants, holding that factual issues remained about whether a duty to report arose from non‑privileged information or waiver (e.g., confession in spouse’s presence) and citing the Handbook’s directive that in life‑threatening harm/serious injury scenarios leaders should contact civil authorities immediately (opinion; Handbook 32.6).
Utah (2024 reform): The legislature extended protections so clergy may report abuse learned in confession without liability, reflecting evolving policy while retaining privilege (AP, Feb 29 2024).
3) Published Church policy and training emphasize compliance and protection.
General Handbook: Leaders are instructed that where disclosure is necessary to prevent life‑threatening harm or serious injury and there isn’t time to seek guidance, “Leaders should contact civil authorities immediately” (Handbook 32.6). Abuse occurring during Church activities “should be reported to civil authorities” (Handbook 20.7.6). Additional counseling resources direct members to contact legal authorities immediately if they learn of abuse (Abuse—Help for the Victim; Marital Conflict).
Abuse Help Line—official statements: After the AP’s 2022 report, the Church stated the help line is designed to stop abuse, care for victims, and ensure compliance with reporting obligations (Aug 5 2022; Aug 17 2022).
Training (2019 → ongoing): The Church launched mandatory online training for all adults who interact with children/youth, renewed every three years (Newsroom, Aug 16 2019; Church News, Aug 16 2019).
4) What credible journalism shows—and what it does not.
AP reporting raises serious questions about legal strategies (privilege; confidentiality agreements), including the Goodrich recordings story (Dec 12 2023). Those stories challenge institutional choices, but they do not provide a quantified weekly rate; they are case‑based.
Bottom line: The frequency claim (“multiple times weekly”) is Not Provable. The “cover‑up” characterization frequently conflates complex privilege/reporting law with proven unlawful concealment—issues that courts and legislatures continue to parse (AZ Ct. App. 2025; Utah 2024 reform).
Legal & Logic Analysis (Defamation / False‑Light)
- Quantified assertion (weekly cover‑ups) is a verifiable fact‑claim. Publishing it absent supporting data risks defamation if materially false and made with knowledge/recklessness. See New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (actual‑malice standard; see also LII summary).
- Opinion vs. implied fact: Labeling something “opinion” does not immunize factual implications. See Milkovich v. Lorain Journal.
- False‑light risk: Casting privilege‑governed confidentiality as per se criminal “cover‑up” can create misleading implications. See Time, Inc. v. Hill.
Rhetorical tactics present in Segment 6: hasty generalization (from notable cases ⇒ universal weekly pattern); equivocation (“cover‑up” vs. legal privilege); appeal to volume (“we can’t cover them all”) as a substitute for quantified proof.
Doctrinal Anchors
- Stewardship Doctrine & Authorized Priesthood Use: Handbook governance requires protecting the vulnerable, complying with civil reporting laws, and contacting civil authorities immediately in serious‑injury emergencies—an institutional framework inconsistent with a presumed policy of concealment (Handbook 32.6; Handbook 20.7.6).
- Covenant Layering: Duty to protect the innocent + duty to obey the law + duty to minister to victims are explicitly layered in policy, with a 24/7 help line to operationalize across jurisdictions (Church statement, Aug 5 2022).
Sources
- Associated Press (Aug 4 2022): Seven years of sex abuse: How Mormon officials let it happen; 4 takeaways.
- Church Newsroom / Church News (Aug 2022): Statement on Help Line & Abuse Reporting (Aug 5); Further Details—Arizona case (Aug 17).
- General Handbook (current online): 32.6 (immediate contact of civil authorities for serious injury/life‑threatening harm); 20.7.6 (reports of abuse during Church activities); Abuse—Help for the Victim; Marital Conflict.
- Arizona Court of Appeals (July 29 2025): Jane Doe I & II; John Doe v. COP of the Church (reversal/remand).
- AP (Apr 11 2023): Arizona court upholds clergy privilege in child abuse case.
- Utah (2024): AP: Legislature expands ability of clergy to report.
- AP (Dec 12 2023): Recordings show how the Mormon church protects itself from child sex abuse claims.
- Training (2019): Newsroom announcement; Church News coverage.
- Defamation / False‑Light: NYT v. Sullivan; Milkovich v. Lorain Journal; Time, Inc. v. Hill.
Risk Flags
- Bottom Line: The weekly frequency assertion is unsubstantiated; “cover‑up” is a legally loaded term that often collapses privilege questions into criminal intent—an overreach contradicted by published policy and evolving case law.
- Risk Flag (Defamation): 🟠 Moderate — quantified, reputational allegations asserted as fact without supporting data.
All transcript quotes are sourced from the user‑uploaded file with timestamps and speaker attribution.