MYCVAStory

Well, it arms the Trust with the ability to apply pressure to non-settling insurers, especially the excess insurers by basically saying "See, you're going to get beaten up if these go to court." Another issue this addresses is Survivors "competing" against Survivors for limited funds in the trust. If all "high-dollar" awards, those in excess of 2.7 mil come out of the existing trust then it will deplete available assets dispraportianately.

Funny? HAH! It's music to researchers' ears. Before Cronbach gets worked up with reliability we can geek out over who the results will apply to! Enjoy.... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3369519/ 🙂

I would place a VERY big caution on the interpretation and use of this. Before I go further, let me say I have the highest admiration for ChildUSA and its work. The issue though is one of external validity or "generalizability" as it is commonly known. The data came from a questionnaire that was completed by AIS ("Abused in Scouting") clients. Regardless of how you feel about the methods used to gain those clients, and I'm making no judgement about that, they are a specific group, that chose a specific firm or group of firms, and that raises questions. For example, at the time of the questionnaire were predominantly Survivors in "open States" coming forward? If so, is that group representative of all States? Were Survivors of the worst forms of abuse coming forward more than others? This is what we call a convenience sampling method. It's convenient because the researchers had access to it but it is NOT a randomized sample representative in a systematic way of a larger population. This does NOT mean that the results should be ignored. Rather, they should be understood for what they are and until data is collected in a manner that is designed to be widely generalizable this "study" shouldn't be used to explain phenomena beyond the participants who completed the questionnaire.

Therein lies the problem. For 82,500 claimants they can't and won't accept an organization that "preaches" character when past behavior runs counter to that. The BSA has said sorry and wants to make up for the past. It had its attorney, and not any employee of the BSA apologize to Survivors who met in Delaware when some stepped forward to be considered for the TCC. It mortgaged the hell out of Philmont so that it could owe JP Morgan and effectively put that out of reach for Survivors. It has done little to address release of the IV files, kicking that to a Trustee and in two years waited for the TCC and Coalition Survivors Group to take the lead on Youth Protection changes. Character? That's what you do when you don't think anyone is looking. Only problem for the BSA is that everyone is looking and its actions have not matched its words or mission.

Uh, maybe that needs to be a separate forum. Going to be a tough lift right now for many of the 82,500 discussing the bankruptcy.

Uhhhh..... As he stated: 1. He tried when he was employed and was prevented from the change he sought. 2. In order to create change while employed, he had to to stay employed. Public comment would prevent that. "Hey everybody, half the youth protection reports I'm seeing involve youth on youth abuse" isn't a headline the Boy Scouts would have appreciated. Remember, he turned down a financial bonus to sign an NDA. I'm willing to buy into his sincerity.

So...Future Claims representative.... this person represents the interests of claimants that have not already come forward but have legal recourse to do so at a later date. Yes, it's one of those bankruptcy things that make you say "So he's billing on behalf of clients he doesn't have yet?" Yes. In the case of this bankruptcy an example would be claimants who at a later date will claim that they were suffering from repressed memory and now that they are conscious of their abuse they want to file a claim. That is a legal argument that is accepted in some States but must be proven and can't just be a doodge because you missed a deadline. So, the FCR attends all mediation, files motions and objections, and just basically representes the interests of yet-to-be identified Survivors. As well, the Trust will have to hold back some money for a period of time "just in case" and yes, the FCR gets to keep billing until that period runs out. At that point it goes back into the trust Don't shoot the messenger. I've added FCR to my career choices when I'm reincarnated. You get to be a lawyer, and bill, without all those pesky clients to deal with. Unbelievable. There has to be a better way. From my attorney: You are receiving this weekly email as a client to provide you with a reminder for tonight's Boy Scouts of America Town Hall Meeting. Please find below the Zoom Information for Tonight's TCC Town Hall Meeting at 8PM. (Eastern Time): Zoom: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 (no registration required) Dial-In by Telephone: 888-788-0099 (Toll Free), Webinar ID: 822 7282 6295. If asked for a “Participant ID,” just press # In addition, video recordings and transcripts of the town halls can also be found on the Tort Claimants' Committee's website : https://www.tccbsa.com if you are unable to attend tonight's meeting.

