British Judge Blasts Tom Phillips

By: Mormon Heretic
March 20, 2014

I don’t think Tom is smiling about this court ruling.

The Deseret News is reporting that a British judge has rejected Tom Phillips’ lawsuit against the Church, and called the lawsuit “an abuse of the process of the court.”  Tom’s lawsuit alleged that the Church committed fraud because it lies about its origins in order to obtain tithing receipts.

“I am satisfied that the process of the court is being manipulated to provide a high-profile forum to attack the religious beliefs of others,” Westminster Magistrates’ Court Senior District Judge Howard Riddle said in a written ruling. “It is an abuse of the process of the court.”

Comments?

Tags: ,

17 Responses to British Judge Blasts Tom Phillips

  1. handlewithcare on March 20, 2014 at 8:45 AM

    Excellent ruling. What was this poor man thinking? Just goes to show the immense pressure leadership in the church puts people under. Hope he can move on and use his money more constructively to create a healing life for himself.

    Fan Favorite! Do you like this comment as well? Thumb up 10

  2. Jenonator on March 20, 2014 at 9:07 AM

    I see both sides. The church suppresses a lot of information but it dies an enormous amount of good.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 1

  3. Jenonator on March 20, 2014 at 9:11 AM

    Typo. Meant does, not dies!

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  4. Howard on March 20, 2014 at 9:22 AM

    Expected outcome.

    Will there be a civil rematch? Civil law generally requires a lower burden of proof. If he were to demonstrate statistically effective mind control is used by the church to collect tithing, for obedience and to and believe outlandish folklore as truth via The Psychology of Religion he would have an an interesting argument that if well presented and taken seriously might not be so easily dismissed.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 1

  5. Jeff Spector on March 20, 2014 at 9:26 AM

    The guy’s overdone. Good ruling, let’s move on. Let the poor guy wallow in his gall of bitterness in peace.

    Fan Favorite! Do you like this comment as well? Thumb up 13

  6. whizzbang on March 20, 2014 at 10:08 AM

    I have heard that he has other plans for further legal issues of which I think Mr. Phillips should use his resources to hire a pyschiatrist and get him the emotional help he needs

    Fan Favorite! Do you like this comment as well? Thumb up 6

  7. Douglas on March 20, 2014 at 10:49 AM

    #4 – A Barrister could weigh in on whether Mr. Phillips has any further recourse in a UK court. I thought this WAS a “civil” (as opposed to criminal) matter. Again, I don’t claim to be familiar with British law but since most of what we have in the USA came from there, I’d think it’d have been brought by a Crown Prosecutor instead of Mr. Phillips’ solicitor.

    Religion in general gets very much a ‘hands-off’ approach in countries that at least profess religious freedom. By the very concept, religion is based on faith, not necessarily facts, so the roles of any jurisdiction, especially over an issue of fraud, would be inherently limited and/or non-existent. This court’s ruling merely upholds that principle.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 3

  8. Howard on March 20, 2014 at 11:38 AM

    Douglas,
    I was surprised as well but it was a criminal charge brought by an individual which can be done in the UK.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 1

  9. Carly Phillips on March 20, 2014 at 10:41 PM

    I wish he did not share the same last name as I have. To honestly think he could have our prophet go to to some ridiculous trial for what? Doctrine he does not wish to accept, counsel he does not wish to follow?? Thats His problem and this is Not how you get your questions answered by seeking to take him to court. . If he cant sustain our leaders then he should just go away quietly, I know who the Lord would side with and thank goodness the judge had insight too.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 1

  10. Brian on March 21, 2014 at 7:41 AM

    I find the whole case interesting. Tom Phillips, still a member on paper, has received his second anointing. My understanding that means that his calling and election has been made sure and this is why, even given his public antagonism, the church has not excommunicated him. I have no idea if that is true. It’s just what I have read.

    I would imagine that this court proceeding is part of a long campaign of his to discredit the church as much as he can. He went from church prominence to an unbeliever whose family does not side with him.

    He feels he committed his life to a lie and wants to expose it. I believe his intent was not to win that case (how could he ever) but bring to light the church teachings that he feels show the church to be a fraud.

    He has stated this is just the beginning and that he has a lot of insider information gleaned from his years in church leadership that he will make public.

