ThenNow

Kosnoff Law @SexAbuseAttys I told BSA and the mediators eighteen months ago this was a bottomless pit of agony. They said I was exaggerating. Then…84k proofs of claim. Say what you want, he nailed it. Ha. “Bottomless pit of agony.” Personally, I think we’re back with the Albino Nurse in the Pit of Despair sizing up our chances against “the machine.” Resistance and raging are futile. So say we all. That was a potpourri of mixed references. I’m tired. Gimme some slack.

Someone among the RSA parties won’t agree to extend the expiration date, which is tomorrow. I heard no indication during the hearing as to which party or parties. If they won’t agree to extend, they don’t want to be in the deal, as cut. That’s my take.

If indeed bankruptcy is just business, this one is a corrupt enterprise. Where I was ready to step back and take aim at the Settlement Trustee process and hunkered insurance companies when this “deal” was announced, I’m back to feeling disgusted. Regardless the state of the RSA and whether it revives after the judge’s jolt today, this thing is a disgrace. I realize it’s highly complex. I realize there are a strange mix of layers and players. I realize it’s emotional and I chief among all. I also realize the fees keep getting paid like clockwork, save for an objection from the insurers. I have seen more distasteful lawyering and postering and bloviating in these last 16+ months than I had in the previous 31 since admitted to the bar. Shame. Shame. Shame.

If 50,000+ victims of CSA at the hands of volunteers and professionals within the BSA are denied a vote and/or get nothing, there will be fallout. One form I predict, and have been since way back, is SoL reform. There will be hell to pay. Another form? States Attorneys General investigations. Yes. I know, I know. Little likelihood of prosecutions. I couldn’t care less. If it goes down that “closed staters” are SoL SOL and utterly denied a voice, I will have a new reason to stay alive. I will fight to ensure both those forms of fallout happen as widely as possible. I have a long memory. I can be strategically patient. I was abused in three states, lived in seven. I have contacts in each. I know people. I can raise money. I will fight.

Yes, but hiding a bone I’ve seen before means I know it’s there. Hope springs eternal. Object permanence can be a beautiful (or horrifying) thing.

I think neither is completely the case. The SoLs are not the impenetrable wall(s) they once were or appeared to be and, for that reason and others, not to file may be completely unwise. If an attorney counsels their client against filing, depending on the state and the fact pattern, that could be unethical. Remember, highly experienced state CSA attorneys graded the "closed" states by Gray 1-3. That means something.

Yup. Here, here. I think I mentioned rotting fish up yonder and a bunch of material for a melodrama. Adopting the suggested analogy, I'm calling it, "The Chapter 11 Circus Came to Town." I'll shorten it. That's just the working title.

I want to compliment the Scouters who’ve been on this thread since I removed my invisibility cloak and have slogged through some challenging conversations. Some bailed out due to frustration and/or anger. We’ve come a long way. Allowing “us” to be heard and substantively contribute means a lot. As you know, no one else in the organization is really hearing us, much less engaging in dialogue from a motive of human understanding alone. They may be listening strategically, but that means little (to me).

Welcome. I am truly sorry for what you endured, now this painful saga. As you accurately said, at least now we are not completely alone, bumping around in the dark of our hyper-focused minds and muddling through. Come what may as the circus continues, we finally have a cohort, though we remain anonymous. It is better than we had and there is comfort in it, I believe.

That's a really good analogy. By my count, we have to add 6 or so rings to the classic Barnum & Bailey standard.

Is it the one where the elephant gets spooked and runs through the crowd?

Part of the script for my screenplay. A fictional tale, or not. For now, let’s say it is. How bitter will be the irony IF: Coalition firms are found to have unethically, improperly and/or fraudulently amassed claims. They used venture money, aggregators and call centers to do the deed, failing to vet many claims, some of which are valid but assailable because of their poor lawyering. Well before all that was discovered and proven - though suspected by insurers - the sheer volume of their client base gave them a mountainous soapbox from which they demanded access to the mediation. Access granted. Once in, things dragged on and dragged some more. They were feeling pressure to settle because, well, the clock is ticking and the piper always gets paid. “Hey! Let’s find a path to compromise. I know we can do it and it’s for the victims, after all,” counseled the Coalition to the mediation parties. To themselves they whispered, “Yes. We surely must. It’s getting a little hot in here, if you know what I mean.” “Oh, goodie,” said the BSA and some other parties. Let’s make a deal!” (Did that include the TCC? Only the Shadow knows...) “So very gracious of of you to make all these concessions!” Exclaims the judge, bolting awake from a 14 month nap. “You are indeed benevolent people seeking the good of all humankind and sexual abuse victims everywhere. I hereby decree you have made a ‘substantial contribution.’ I wave my magic money wand and award you $10M. [Swish and flick! *PING*] ”Thank you, your honor. Truly. You are most generous and we are humbled. Um. May we be excused for a minute or two?” bows the Coalition. “As it turns out, we need to see a shark about a horse’s head.” “Very well. I grant you leave,” said she, “but do remember to vote. Early and often.” To be continued... I am NOT reporting facts, only playing with the puzzle pieces to create a speculative collage. The pieces are there though.

