While the recent leak of a secret recording between a woman confronting former MTC President Joseph L Bishop about his prior sexualt assault on her as a young sister missionary in his charge has made prominent news – many people may be asking: “were there any warning signs that this man is a predator?”

It turns out that there may have been.

The assault referred to in the recording took place in 1984 while Bishop was President of the MTC. Before that calling, he served as a Mission President in Argentina – a calling he accepted while President of Weber State College, now Weber State University.

Weber State College has an oral history program where they interview prominent figures in the school’s past about their experiences. One such interview is with former Dean of Women’s Affairs, Jan Tyler. In that oral history, Tyler paints a picture of Joseph L Bishop which, in retrospect, may not be surprising.

Intro

The following is an excerpt from an oral history interview with Jan L. Tyler (born 1942). Ms. Tyler served as Assistant Dean of Students at Weber State College from 1971 to 1974. The interview was conducted on March 11, 1980 by John R. Sillito in order to gather Ms. Tyler’s recollections and experiences with Weber State College. See the full interview at archive.org and weber.edu

In the later parts of the interview, Tyler answer questions about her interactions with Joseph L Bishop while he was President of Weber State College. Let’s examine the character portrait painted by her account of his administration

The Chauvinist

JS: let’s turn our attention now to President Bishop. What was your initial impression of Joseph Bishop? JT: I was excited, and felt with a new person changes could take place. I wasn’t the only one who had ideas about what could happen on that campus; so there was a lot of eagerness on the part of people that with a change of presidents maybe a lot of significant changes could take place. All of us who were administrators were called into his office for an interview and he asked us three questions. JS: Which were? JT: What do you perceive as the strength of this institution? What do you perceive as the weaknesses? What are your professional goals? When he looked me in the eye and asked me what my professional goal was, I looked him in the eye and I said, “In ten years I expect to be where you are.” And at that point I began to sense what I was up against, because his views were not only Mormon, but very traditional. JS: Are you saying that he was a chauvinist? JT: Well, yes. I think he made the typical, condescending remarks; he did not take me seriously. I could just see this mysterious look on his face: “Who is this woman? What is this woman saying?” But initially there was a good feeling, I think, between us.

The Inquisitor

JT: I began to have some concern when he called me in for a second meeting, and at that meeting quizzed me about faculty women in two departments on the campus, as to whether or not they were lesbians. I found the whole conversation very disturbing because I had never heard of such a thing, I mean that there were any active women on the faculty that were lesbians, and I didn’t understand where he got the information, or why he had decided to talk with me. And in the course of the conversation, he asked if there were any students that were lesbians. I told him I was aware that there were some, because some had come to me for counseling, and I was sure that probably the counseling department was handling some of that. JS: But you don’t have any idea why he was asking you these questions? JT: I finally asked him, and he said that he had gotten the information from Bill Carver that there were faculty women on campus who were lesbians, and asked if, because of my job, I knew anything about this. And I also had the feeling that he was questioning me too, possibly because of my interest in the concerns of women and the whole stereotype that goes along with that; the assumptions that people make. I really got angry at that point and said, “If you’re asking me if I’m a lesbian, I am not. As far as counseling with young women who are struggling with this issue, I see that as perfectly within the limits of my job responsibilities as well as my training as a counselor, and I will not reveal who those individuals are because I have a professional responsibility not to.” I told him I was not aware of any faculty women who had made that choice. I became very upset about the conversation, and I abruptly excused myself and left. I immediately went to my office and called the women who Bishop had named and let them know that I had had this conversation with the president, that I was very upset, and that I thought it was very inappropriate on his part. I also asked them why in the world there seemed to be this big witch-hunt for lesbians. I felt a responsibility both as a professional and as a woman to let them know. JS: How did they respond to that? JT: They were amazed, absolutely amazed, and hurt and scared because many of the women, like myself, were single and they were also somewhat older than I, and so they had lived with that longer than I. I had never confronted that before in my life. JS: Did President Bishop express some feeling that he was interested in this because, if there were such people on campus, they were a threat to the students? JT: He said that we just couldn’t have that kind of activity occurring on campus, and I said I wasn’t aware it was. JS: When was this in terms of a time frame? JT: At the very beginning of his presidency. JS: He hadn’t been president very long? JT: No, the first year, in the early months of his presidency. JS: Within a few months after he took over. JT: One faculty member that I talked with did say during the course of a conversation that either two or three years prior to that they had had a problem with an individual on the faculty, but that the person was no longer at the institution. And to her knowledge there was just not any of that going on. I thought the whole thing was very ugly. JS: Kind of bizarre? JT: Yes, to me it was bizarre because it was really my initial exposure to that kind of attitude about a single woman who might be committed to the concerns of women. Of course, all the other women were not even necessarily involved with women’s issues. And so I thought it was unprofessional and frightening. I was concerned that people were going around digging this kind of stuff up and not even being sensitive to the way that they were handling it, making accusations seemingly without any information. I resented it then and I still do.

