johnsch322

And yet there seems to be a widespread belief from people who occasionally comment in this forum with that argument. What bothers me is that they seem to be older scouters (such as myself) who have a long history with the BSA. The other point that seems to be made quite often is why punish the new scouters. All of this is not against scouters per se but the organization BSA and it's LC's and CO's etc. They failed under the law!

Child maltreatment[edit] Child sexual abuse has been recognized specifically as a type of child maltreatment in U.S. federal law since the initial Congressional hearings on child abuse in 1973.[1] Child sexual abuse is illegal in every state,[2] as well as under federal law.[3] Among the states, the specifics of child sexual abuse laws vary, but certain features of these laws are common to all states.[4] I copied this from Wickpedia. For me it takes away any argument of “different cultural norms of the day”. Society had laws on the books to punish those who victimized children. It was illegal, in every state period. If it was known and not reported then those that knew are as guilty as those who abused. If you have knowledge of a crime and you don't report it you aided and abetted. They may not have let them be part of BSA but they were free to find other areas to full their pedophilia. When an organization has a policy of cover up it makes it that much worse.

Within one year.

The blind eye was turned not because it would tarnish good scouters instead it was turned because they didn’t want to tarnish the reputation of the national organization Boy Scouts of America. The stink is on all those who facilitated the carrying out of that policy.

Let me be realistic to you. I live and have lived for 54 years with the abuse upon my body and soul. I told not one person for 52 of those years what happened to me. I had fistulas next to my anus which started in my 20’s. My doctor said it was from anal penetration and was surprised when I said I wasn’t gay. Till this day stool leaks thru as my sphincter had to be cut. The Boy Scout files have 5 documents relating to my perpetrator and one of them says that they suspected he abused 11 to 13 others in my troop. Not once did they reach out to me to find out if I had been abused and if they could offer any help. That was the Boy Scout way.

I am appalled at the tenor of this post. It smacks of victim blaming “if the victim reported anything” if we haven’t learned anything we should know the victims/survivors as a whole told no one. “Wider context of the time”? How is that really relevant in the context of what took place? My personal story which I have told is one which is so similar to so many that I have read. The pattern of abuse reporting was set and used for over 50 years by the BSA.

Hypothetically what if Kosnoff legally represents no one? Could he just have been used as a figurehead for AIS and the actual representation is Eisenberg? It appears that he was trying to avoid paying his ex-wife alimony. Could he just have had a verbal agreement for monies?

I don’t see my law firm on the list and they are supposedly representing 1600 claimants.

My money is on the TCC.

From where I sit that there would be a lot of lawyers making a mad dash to the court houses. Most likely may not be the best for the insurers would it? If hypothetically 10,000 lawsuits were filed that would be a lot of litigation with jury trials.

Welcome to the club @life. Please don't feel like you need to wait for another calm before you chime in. I believe next week from the filings I read yesterday there will be another storm brewing this coming week. When the storms from the bankruptcy and the storms in my head are raging is when I feel the most need to reach out here. I have not written much this past couple of weeks but I guess it is because my Prozac seems to be doing its job. @ThenNowsays it well

There does seem to be a few clowns but they are not very funny.

I feel like I am watching a 3 ring circus as all of this unfolds.

Kosnoff is going after Century on Twitter. Here is the latest and there is much more. He is calling them out any idea for his motive? I’m still waiting for a reply to my letter. Did he allow Century/Chubb to bury hundreds of billions of dollars in coverage liabilities in this run-off scheme that threatens tens of thousands of sex abuse victims? Why would he do that? Quote Tweet Kosnoff Law @SexAbuseAttys · Jun 7 Ltr to DiMemmo PA Ins Commissioner but no response. What is the Commissioner hiding? https://yumpu.com/en/document/view/65700116/ltr-to-dimemmo-pa-ins-comm… via @yumpu_com Kosnoff Law @SexAbuseAttys 4h The truth is not slander. There is a report it produced. And the Insurance Commissioner is a political figure. So, no, not slander. Quote Tweet Skunk @SkunkandBerry · 4h Replying to @SexAbuseAttys Slander? Kosnoff Law Retweeted Kosnoff Law @SexAbuseAttys · May 5 Worried about Century Indemnity? You should be. "Given the exhaustion of the NICO cover, does Century have sufficient financial resources to meet its obligations to policyholders? After all, it only has a statutory surplus of $25 million,