Where was I on career day in high school when the "Bankruptcy Consultant" discussed that career path?

So my understanding is that the whole "substantial contribution" motion/argument is considered after the confirmation. It's in the plan to let the judge know where money "may" be going. The judge could say "okay, leave it in" or "I don't want to be bound by this in any way, take it out." Regardless, it is considered after the confirmation portion. I'm looking forward to that. The judge has already signaled on more than one occasion that she has doubts about it. Then last week it was evident to her thatthe Coalition was the group in the STAC that couldn't agree with the rest of its members on a Trustee. That forced the BSA to just name the Trustee based upon a majority and the judge to show much displeasure as to how the STAC had started its work. So, there's a very real possibility that the judge could say "You need to pay your attorney's bills, do what you're doing to your Survivor clients and pay for them yourself from the contingency fees you're taking."

Absolutely. The new YP changes compared to the original settlement are on a link at the top of the tccbsa.com website. It might make you feel a little more at ease. That's a big emphasis on "might." The reality is that there are pedophiles out there and they will always look for opportunities. What the BSA needs to do is have a culture of protection running throughout it AND the public able to know if it's working. The new settlement allows for a mechanism where parents will be able to call and find out if a troop is safe before and during involvement. As well, mandatory reporter laws exist where they never did. Will it all make a difference? I don't know, and the amount of youth on youth abuse that we may have never realized is really an issue but a LOT of Survivors are going to be on local Council boards and others will be making those calls to see if anything has changed. Transparency is critical and the BSA owes it to the public and especially Survivors to prove that it deserves to exist after what it did, and is now doing, to every Survivor.

We all have different paths to follow. What's right for some isn't right for others. The past was a nightmare and the present finds Survivors in a legal process designed to address business and not abuse. The reality though is that this may be our only chance to be involved. Follow the path you you feel is best but just remember that some day this will be in the rear view mirror and we'll all need to ask then whether we did today what we needed to. Hindsight's a bitch and always 20-20 but usually favors action rather than inaction. Hang in there and I hope you find some peace.

Yep, there's no way that everyone's individual situation can be addressed but at least this helps when we speak to our attorneys. I hear those saying..."But I'm pro se!" That's where the Trust is really going to need to continue the discussion of how this is all working and what it means. The TCC mentioned that it will be meeting and stressing communication with the Trustee if/when he/she is appointed. At least this is a start given how early it is in the process.

They said in the meeting last night that they had created an almost hour-long video explaining the review processes (three paths) in detail and hoped that the video would be up on the website very soon. At that length hopefully it answers a lot of questions or at least helps Survivors ask the right questions of counsel.

You have to wonder if after trying to control things for so long and excluding the TCC, then having that fail, if this wasn't a last(ish) effort at retaining some control over Trust operations. Sounded like the Judge wants no part of that.

Judge called a hearing on quick notice....NOT happy that the STAC couldn't agree on ONE Trustee. TCC and Pfau/Zalkin wanted Hauser. Coalition wanted Levy. Deadlocked at 4-3 and the BSA submitted Hauser's name to the Coalition's consternation. Coalition wanted two trustees with one being Levi. Judge decides that she will allow Hauser to move ahead because it is the BSA's plan. Buchbinder says two trustees would be a mess and she agrees. She also seems VERY pissed that the STAC couldn't work this out an dmade work for her, she wants a VERY independant and qualified Trustee, she will be looking at the role of the STAC and appears to want it to be advisory at best with an independant trustee. Interestingly, Rothweiler raised his hand to speak but she disallowed it because he is a represented party and Molton was already speaking for the Coaition. NOT a good look when you want to jump in to take your attorney's place. Pachulski gave Molton a biot of a lesson in Bankruptcy code so maybe this was damage control. Overall....a good result for Survivors if this judge wants the right Trustee, and the lawyers who have been fighting for two years to be advisory at best.