Malicious

JS: So your relationships with President Bishop got off to kind of a bad start. What about his general attitude toward the Environ and what you were doing? JT: I worked with him, and we spent a lot of time in meetings. He did support it, and he supported my going to the Institutional Council. He supported the budget for it. But I got the feeling that the more successful my efforts became, the less he was willing to support it. JS: Why’s that? JT: Well, I don’t know. I really do not understand to this day what occurred between us professionally. JS: How did Bishop differ from Miller in terms of administrative style? JT: He gave the feeling that it was “open door”; call him Joe, not president; we were one of the guys and all of that; but his behavior did not buy the respect that people felt for President Miller. JS: Some people suggested that part of his problem was that he was way in over his head, that he was not equal to the job. Do you think that a fair characterization? JT: Well, if I hadn’t had some of the experiences I had with him, I might agree. No, I’d have to say that I saw him do things which I thought were very malicious. An example of that would be the type of humor he displayed in front of people. It was destructive humor: he’d make fun of their baldness, their weight, where they received their degree, if they had a speech impediment, etc. He did not know how to relate to people and so his humor was very destructive.

The Amoral Gaslighter

JT: I felt that he was a person without a sense of morality, of what was right and wrong. He was almost amoral. JS: You don’t mean that in a sexual sense but in an ethical sense? JT: Just in the way he dealt with people. JS: Like making commitments that he didn’t intend to keep, that sort of thing? JT: Yes. And he would intentionally lie. On occasion he would tell me something and then he would say, “if anybody asks me, if you don’t keep this confidential, if someone comes back and asks me, I’ll tell them I don’t even know what they’re talking about.“

The Priesthood Beaurocrat

JS: Do you think there was a feeling, a year or so after he became president, on the part of some people, that they had made a mistake. Did the efforts to get rid of him as president begin that early? JT: On the part of some, yes. There were attempts to talk with Institutional Council members and legislators. JS: Where do you think the anti-Bishop sentiment was coming from, within the administration or the faculty? JT: I saw evidence of it in every segment of campus. I think administrators who had to work with him made a genuine, professional attempt to do that, but those that weren’t close to him, or weren’t part of the administration, were more willing to take the risk in terms of overt activity. JS: Do you think there was a Mormon, non-Mormon element to it? JT: I think that didn’t emerge until later, yet there was a very strong feeling, and some resentment toward the Mormon elements. The fact that this man was a Mormon, and was doing what was perceived as unethical and destructive and hurtful kinds of things, was just so inconsistent with what was being put out, as what a good Mormon would do. So it made both Mormons and non-Mormons very angry. JS: I guess he wore his Mormonness pretty much on his sleeve? JT: Oh yes, and that was his problem. The only administrative model he seemed to be aware of, in spite of his training, was the model that’s used in the Church which cannot be used in society successfully. Even though there are aspects of bureaucracy in both, it just takes a different kind of style than the priesthood approach when you deal with secular issues. JS: So your saying that the Mormon, non-Mormon split was part of it but it wasn’t the major factor. JT: No, I don’t think so.

