SiouxRanger

Yep. And then, at least the BSA has done its civil duty.

When flow chart and operational discussion gets to this level, time to find a new chartering organization. General Taylor: Woah, Dick, put the brakes on. I wanted to wait until airman left to talk with you. Dick, I'm transferring you. Sgt. Major Dickerson: Transferring me? Where to sir? General Taylor: You're going to Guam. Sgt. Major Dickerson: Guam sir? There's nothing going on in Guam. Why Guam? General Taylor: Dick, I've covered for you a lot of times cause I thought you were a little crazy. But you're not crazy, you're mean. And this is just radio. And a Scout Troop, as important as it is to the lives of the youth, it really is just a Scout Troop. Tiny finances, sparse adult leadership, huge burdens on the few adults who actually show up, tons of communications, phone, email, text… And, frankly, in my 25 years of troop service, had anyone ever stepped up to help, what a Godsend. And had anyone stepped up, only to get in my way and not help, well, "here are the keys, good luck…" Most units don't need a minute's distraction putting on the program. As one who grew up in the program, all ranks, cubs, scouts, Eagle, local camp staff, Philmont Ranger, when an interloper with no scouting experience seeks to disrupt the troop's operation, either they back off, or we all leave. Some would blame Soros for this (by virtue of some convoluted conspiracy theory) but that blame tactic is long fore-shadowed by Cato the Elder whose hatred of Carthage was so deep, that he ended his every speech in the Roman Senate with, " Carthāgō dēlenda est ("Carthage must be destroyed"). And tell me how does hatred solve problems?

And a Google search is proof of fact? Hardly.

Gee. First time I have heard that. My council has not appeared to have dropped any merit badge counselors from its rolls in centuries. Maybe 10 in 100 on the list are active. 90 out of 100 calls for assistance are met with "You are calling me for what???" Or, no replies to emails. The "password" (old TV show) is "Administrative efficiency."

Good luck to you.

By whom, how?

I just cannot understand this. Until your post I don't recall anyone, anywhere claiming BSA has a "r...c...." This smacks of a "straw man" argument where a false, inflammatory statement is made, then to dramatically knock it down. My recollection of basic logic (Copi-look him up-took a university 3 credit hour course on logic) is that the logical structure of "If P then Q," if P is assumed to be true, then Q is always true.) So, as applied to your post, if "family members' statements" are presumed to be true (when might they be available for deposition?), then any statement you post after that is TRUE (logically)-even if false. And, who switched? Exactly, precisely WHO switched? I am not trying to give you a (pointless) hard time. But words matter. And the senses, tenses, innuendos, flavors, intimations...of those words. There are many folks on this site whose lives have been tragically affected. Every post here raises their hopes of lowers their hopes. After all they have endured, they do not need a roller coaster ride.

And yet, the statistics?

Well, agreed, week-long sports camps provide similar opportunities, though scout unit campsites are intentionally wide-spread to enhance the wilderness experience. Never having any experience with sports camps-just scouting.

I would really like to see sources and statistics for this. From my experience, opportunities for abuse in children's sports seem to be much less than those in Scouting camping experiences. Kids leave their parents' car, go to the field, play, return, and leave. Where is the time for things to go wrong? Scouts are gone from Friday afternoon until Sunday morning. Two nights. Lots of time window for abuse to happen.

I think, theoretically to identify the problematic and exclude them from future participation in the Program. As near as I can tell, all done via paper and manual tallying. But in that era it was a very limited and missed many "hits." "Bill J. Smith" became "Jim Smith." Or "John Smith," or "Fred Gonzolabus." Who would know? Never saw anyone check an ID. (Just 50 years in...And not my fault as I NEVER heard a word from the Council that abusers could be among us, nor have I ever seen nor heard of any claimed abuse. And NEVER instructed to be on the lookout-registration was my assignment.)

Well, a statistical analysis of where the assaults occurred is an essential element of your argument.

Agree. BSA appears to have done a lot to document issues and identify perpetrators. BSA also appears to have mandated that all materials held by a council about incidents be sent to National. The council retaining NO records. Now, the conspiracy folks may see something evil in that, but that measure would tend to eliminate the inadvertent disclosure of potentially defamatory materials. I am not sure of the meaning of "BSA held files" in the quoted text. "Held" how and from whom? So, further clarification would help. I will say that there is immense Truth in the concept that the aggressor needs only succeed ONCE whereas the defender has to be 100% perfect to mount a defense. So, an abuser gets pushed out of Troop A and goes to Troop B. And from Council A to Council B, if needed to pursue his abuse intentions. Abuser changes name. Or name to nickname. Or uses middle name. And they are off the radar until an arrest. Most of this happened when records were kept on index cards. Not name searchable databases. Statistics and the Bell Curve tell us that no matter what level of care we employ, regardless of diligence, something will always slip by. And that there will always be incidents of abuse. That being said, the Bell Curve tells us that though there will never be zero incidents of abuse, those incidents can be reduced to near zero. And that is the goal of YPT.