I would have agreed previously that it is premature and the rooting out should be done by the trustee however this appears to more an issue about controlling the RSA/Bankruptcy/Settlement. Will the lawyers who appear to have rubber stamped the POC's also be able to do the same with the voting? Is this why the opt out money is now $3500? "The stated objective of those behind the Coalition was to generate a supermajority of claims and thus control the bankruptcy, as revealed in an email that the TCC turned over to the U.S. Trustee. And the Coalition did just that." is this why Kosnoff has it out for the TCC and their lawyers? Wow another can of worms to go fishing with.

If I read the filing correctly the firms that are mentioned represent 65,554 claims. Not all were signed by the lawyers but it doesn't put the rest of their claims in a good light.

I just read this document and it is appalling what is alleged. Previously I have been opposed to rooting out false claims at this stage but I have now changed my mind. if this process takes a little longer I am personally OK with it. The unfortunate aspect of this may be that some legitimate claims may be lost because of unscrupulous practices. My lawyer did sign my final claim (he is not on the lists in the filing) but that was with my blessing and after multiple phone calls developing my claim.

Can someone help me out understanding what the ramifications would be if true that AIS and other lawyers may have been funded by Wall Street and that the loans are due? If those lawyers pushed thru a settlement that wasn't good for their clients but mostly based on the need to pay back loans would that leave them open to malpractice claims?

I have been sitting back for the past week or so reading everyone's comments and trying to assess my own feelings. I was appalled when I read attacks against the TCC members who I have felt have given their all to what has been going on. I have thought about the first Town Hall where they all said that this was a steep learning curve for themselves and I have wondered how they feel at this point. My conclusion is they must feel a lot like most of the rest of us.....hurt, confused, and wondering what will happen next. I also recalled the night before the last Town Hall when the word was that something was happening and there might be a deal. I distinctly got the impression that they were discussing whether to sign on or not. It must have been gut wrenching for them. My therapist asked me this week what justice would look like in my own eyes as an outcome. I was quick to tell her that there is no justice only restitution that would never go far enough. I told her that I had to look for some kind of silver lining and for me it's that I have had the revelation of what has caused my past behaviors and that I am now on a path to come to grips with them and not let what happened be the most dominant force in what life I have left to live. I know the litigation is not over and will be something I will have emotional ups and downs for the foreseeable future. I have no crystal ball to read the final outcome but I do know that I am in a better space now then I was three years ago before all of this started. I also with gods grace will be at the finish line.

You are correct. At minimum you could get $3500 if you don’t want to pursue further.

But if there is no way to recover from the insurance company's under this plan since there some thoughts that one can no longer sue than what would be defending. In other words I believe they will defend/defend and eventually pay because they are still liable and they know they are. I think my question was what might be called rhetorical? Maybe that's the wrong word.

So the question I will ask is: if there is no way that the insurance company's can be sued then why aren't all the insurance company's endorsing the plan?

I'm sorry Muttsy I didn't know it was you I sold that car to. But you really liked it when you bought it.

I am sure that the insurance carrier would be able to defend in court and these would be jury trials. The slam dunks would be cases where the preponderance of evidence would be pretty overwhelming. It would be explained to the jury that the fact that BSA has BK’ed but that fact has no meaning to the facts. If found liable the court/jury would assign damages and whatever portion would be the insurance carriers would have to be paid by them. That is a bit of simplification but it would be a fair process. It is basically what would have happened if BSA did not enter bankruptcy.