ThenNow

I am in the midst of a very elementary national survey to see what people know about the case, their thoughts, on it, whether they think the BSA should continue, if their kids are allowed to be in activities with other adults while they are not with them and several other things. I will report, if anyone would like to know the results. To your point, I was pretty surprised how many people said things like, "I know little or nothing...some leaders took advantage of some boys years ago...they had to file bankruptcy because the LDS church left" and etc. Also, 65% or so know someone who was sexually abused as a child. Not surprised, but notable. This is why I posted the chart and why I have been baffled at the ho-hum approach being taken by the LCs and COs, not to mention the BSA. They and the Ad Hoc Committee (I assume) had the data for months via a settlement demand from the TCC. I guess they weren't in a sharing mood. "Hello? Anyone serious about this?" [insert head shake and befuddled look]

Well, okay then, as they say in the northern midwest. I have no pithy retort to either of those sentences.

Again, this is me throwing question darts at a board in the dark. I ask out of ignorance and not grinding anyone's nose in something. Was it truly the assumption that these were minor "offenses" and random, though malicious acts of "touching," and etc.? I am taken aback by the reaction to the data, since we've been talking about sexual abuse. Plus, I have been blathering on about my experience. Did most assume my claim is isolated and/or anomalous?

This is certain liquidation for open state LCs, since none of the Councils will be released from liability if they don't participate. They are non-parties to the case and only get protection if they "voluntarily" contribute to the Trust. This appears to be the approach the TCC is taking, as I understand it. Is your thought to preserve LCs not subject to immediate or highly likely near-terms lawsuits, based on the status of state SoLs? As we've discussed, though not all have look-back windows, many have pending legislation that could very well lead to one. I'm just trying to understand the anticipated outcome of the $.01 suggestions.

It may be true. Based on what some of you report, I’m not sure. Many seem to be far removed from abuse or negative experiences. I suppose the issue really is can safety be replicated and, more so, ensured. If it can’t be reliably replicated, that’s quite an indictment on the human animals. No surprise. Sounds like Scouting’s philosophical and practical death knell, if the opinion is widely held among the ranks. Time to fold up the tents and liquidate, then? (Btw, having the “best lawyers” is ultimately meaningless when the Supreme Judge is on the other team.)

I’ve read this three times. I make no sense of it other than to conclude it’s a puzzle of contradictions.

I’m not sure what you’re looking for here, but yes. State statutes define criminality and level of offense associated with each act, depending on age, force, injury, and, etc. All categories represent criminal acts, statutes depending. In the old days and maybe today, the last category might goes to “contributing to the delinquency of a minor” up to child pornography. Have any been prosecuted? No clue. In my case and many others, the criminal SoL had run by the time I was ready to act. Some of the claims could be prosecuted under newly revised SoL in certain states, if the survivor chooses and prosecutors are willing. As CynicalSouter has said, it’s a tough row to hoe in a criminal case after so much time has elapsed. “Beyond a reasonable doubt” is a high bar of proof/evidence to get a guilty verdict. Again, I can refer you to CHILDUSA and their work for details on SoL reform.

One of the reasons I posted what I did goes to this very point and, by implication, YPT. The data and reality represented is what lies on the other side of whatever effort you put into “firewalling” predators. Failure to enforce or allowing 67% completion of training leads to that chart. It’s dark, stark and ugly. It’s also very real. We survivors have felt it was not being seen for what it truly is. Now it’s unavoidable. Few things are more affirming that to be believed in the face of widespread doubt and aspersions.

I did not know about the dual membership. I assumed Scouters from “Scouter.com.” The very LAST thing I would ever want to do is cause anyone trauma over this. God forbid. I am very sorry if it occurred in any way.

Understand and it’s your call. I had no way whatsoever to know your thoughts or predilections. Apologies, nonetheless. And, yes, it is explicit. And, yes, I believe not staring it straight in the eye is part of the problem. And, yes, that little chart represents a huge part of my Scouting life. Monetized and sterilized words on a page.

In case someone doesn't have access to the WSJ. This is authorized, by the way. https://www.morningstar.com/news/dow-jones/202104023701/sex-abuse-victims-duel-with-boy-scouts-for-right-to-steer-bankruptcy

Sounds like your Unit and CO have a clean record. That's highly commendable. Is that from inception to date? I wonder how many can say that. No way to tell without a massive, targeted dive into the data.

Just published. https://www.wsj.com/articles/sex-abuse-victims-duel-with-boy-scouts-for-right-to-steer-bankruptcy-11617383922?st=ucbzl2ecguscddl&reflink=article_copyURL_share

Seems to be the case. I wonder how the Ad Hoc Committee presented the prospect of participation, since they clearly don't speak for all LCs. I don't believe any COs were party to the mediation so that's a complete mystery, at least to me. It is. I'll take it as the quick and dirty path to a completed estimation. No one else was keen to do it, so now we know. Knowing what I know from other cases and bankruptcies, I feel good about the numbers. For me as a survivor claimant, it's at least affirming to see someone place a value on what I went through. I know it won't amount to that much, but it's peculiarly comforting.

Appears it put them into stark relief. I say, let’s replace the driver and move this thing forward. As my mom liked to say, “You’re coming along kicking and screaming, if that’s what it takes. Either way, you’re coming.”

Of course.

Beyond my sphere of limited knowledge. There is still the more looming issue of sexual abuse lawsuits post-hypothetical liquidation, but that bridge is yet to be presented for crossing. I'm thinking it may also be more than 6' off the ground...

All intellectual property is wedded to the congressionally chartered entity or entities. It goes away and they can't "deal" or assign it. Let's say National is liquidated and the LCs remain separate to live another day. You do understand, without the protection of a release by the abuse survivors they would be the named defendants in the sexual abuse lawsuits, along with the COs/SOs, yes? That's the reason people are calling to "burn it all [National] down" and liquidate. The most significant assets are with the secondary, "non-party" entities and insurance policies.

When he is free, I'm confident CS will give his studied and storied take on this. I'm mostly speculating, being a mostly ig'nert party. This is the argument that is being made, however. If you look back at the documents related to that asset trust transfer scuffle in the summer, it's pretty clear from the TCC's filings. Charters can be yanked for any reason, as I read it. We will await enlightenment. (Not being sarcastic.)

May I know which state this is and if the law is long-standing? If the reversionary interest in the established chartering agreement is valid, I would be keen to know the overriding state interest that justifies invalidating it.

I'm sure he will chime in, but my recollection is CynicalScouter addressed this. I believe he said the charter attaches to the specific BSA corporate entity and dies with its "host." It is an obligate symbiotic relationship.

Yes. This has been the argument all along and was at issue in the TN asset transfer situation last year. Aren't the councils all re-chartered annually? I assume if the chartering organization ceases to exist, so too the power to grant renewals. Thus, all would necessarily be liquidated by triggering the reversionary interest of National in the assets of all LCs as it is wound down.

On the Camp Gustin sale. The family of the namesake and donor is asserting a potential deed restriction and reversionary interest. https://www.sunjournal.com/2021/03/29/gustin-family-urging-boy-scouts-not-to-sell-sabattuss-camp-gustin/

If they don't talk about the estimation at the mediation sessions that would be sorta mind blowing. Again, I'm in the shadow of darkness within a cave in the woods. PS - I've been advised to keep my expectations right about ankle level, if that says anything.

I have no clue. Someone else may have an idea, though. I would think it greatly depends on what is accomplished, if anything, and whether confidential follow-on conversations are required to reach some measure of agreement.