Backstabber with an Enemy List

JS: There came a time when professional relationships between you and President Bishop reached the point where you threatened legal action. JT: That’s right, in fact I initiated it. JS: Why don’t you tell us about how that developed? JT: Well, initially I was given the message that Bishop was very interested in opening things up for women, and that he indeed wanted to make some changes. And, he took some steps like supporting the Environ and so forth. But personally, he couldn’t make those moves; it just wasn’t a part of his head, or behavior, or experience, or his perception. I don’t think he knew how to get out of that other than to undercut me. JS: When you say “undercut me” what specifically do you mean? JT: Well, I became aware that he would be talking to other faculty members about whether or not I was a competent person. And students would come to me and say they had been called in about me. He would always say to students now this is confidential. I just thought that kind of behavior was so unprofessional, and so destructive, and it really created a very difficult atmosphere under which to work. JS: Was he shooting at you, was he shooting at the program, or both? JT: Both, and at one point I learned in the rumor mill that Bishop had a list of enemies, and that I was on the list and I was the only woman. So I followed the rumor clear to Dean Hurst; it was supposed to have come from him who got it straight from Bishop. So I made an appointment with Dean Hurst and confronted him with this rumor. He was absolutely amazed that I even had that information, and he did not deny it. I made an appointment with President Bishop to talk with him about it. He would not see me so I ended up seeing his sidekick, Dwight Burrill, and he not only told me that it was true, that I was on the president’s enemy list, he proceeded to read the rest of the list to me. And after about the third name I stopped him and said, “That is information I don’t want and I think it’s absolutely childish that this kind of thing is going on among grown-ups.” It was incredible to me that this was even happening and it was at that point that I started referring to the whole atmosphere there as Webergate. And it became a pretty common reference.

The Nixonian Wiretapper

JS: What about the charges of the wiretapping and those sorts of things, do you think these are true charges? JT: Oh yes, I found out about those after I had engaged my lawyer. I filed under Title IX Executive Order and Title VII, Title IV and Equal Pay. The NEA on the national level got involved and I engaged a lawyer. JS: Who was your attorney? JT: Senator Darrell Renstrom. Soon after I engaged my lawyer another colleague in student personnel also engaged a lawyer. Our two lawyers were talking and comparing the facts that concerned our respective situations and the other lawyer revealed to my lawyer that wiretapping was going on. It was really shattering because that very day I had an appointment with my lawyer to bring some information and when I got to work my whole office had been gone through, all my files, my desk, everything. And I realized it could have been paranoia on my part, but I suspected that if in fact my phone wasn’t being tapped, my conversations could have been listened to which was very easy to do because of the way the phones were arranged in the office. It got to the point, especially after that conversation with my lawyer, that I had no significant conversations on my phone. I’d always go to the pay phones in the Union Building.

The Intimidator

JS: Now what was the legal action that you initiated specifically? JT: It was based upon discrimination regarding equal pay and working conditions. JS: What did you hope to achieve out of that? JT: Well, to try to get Bishop off my back! [laughter] JS: Was there a larger issue involved? Did you feel if he were successful harassing you, he would then begin to harass others? JT: Oh sure. JS: And then intimidate other women. JT: Not just women; I mean his whole style was affecting a lot of people; and a lot of people that I cared about. JS: What was the attitude of people on the faculty and staff towards what you were doing? JT: Publically, I became ostracized. It was a tremendously threatening kind of step to take, but I would not let up, I simply would not cave in on it, and I was determined to see it through to the end. Privately there were all kinds of supportive phone calls, people meeting me off campus, notes to my house, etc.; they were behind me all the way. But it was important for me not to look back because publically they weren’t going to be there. That kind of thing. So there was a lot of support and, references made like “Jan of Ark” and “Super Woman,” stuff like that. It was very confusing to me; I couldn’t understand the fear. And when I’d confront people, particularly those that I worked with, they would say, “You don’t have a family, you’re not trying to buy a home; it’s okay if you take those kinds of risks but we can’t; we’ve got wives, children and mortgages; we can’t afford to take those kinds of risks.” None of that made any sense to me. JS: What was the impact of what you were trying to do? I mean, did it make it difficult for you to communicate with students or others? JT: The students were beautiful, in fact they really helped to just really get me through it. They were so supportive because they knew me, I mean they knew that when they needed someone to go to bat for them I did, and the programs that we did were successful and they had good experiences. They were just tremendously supportive. I thought the irony of it was that those who were viewed as immature were acting so much more maturely than those that were supposed to have gained some wisdom in life’s experience.

