Excerpt from Eve Ahren’s November 25, 2020 email to Bp. Stewart Ruch and his wife:

Some may not like me drawing conclusions from an “innocent” prayer encounter, but if one were willing to entertain the possibility of Mark having a pattern of grooming and predatory behavior, this would certainly neatly fit into that story. 

Some of the tools in a predators belt are

A) providing attention and good care (specifically inviting me for prayer, singling me out, addressing my teenage needs or drama as important and worthy of care and attention and deserving a “special” prayer session)

B) eliciting trust and credibility (this is protocol, I wouldn’t do xyz inappropriate thing)

C) Testing response to physical boundaries (someone can correct me if the whole hand on the chest thing is protocol, but it definitely felt new and invasive to me) 

D) Testing whether a victim, in a moment of shock and discomfort (particularly regarding something sexually explicit) would immediately register that shock and disgust on their face, or whether they are concerned enough about protecting the perpetrators credibility and saving him from discomfort that they would move to hide their own discomfort and make the shocking action/disclosure seem “fine”. At that point, when the victim has actually made the attempt to make the uncomfortable lines that have been crossed seem comfortable and normal to themselves and the perpetrator, the perpetrator has played his trump card by eliciting their cooperation and complicity. After this, it is incredibly difficult for the victim to go back and say “I didn’t like that” or “I was uncomfortable,” because the perpetrator can just say “but you were fine with it” or “you didn’t say anything”.