Re: Coalition’s $10M gratuity Thank you, Mr. Buchbinder! https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/8eb26aec-4928-412c-836f-57ec9157c343_5685.pdf

Esoteric Important Unimportant are my middle names. As you know, my mother had it in for me from launch point.

Random Observation I: I had no clue you guys had this much to say about cell phones in Scouting. I’ve been tempted to say, “Get a room already.” Random Observation II: There has been an interesting concurrence of the camp distraction lull and luffing in the case. Harmonic convergence or interstellar alignment I’m thinkin. I have a slight foreboding. Carry on…

I get it, "why" vs. "why." I'll exit this part of the conversation saying I'm glad I learned what I know live and not from a Youtuber goober. (If you guys have cool videos there, I mean no offense. Low hanging rhyme I couldn't pass up.) PS - Lied about that “exit, stage left.” (Nod to Snagglepuss.) The videos I WILL watch are any you can direct me to where you’re opening a coke bottle, boring a hole in a stick through which you can thread a leather thong, whittling or opening a can of beans with a phone. I will be mesmerized and watch with rapt attention and awe. iPhone or Android, your preference. “I don’t care who you are. That’s funny right there.” Attribution withheld to protect my image.

I get it, "why" vs. "why." I'll exit this part of the conversation saying I'm glad I learned what I know live and not from a Youtuber goober. (If you guys have cool videos there, I mean no offense. Low hanging rhyme I couldn't pass up.)

I know why we need phones for safety purposes and adult connection to work and family, but why does a Scout need a phone at camp? I’m glad I couldn’t search the web for lashing or Barred Owl mating calls or reflector oven biscuits or raccoon scat identification or any one of a 1000++ other video tutorials I could now fetch up. For me, as both a Scout and camp staffer, seems it would have been totally disruptive (and even destructive) of the positive things I took away from camping, Summer Camp particularly. No?

Sure. Thanks. Rub it in why don’t ya! Now that you say that, I was always at camp over the date on which my mother decided it was time to launch me into the great wide world of the unknown, the inexplicable and a place where I was soon forced to eat and sleep and poop according to the dictates of human convention. I always resented that. It was much easier before she went and did that to me. I think I’ll call her and remind her just how rude that was. Be right back...

It appears so. Maybe everyone left us here to rot and wither in ignorance and lack of socialization due to some unexpressed desire for a sabbatical. Or, everyone is reading my article very slowly and translating it into multiple language for international distribution. Or, we offended the rest. Or, this all was settled amicably and no one told us. I’ve been vexing about this without explanation, other than my attempts to humor myself.

Here is the entire article, courtesy of a friend at Bloomberg. Worth a read. Makes me crabbier that this judge does not have an eye to the judges overseeing actual mass tort cases, as opposed to the same masquerading as a Chapter 11. Grrrr. Law.com, Mass Tort Attorneys_ Judges Want to Know About Your Outside Financing.pdf

Isn’t the damage TBD, based upon how far under the bus and irretrievable they become? Are they already out of reach, in terms of getting under the channeling injunction? If they start getting named and teed up to be lit up in the window states with no BSA air cover, it’s kaput, ja? It doesn’t feel to me like BSA is going to reach back and fetch COs at this point. If they did opt for a rescue, what would it entail? My view on all this is overly simplistic, I know. Last disjointed thought. Though it may be better for some survivors to have open season on COs, I don’t see it as a great benefit to all. I may be missing it. The whole scenario also looks pretty cold hearted and two-faced from my club chair. Let’s see. A Scout is trustworthy. Strike that. Hm. Loyal? Never mind. Start over. A Scout is helpful. Debatable, but I’ll give them that one through and abundance of grace. Friendly, Courteous and Kind? Nah. No gimmes. I’ll let them run the table from there, with the exception of Brave. Definitely not Brave...

Sorry. I spoke too fast. Yes. That was my multi-headed beast point and confirms my sense of the why. It seemed clearest and most logical to me and the legal makes perfect sense. Thanks.

Thanks. I apologize that my smart alek question made it less than clear. My real question is, knowing how critical the CO relationship is, why the “get off the bus, Gus”? That was even better.

Oops. I just to referred myself, by extension, as a beast. Being an attorney, please don’t censor my comment. I did not intend to revive the now expired and verboten.