Settlement and reflection

JS: So ultimately you settled out of court? JT: Yes. Looking back, the decision I made to settle everything out of court was a good decision for a couple of reasons. One was that eventually I was able to get what I wanted and what I felt I should deserve in terms of my salary, and my title and everything else. And the other reason was that I didn’t want to make a big public issue out of it. I genuinely felt sorry for the man’s wife and kids. And I felt that it would be publicly embarrassing to him. I don’t know why I cared about him that much. Although I got everything I wanted, the atmosphere became so poisoned, it was apparent that while I had won, in many ways I lost. I was aware of it, and I knew that was the risk I was taking, but it was a very painful thing to go through. I was being confronted with the reality of a world I had never had to confront before. What people will do for their own egos, what people won’t do, even if they believe some things are right. It was just a real wrenching kind of experience. JS: Looking back on it, if you had to do it all over again would you do it differently? JT: You mean would I have initiated legal action? You bet, and I would have gone all the way through court. JS: You wouldn’t have settled out of court? JT: No I would not, and I do not advise people to do it now. Since that incident I have been involved in one way or the other with two hundred similar kinds of incidents. And I tell people to go for it, if they understand the price they will have to pay. If I had it to do today I wouldn’t settle out of court. I would go public, and I would use the media. I would make public that people on the Institutional Council said things to me in private and then turned around and informed Bishop about what I had said, but not what their responses to me were. As it was I had never entered into any kind of legal action before and it was frightening. That alone was frightening without having to face the way I was being treated. JS: After you settled a job opportunity developed at BYU. JT: About six or nine months before the whole thing was settled an opportunity opened up at BYU and I kept putting them off because they were well aware, not only of what had happened, but of the fact that I was in the process of legal action. That didn’t seem to matter and so I kept putting them off and telling them that I was not interested in signing the contract until everything was resolved. I stuck to that.

Bishop Disparages Tyler to Student Paper

JS: There was not much public perception of what was going on, it wasn’t in the media, it wasn’t in the Signpost. JT: No, not that I’m aware of. I know Signpost reporters were investigating it. In fact, that student reporter was among those that Bishop called in, confidentially, and gave all kinds of information about what was wrong with me. I also know of a reporter who now works in Salt Lake who investigated the case but has not published what she discovered. Eventually when I write all of this up, she has agreed to give me all her notes, cause it’s just my memory I am going on. JS: So this was all an internal thing? JT: It really was. JS: Was the perception fairly broad on campus of what was going on? JT: Oh the gossip mill was just incredible! Yeah, people thought they knew what was going on. You know it’s a small place; no matter what happens, the minute it happens everybody knows. JS: So you left Weber then and went to BYU? JT: Right. JS: That was in 1974? JT: Yes.

A Fair Headed Boy

JS: President Bishop stayed on four more years and things became increasingly worse in terms of criticism of him on campus. JT: Yes, and not only that but the very things that I had initially drawn to the attention of some of these Institutional Council members, became public issues. JS: So it did become public at a later date? JT: Yes, much later. There were a lot of people trying to keep the lid on, and they were successful for awhile. There were a lot of rumors going around. One rumor was that Bishop was one of the “fair haired boys” of the Church, purposely brought to Weber by Monson and Packer, and the reason it was very difficult to get rid of him was because of that influence. Now I don’t know if some of that came out of the non-Mormon camp but I heard it from the Mormons too. JS: It’s probably a good thing that the BYU job came along, because don’t you think that your credibility had been weakened, at least with the administration. Wouldn’t have it been difficult personally for you to continue on at Weber? JT: Sure, because of the nature of the administrative changes that had taken place, people that I considered to be against me were in key positions. Responsible, honest individuals were done away with and people who would stoop to almost anything were in positions of responsibility. And I just wasn’t willing to work with that kind of situation.

Conclusion

This interview took place in 1980 – covering events that happened almost a decade earlier. What do you make of the character of the man she describes Bishop as?

This man would go on to respected positions in church leadership as Mission President, President of the MTC, and service in several other Mission callings. He was on the General Board of the Sunday School for the entire church. In the leaked recording he recounts being personally interviewed by the Prophet himself as well as numerous apostles and being found worthy, despite the fact that he was still doing things for which he characterized himself as a sexual predator.

In the meantime, while this man was being promoted in the hierarchy of the church – people like the September Six were being excommunicated. Did you know that one of the things some of the september six were involved in was identifying and rectifying abuse within the church? These were men and women of character whose academic and moral integrity are being vindicated, while predators like Bishop are being exposed for what they are.

The timeline of this interview and the abuses and the recent leaked recording should give us pause, however. Remember that the assault survivor in the recording notified the church of her attacker sometime in the eighties. She would do so again years later. Tyler spoke up about this man before he ever made it to the MTC.

The #metoo movement is sometimes cited as something which is inspiring brave women to finally speak out about the harassment and abuse that they have suffered under. Perhaps they have been speaking out all along, and we have only just now started to listen to and believe their stories.