TCC Town Hall tonight. Letter from my attorney said it could be an interesting one worth watching. Please find below the Zoom Information for Tonight's Town Hall Meeting at 8PM. (Eastern Time): Zoom: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 (no registration required) Dial-In by Telephone: 888-788-0099 (Toll Free), Webinar ID: 822 7282 6295. If asked for a “Participant ID,” just press # Video recordings and transcripts of the town halls can also be found on the Tort Claimants' Committee's website : https://www.tccbsa.com if you are unable to attend tonight's meeting.

The takeaway is that this settlement gives the BSA 12 months to work out an acceptable protocol for release (redaction, privacy, etc) and the Trustee has the authority to file suit to compel the court to do so. Bottom line, a path has been laid out and the BSA with the new Youth Protection Committee can walk it and the Trustee will be waiting to see if they show up at the destination.

Reminder..... The TCC urges you to attend the TCC’s “Town Hall” meetings. The next “Town Hall” meeting will be February 17 at 5 p.m. (Pacific)/7 p.m. (Central)/8 p.m. (Eastern). The TCC will discuss its recommendations about these material changes to BSA’s Plan. Here is the Zoom link to the Town Hall meetings: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 OR telephone: 1-669-900-9128; Code: 82272826295#

An FYI.... The TCC urges you to attend the TCC’s “Town Hall” meetings. The next “Town Hall” meeting will be February 17 at 5 p.m. (Pacific)/7 p.m. (Central)/8 p.m. (Eastern). The TCC will discuss its recommendations about these material changes to BSA’s Plan. Here is the Zoom link to the Town Hall meetings: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 OR telephone: 1-669-900-9128; Code: 82272826295#

Vetting has only been done by attorneys filing claims. (Insert opinions about that here). That's why the selection of a Trustee, claims processing professionals, and a Trust Advisory Committee are so important. Ultimately the Trust will vet claims as best as possible so that available funds go to valid Survivors. While the scope of this is historically large its been done in other mass tort and abuse settings. So, there are "best practices" and if a Trust is established let's hope it communicates well its work.

From the TCCBSA.COM website: The TCC will be holding a Town Hall on Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 8 pm (Eastern) to discuss the latest developments in the BSA bankruptcy. Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 (no registration required) or by phone: 888-788-0099 (toll free), Webinar ID: 822 7282 6295

One opinion....closer to the end of the bankruptcy than the beginning since a confirmation hearing is rapidly approaching. But....if it all fails the clock resets to where all Survivors were the day before it was filed. If it succeeds then Survivors have to understand that a Trust needs to get up and running and claims are addressed "first in, first out" (FIFO) according to filing date. Even then, as non-settling insurers are litigated by the Trust that will take time. So, post any settlement this will take....more time. Some Survivors might get a look at all of that and say "Give me my $3500 so I can forget about all of this. And if some combination of the above happens, where third-parties can't be released, then Survivor litigation may commence for some. Oh, and ALL of it can be appealed by objectors. So, we're closer to the end of something....but not very close to the end of everything. We're all living the reasons why bankruptcy was never intended to adjudicate sexual abuse.

The RSA was essentially her saying "Okay, you can go down that path but it's YOUR job to prove that the destination is the right one." An RSA isn't an endorsement of a settlement. That said, getting to a confirmation hearing is huge and hopefully any decision won't get tied up in appeal. Sorry to raise that possibility!

The article is over four years old. While it hints at her feelings re third-party releases it's a hint at the bankruptcy landscape THEN. Recent decisions invalidating third-party releases and anticipated appeals moving higher and higher suggest that she would have reason for different feelings now. As well, she did say from teh bench that her Millenium decision should NOT be taken to apply to this case necessarily.

A confirmation hearing is a lengthy process in cases as complex as this one. Recent predictions are that it could take weeks and not days. Should a plan be confirmed it would be a resolution. If not it could still be a resolution if a plan fails, the BSA says "we tried" and injunctions against LCs are lifted. Still, even if a plan is confirmed there can be appeals and if a trust is set up it will take time for that operation to get going. Survivors should remain as patient as possible and not expect checks in the mail the week after the 22nd!