ThenNow

Yes. That problem is inherent. My red flag the clear implication that the Coalition is selling out for the new Hartford deal, as MYCVAStory (and I less substantively) noted as an underlying fear.

With permission. Boy Scouts Are Close to New Deal With Insurer Hartford on Sex-Abuse Claims.pdf

Right. I wasn't questioning method, skill or precision, just that what they sought to achieve through the expert is kaput. It was ill-conceived, as you've stated.

I'm feeling like mediation is going to undergo a spelling evolution. It will henceforth be spelled c-o-m-p-r-o-m-i-s-e and I don't mean that in the best sense of the word. I hope I'm wrong. Meh. She's gone from cans straight to heads.

As you know better than I, a classic case of expert backfires. Spectacularly.

Yup. He is nothing if not calculating, and also smart. He is where he is for a reason. (I am NOT pandering. I've been saying this repeatedly, well before I had a fanboy and took on that celebrity client. Ha.) Why are they getting to depose the aggregators, again? What did the judge mention? What pushed the rock over the hill? Hm...

So, of the 44 days, how many now get spent deposing the aggregators? "We'll start with the aggregators." The second word really caught my attention.

With a blanket rebuff and admonition for anyone else who would so attempt to "extricate oneself from representing a client." Rare form today.

Another denial. No delving into the POC's. Allowing depositions of the aggregators/claims generators. Cited Mr. Kosnoff's statement about the fraudulent use of his signature on POC's by another firm or group.

MYCVAStory made the point very well. If the Coalition caves, it's likely because the bill collectors (enforcers?) keep lighting up their phones. They want it to stop, sooner rather than later, so they can start counting coin.

And, she's denied the motion.

One fig leaf. 3 entities. Logical conclusion? Someone gonna be n'cked, depending on the size of that leaf. Just sayin'. In my book, that's a small leaf and someone's motive is suspect. Hint: starts with a 'C' and ends with an 'n'.

Same. She has been extremely combative disfavoring the arguments by the TCC and the Coalition. Less so the Coalition, in part bc Goodman is fluent in bakruptcyese.

Yup.

WSJ just confirmed a new deal with Hartford. "Boy Scouts are close to a new deal with insurer Hartford on Sex-Abuse Claims...could approach $800M, though negotiations continue."

If true, tells me it's a sweet deal even at that number.

2PM ET.

Also, John, you didn’t use the high-end of the statistics - 100 per abuser or 1 in 6 men abused - for the calculations did you? That’s right. You did not. As to multiple multiple, as abuse is defined in the POC and the Tiers of Abuse, my abuser hit 8 the first night of my very first BSA campout. He went down the row of 4, 2-Scout tents tossing in a pair of cold Old Style and a porn mag to share. That was campout one. I was in the Troop from ‘72-‘79. (I was an unhappy Cub Scout prior to that, so about 7ish years total. I don’t have the Cub start date listed anywhere.)

Locate the first tiny word in the section you quoted. Not you, not Barry, not anyone else. I responded to requests for replies/conversation on a topic with an honest reply: “I am not here to discuss...” I’ve done that topic and responded to that argument, as have a number of others, til I’m blue in the face. (Smurfs-based jokes and mockery welcome.) All y’all rock on with your bad selves. (That’s not a poke, just a Southernism meant to say, “As...you...wish...” Meesa done with that Maypole dance.

Not poking, just asking. Is the point or argument that BSA is in Chapter 11, driven here by child sexual abuse lawsuits or threatened actions, because of the IVF disclosure? Because they kept the records, though purged who knows how many? I’m trying to clarify. Thanks.

As has been seen with some of the issues/topics that needed to be ‘banned’ or pulled out as separate threads, maybe there are other things that are simply dead horses and bones of contention. Some of the cyclic debates, in my reading, no longer advance the purpose of understanding and processing though what has happened (to Scouting, Scouts, Scouters and survivors) and what is happening, will happen, may happen and may never happen. The moderators probably have a better 30,000 feet view of what those may be. I have some thoughts, but my comments won’t be taken well by some, I’m fairly certain.

We’ve briefly touched on the physiological and neurological changes created by trauma. While it is extremely interesting to me and I wish more people understood/wanted to understand it, I’m thinking it’s far afield. It might be very helpful to have a place to post articles and links as a ‘digital library’ for any who want to understand sexual abuse trauma, the various forms of impact, Complex PTSD and all the attendant issues. Could even say it’s not a discussion thread, simply a resource. (I know some people say I’m one of the smartest people on the forum, but this is a pretty good idea if I do say so myself. PAH!)

As I’ve said, “speck and log.” I’m not talking about or thinking about anything but BSA for these purpose. Relativity is irrelevant here. I can’t operate on two patients at once. I’m not a machine, man. Good lord. 😬

Might be time to upgrade that jalopy to a Recteq, my friend.

Wonder what it would be with 12 victims…Hm. PS - My point in this exercise is to attempt to disabuse some of the notion that 82,500 is some unthinkable, absurd and clearly bloated number of victims. Is simply is not. Further, it’s most likely statistically quite understated.