    Just like the church sends tens of thousands to tell the world the “truth”, I think this is Mr. Phillips’ version of spreading the truth. In his mind, stopping the spread of cancer.

    I don’t know what is inside his head nor what I would do if I knew what he knows or had experienced what he has experienced. I don’t see, however, in the long run how trying to ruin someone’s belief in religion leads to a happy, healthy life. I have often wondered about the Tanners in SLC and how their long-standing campaign against the church has left them feeling about their lives. I think they feel theirs is a mission from God, whereas Tom’s is strictly from a secular standpoint.

    As a former Mormon, I look forward to his information. At the same time, I hope he can move on at some point.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 1

  11. Erin on March 21, 2014 at 7:51 AM

    “Tom Phillips, still a member on paper, has received his second anointing. My understanding that means that his calling and election has been made sure and this is why, even given his public antagonism, the church has not excommunicated him. I have no idea if that is true. It’s just what I have read.”

    I have read this as well, and wonder if anyone can shed any light on this. Can someone explain 1. what a second anointing is, 2. what “calling and election made sure” means, and 3. why Tom Phillips has these?

    Although I have been a member all my life, from pioneer stock, served a mission, married in the temple, attended church colleges, I have only heard of these things, but I am clearly ignorant of them. Could it be because I am female and therefore don’t hold the priesthood that no one thought to teach me this stuff? (Silly/uppity female wanting to know priesthood stuff! :^) )

    Like this comment? Thumb up 1

  12. Jeff Spector on March 21, 2014 at 9:21 AM

    Erin,

    I don’t think your lack of Priesthood has anything to do with your lack of knowledge about second anointings. It is quite the mystery to many of us and would require some very in depth research to really find out anything. Tom Phillips has a website where he claims to reveal the entire ceremony. But, on the other hand, there are probably journals around that outline the whole thing as well, i you know where to look.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 1

  13. Mormon Heretic on March 21, 2014 at 1:01 PM

    Here’s an old post on 2nd anointings: http://www.wheatandtares.org/12770/saved-born-again-2nd-anointing/

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  14. Andrew R Price on March 21, 2014 at 4:19 PM

    It was almost inevitable that a British judge would decline a legal battle which would so heavily turn on theology. However Mr Phillips was the real winner.The Mormons have been publicly exposed and most significantly the judge declined the Mormon application for their expenses to be paid but upheld the application on the part of his legal team for his expenses to be paid.A critical fact which the Mormon spin machine does not mention.I was in the public gallery and most of the sitting was over the argument concerning expenses.The QC (they do not come cheap) put a lot of pressure on the judge and praise God the judge did not give in.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  15. Stephen R. Marsh on March 21, 2014 at 5:41 PM

    Andrew — are you saying he got blasted for abuse of process, lost his case but was awarded his legal fees and expenses from the LDS Church? “The court did reimburse Phillips a percentage of his costs, because, as Phillips said, “it was not my fault that the summons was defective.”” That does not read as an award against the other party, but I may not understand what happened.

    Do you have a link to the actual written order — I’d love to read it.

    Otherwise, for the latest on this side of the pond: https://www.countyofsb.org/da/msm_county/documents/MireilleMillerYoung.pdf

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  16. Andrew R Price on March 21, 2014 at 7:06 PM

    Stephen – the Solicitors representing the Mormons in the UK will oblige especially if as I suspect you are LDS . Their name is Devonshires.I do have a copy of the judgement which was sent to me by a contact but it is fairly poor quality.My email is andrewandruthprice@yahoo.co.uk , so if you email me I will be happy to forward what I have.The Deseret News is bound to have a copy of the ruling. No his expenses were given from the public purse.The Judge however declined to give costs from the public purse to the Mormons.which is most significant. In my opinion whist the Judge was never going to go down the road of allowing Tom Phillips to use the English Courts in a theological dispute his rulings concerning costs clearly have an inference.The Defence Counsel made strong representations to the Judge not to grant costs to Mr Phillips as it would be “seen to reward him”.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  17. Stephen R. Marsh on March 25, 2014 at 5:34 PM

    My office would not generally hand out copies to random contacts. I’m hoping for a good quality copy, really hoped it would be on-line somewhere, but have not found it.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

Leave a Reply

Subscribe without commenting

Archives

%d bloggers like this: