ThenNow

Welcome to DORU! (Different Opinions R Us)

Choosing the right insurance carrier? Tell me if I'm getting warm... Little humor in the mix can't be all bad, right?

Roger that.

I can't speak for CS, but I have said the same and can speak to that. I, for one, have neither said nor implied it would be the sum total, only the BSA contribution. Even at that, $6100 is insulting, especially given the weak "we'll commit to asking the LCs for a contribution of $X and you men can go fight for the insurance money." In that context and knowing they may well be protecting/hiding large assets without sufficient legal grounds, it is offensive. My personal take and feeling. In this case, claims will be vetted, but weighed by a preponderance of the evidence. It does shift the burden, but no more so than the law requires, which is appropriate. I don't think that amounts to a presumption of guilt, by any means. If you're referring to trial and conviction in the press and court of public opinion, that's another matter. Frankly, I despise how fast and loose our system is with allowing information to "leak" to the media and general public. It creates a tremendous and almost insurmountable mountain for the accused. That is anathema and contrary to our intended system of justice.

I believe what he is saying is that God is the ultimate arbiter of justice and recompense. "I lift up mine eyes to the hills, from whence cometh my help." Man can (and should) pay for wrongs committed, but often this does not happen. He's encouraging me/us to look to those hills and hope, and not trust in man. Man resoundingly disappoints, cannot bind up the brokenhearted nor grant peace or contentment, whether through riches or words. Still, doing what's right within society and the bounds of the law should not be avoided, waiting for eternal justice or saving grace in this life. JMO.

I get all there is to hear and know about lawyerly caution, but doesn't this speak loudly to anyone?

Roger that. I respect you and hear you, but I think you're wrong. These pages are followed and duly noted by many involved in the case.

Did they do enough? They seem to think not or they wouldn't have both implemented and improved YPT, then escalated compliance requirements. Saying no one can do enough to prevent a problem entirely doesn't negate or exonerate responsibility, accountability or liability. No one will ever eliminate auto deaths, seatbelt or no, so let's ditch the seatbelt requirement and auto safety standards. Looks the other way? Yes, we will always have evil, but do you look the other way when (if) you see abuse? Do most people here? Do most people you know? Who is society? Aren't we society? The negligence or apathy of some doesn't create a norm by which I want to live or one I would support, advocate, use as a crutch or rely on as an excuse. Take red and white paint. Remove jacket. Lay jacket on work bench, front side down. Paint alternating co-centric circles on center of jacket. Let dry. Begin wearing jacket with the target you painted on your back. Hm. "You cannot change what happened in the past." True. But then what?? No restitution, damages, repayment for losses caused are ever necessary, just, moral or due. Nothing can be "changed" so move on? I keep hearing "money is not going to fix what happened to me." Agreed. Still, let's give it a whirl, shall we? I'm not asking the BSA or anyone else to "fix" me. Only God can do that and He's working on it. I want some balancing of the real world, life impact and damage scales. Ok. "Ruining"? Again, Chapter 11. Not Chapter 7. Voluntarily filed. Seeking a Plan to continue and equitably compensate sexual abuse victims. Court won't allow destruction or force liquidation. If by "ruining" you mean causing reduction in programs and increased dues, again, please see above (in multiples). PLEASE stop using the same word(s) that apply to people who were raped and molested in all imaginable ways to describe the "pain" to be felt by Scouts who will have less Scouting. It's like peopling saying, "I'm starving," or "I'm totally depressed" or "I haven't eaten all day. I think I'm anorexic!" or "Look at how I lined up my flatware. I'm, like, totally OCD or something!" That stuff not only strains the meaning of these words, but dilutes their import and substance for those who truly SUFFER. I'm sorry, but neither you nor kids who will have a reduction in programs or increased dues are being "abused" or will be "victims" of payments to actual abuse victims. It is both laughable and patently offensive. I'm begging you guys. Please stop abusing the English language and, thereby, the victims of BSA sexual abuse. Please stop... PS - I am my own "vulture." I'll take it all, thank you very much.

What would be the topic? Theories of vicarious liability and the morality of supervisorial accountability?

I have pretty much no idea what this means. Go where? Restoration of my life? Good grief. I never said something so silly. I'm not that naive. In fact, I'm close to powerless, as are you. I gather this is a large part of your frustration. Welcome to the clubhouse. "Justifying the wreckage"? Say what? What meanest this?

No there is not. "Implied expectation" in a legal case? What good attorney would be that obtuse and expect to get more clients who want him to negotiate on their behalf. Nope. The TCC offered a legitimate and data-based estimation as a benchmark, since no one else was doing it. Please don't create something out of what is not there, especially by vaporous implication. Data-based. Fact-based. Claims-based estimation. I see nothing of the sort "established," other than through an unfounded implication (that doesn't exist). Show me. I don't believe that's what Jim Stang said. He works for the TCC, as representative of ALL abuse claimants. Right? He has a fiduciary duty to his client. Only his client. "Caring" about the other party, even though I don't think he said he doesn't, is not in the lexicon of requirements for an attorney to fulfill his fiduciary duty. If the BSA fails, that is not his concern and cannot be his focus. He has one concern and one focus; ALL claimants, come what may. Not caring implies malice. I've met him and have listened to him. I think that's a false accusation, but more so irrelevant.

Actually, they did not and have not yet made that demand, at least publicly/before the court. I don't know what the exact mediation demand(s) have been. As I understand it, that number is the aggregate claim value estimation, and then conservative because it does not place values on repeated abuse or abuse of a boy across multiple of the tiered categories. That said, I agree. It is possible.

I appreciate you saying so, Barry, and value the compliment coming from you. I mean that sincerely. I wonder, though, if the loss is/was necessary if the BSA would be more forthcoming in this process. Also, the claimants can't be responsible for the condition of the organization going into the Chapter 11, by that I'm referring to the LDS departure, COVID and other reasons for membership decline. The February 2020 filing happened to be at a time the BSA was already "weakened." I still don't think "total loss" is necessarily imminent, but I have to focus more on advocating for the claimants and my case. In my view, if the BSA is dying it is from a thousand cuts, many at their own hand.

Accepted US legal definition of fault: Fault IS a negligent or intentional failure to act reasonably or according to LAW or duty. It is an improper act or omission causing injury to another and arising from ignorance, carelessness, or negligence. Faults may be gross, ordinary, and slight.

In my reading, this is way far afield from the point I was trying to make. Forgive me if I wasn't clear. The "let's compare," was trying to draw out what I see as the horribly offensive notion that the sexual abuse of boys is somehow concomitant with "reduced programs" or "increased registration fees." I may misstate, but I don't think so. Someone says they are going to be "abused" by BSA paying sexual abuse victims. It is the wrong way to "pay" for someone else's sexual abuse by a long gone volunteer who worked for/with the organization into which he pays dues and within which his programs are reduced. I'm asking for a comparison of damages and impact. I think that's more than fair. The exercise if a trick and a futility. There is no way to compare them. Am I asking for a "tap out" or "I yield and agree with your point?" Absolutely I am. As has been said, no one is being forced to associate with an organization that, by its own implicit admission, has overseen the abuse of boys. 8, 80, 800, 8,000 or 84,000. Increased dues and reduced programs are not some random, indiscriminate or mandatory tax that cannot be legally evaded. There is a way out of feeling the "abusive" impact on the volunteers within the organization being held accountable. Yes, volunteers and donors have been and will be impacted. That impact pales in comparison to what was heaped on sexual abuse victims. Some believe and repeat "there are two wrongs" here and that doesn't make things "right." I say, there is one evil assault resulting in vicious injustice and tragedy, and one unfortunate and uncomfortable inconvenience.

Just for context and contrast, I am only one of the BSA sexual abuse survivors. Let's talk about costs and fees. My in-patient, out-patient, therapy, psychiatry, medical and medication costs from 2000 until today is not less than $500,000. I'm sure that's low, because my therapy costs were around $100,000 over 20.5 years and one stint in treatment runs between $30,000-$60,000. I've done several. And, that does not include lost wages (HUGE NUMBER) or any of the "emotional and psychological" damage caused to my family and me. What has/will the abuse settlement cost you and other Scouts and Scouters? Hm? PS - I've been told a few times on this forum, directly or by implication, that I'm "whining" and spouting "psychobabble." As they say, show me the receipts. Dollar signs are neither. I'll show you mine if you show me yours. Let's compare...

In all of my posting and bantering back and forth, this is really the thing I've hoped to present. What the BSA is facing, whether in the courts or this Chapter 11, is not an amorphous force that gathered in a dark room somewhere to plot the malicious destruction of Scouting. Not whatsoever. We are men, once boys in Scouting like you and your children, who didn't invite the whirlwind. We reaped it. In many cases, to OUR near destruction. None of us expected this when we joined Scouting. None of us would wish this on anyone else. None of us are enjoying or relishing being here. I hope you know this. Perhaps these letters will "help," as painful and difficult as they are to read.

Are you referring to or do you have specific data on the memory "maintenance/retention"issue? I'm 60. My SM/abuser, who's very much alive and enjoying his retirement, is now 71. I can tell you details about him and some of the abuse that defies most people's understanding of vivid memory recollection. I'm not alone. My Scouting cohorts, most of whom are still alive, could be called to corroborate many of the ancillary and contextual allegations I have made. Some can corroborate instances of non-touching abuse (grooming, drinking, pornography...) and others their own physical sexual abuse or public sexual activity. There are multiple Proofs of Claim against the LC/Troop/CO, all I assume implicate him. No dearth of memory/accurate recall here.

From my own experience and the reams of research and data, any age cutoff must be tied to the real world knowledge of when people come to grips with CSA and have the “ability” to come forward. If it’s a random number, like 40, it’s just pulling numbers out of a hat. For me, if it was 40, I would’ve been just about 2 months too late to the game.

I appreciate you/someone saying this. I’m a bit amazed no one has to this point, but I’m glad you did. Can you help me understand your “However” qualifier? Personally, I’m not seeking “revenge,” don’t know of many guys that would characterize their involvement in the case as such, and the SoL law in the state of my primary abuse has not undergone substantial change or reform. From my understanding, 50,000+/- victim/survivor claimants are in that last category. Again, thank you for those first two sentences. The laws facilitated law suits seeking compensation awards, which snapped the BSA out of a YPT compliance malaise, which hopefully leads to greater safety in the BSA and other organizations. They were not “made” to that end, but likely will achieve that result, especially if the TCC/we claimants get the non-monetary awards we are demanding.

I don’t think I ever said that. Not once. In fact, I believe I’ve acknowledged my concern for current and future Scouts. How that plays out is not within my control. I appreciate you’re frustrated and, perhaps, angry with me and others for pursuing compensation from the BSA and related entities. Are you saying you would not do the same had you or your son been abused? I was minding my own business, making my way as best I could when the BSA called for men like me to submit our sexual abuse claims. That’s why I’m here, along with the tens of thousands who also returned their RSVP. Because the BSA and you are surprised, shocked and angry about the (number of boys abused and) magnitude of the attendant liability is not our doing, concern or responsibility to assuage. I really want to know, apart from asking that we hear your frustration and anger at what you see as misplaced “abuse” and “punishment,” what you think I/we should do. Withdraw our claims? Take the $6100 offered? Take the $1500 opt out now and buy those 250+ Carmel Mochas? What would you tell your son? Check out today’s docket update at Omni Agent Solutions. Read the letters and consider what you would tell these sons, too...

This is per California non-profit law and likely similar in other states. Are you a “member”? The term “member” is a term of art defined in California Nonprofit Corporation Law (the “Law”). Generally, a member under the Law (sometimes referred to as a “statutory member” or “voting member”) means any person who, under a provision of a corporation’s articles of incorporation (“articles”) or bylaws, has the right to vote on (1) the election of directors, (2) the dissolution of the corporation, (3) a merger, or (4) a disposition of all or substantially all of the corporate assets; or any person identified as a member in a corporation’s articles or bylaws who has a right, under either governing document, to vote on changes to either document.

Assuming you're talking about the BSA (or any other corporation) as an "inanimate object," this is simply not true. It is a total misunderstanding of the nature of corporations. In fact, they are sometimes referred to as a "legal person." Corporations exist separate from their owners, but can do most all of the business, financial and property/asset transactions an individual person can. They can sue, be sued, invest, own property, hire, fire, borrow money, pay taxes, and, etc. They are very much alive and fully animate for all purposes relevant to this discussion. Specifically, they are 100% legally and financially accountable.

I don't want to pile on or call (further) attention to myself and my story just for some additional acknowledgement or affirmation sake. For what it's worth, I will put a "face" on this and speak for others like me, as I try to do where appropriate. My experience tracks with all of those, except numbers 6 and 10. These are not isolated experiences nor are the letters from a select few who were most impacted or 8 handpicked and designated spokesmen. Caveat: I don't want to misspeak. Perhaps the TCC or some state attorney or consortium selected the men to write the letters. I should say, "nor, to my knowledge, are the letters from a select few..." Even if they were asked to write the court, their stories are not unique and there are thousands that stand with each of the 8 who can relay virtually the same experience.

I don't understand this whatsoever. Chapter 11 is voluntary, regardless the pressure of abuse cases that pushed the BSA to that decision. The BSA is requesting 84,000 CSA victim/survivor claimants to release them from future liability. This is not a hostile takeover or class action. They want a release? Produce the financial documents, especially if they really want to stop the fee bleed they repeatedly bemoan. This is nonsense. Want to demonstrate bad faith and a lack of commitment to "equitably compensate" BSA sexual abuse victims? Keep playing this game. Want to step up, be honorable and negotiate in the open? Produce the blasted paperwork.