Precisely true. However, the BSA is not unique in this respect. EVERY (not some, not most,) lawsuit targets those legal entities against which liability can be established (that is, the law and facts make them liable), AND which has assets capable of paying an award of damages. The legal principals which establish liability have long been established, without reference to the existence of the BSA. (Theories of negligence, gross negligence, willful and wanton, intentional, products liability, vicarious liability, strict liability, and so on.) So, if you really have a problem with BSA being caught up in this tangled web of legal liability, take it up BSA National, ITS lawyers and ITS administrators. These principles of liability existed when BSA National made its decisions on how to handle abuse claims. And, either: 1. those folks failed to appreciate the risk and application of the rules (entirely understandable considering that many decades have passed and societal norms have changed significantly), or, 2. those folks were business and legal geniuses and decided to run the risk, nonetheless. (Leaving future BSA employees to deal with the consequences.) (The sentiment being: "I'll have my pension in 2 years, and the guy I just hired will hire someone in 20 years, and that newly hired will have to deal with it 20 years after that, or if really lucky, pass the problem downstream to someone else.") Regardless, "that day" has come to pass. No matter, the future of the BSA is not a burden the survivors have any obligation to bear. If according some measure of justice (haven't seen it yet in the whole bankruptcy process to date) results in the dissolution of BSA National, so be it. The Scouting Program has been my only activity outside work. From age 6 to 70. My Scouting resume is 4 pages long, single spaced, most positions held 10 to 15 years and 3 or 4 held simultaneously. It is what I know, love, and I can participate with my children, all Eagles. I am no BSA basher. But the BSA cannot move forward until there is some closure regarding the damage done to the Survivors.

I don't think I've seen evidence of that. BSA is being held liable as a co-tortfeasor along with the miscreants. Miscreants have natural lives. Corporations have infinite lives. At some point, only the corporation is left standing on the field as the miscreant is deceased. In fact, other than in a legal context, most folks, at least in my realm, hold the BSA in high esteem. Despite all the legal turmoil.

Meaning what? That a continuation of the failed IVF system continue?

Which socio-political groups?

My son got a CIT position at the local camp. Now, to my feeble mind, that means, "Counselor In Training." Menial work hired out in the past. He worked in the kitchen for two weeks, all day. No "counselor," no "training." He hated it. He never went back to a camp staff position. I don't blame him. My hopes that he'd have the benefit of the local camp staff experience and the Philmont staff experience I had were shattered. That was an enlightening event. Scouting could not be trusted. Had I an inkling that he would not have actually been a Counselor In Training, but sent to the kitchen, I never would have signed him up. My local camp staff and Philmont staff experiences were the best thing that ever happened to me and changed my life.

A very long time ago, a "handful" CIT was dropped off at camp and the parents went to Europe! Had to track down relatives to pick the scout up.

And, for all I have read about National's modus operandi in these matters, and local councils' complicity therein, councils are now complicit in that fraud in disclosure and have huge legal liability exposure. Councils took the easy course mandated by National and may well pay the price.

Been there. Done that, except at the council level. National saw it my way and retired the council exec. Not fun, but necessary. These things do not play out according to organization flow charts, Robert's Rules, or the Queensberry Rules.

When I first read the BSA trustee's objections to non debtor releases, I was persuaded. I do not expect them (non debtor releases) to be upheld. That's where I place my marker on this issue. Just my legal judgment. (Scouting has been of huge importance for me in my youth, and as a parent. The Program is great; National's handling of abuse issues is a terrible failure. If only we could separate National from the movement's ideals.) The BSA trustee's legal objections are very serious, legally. And the SCt seems to think so, too.

It could also mean that the Supreme Court wants to resolve a known conflict among the appellate courts. The Supreme Court recognizing that the conflict has grown to such dimensions that it is "ripe" (not in a purely technically, legal sense) to be resolved by the Supreme Court. The SCt tends to let conflicts among the appellate courts develop to a point where there has been sufficient exposition of the issues in the lower courts to step in and bring it all to a head and set a rule. Absolutely agree. More discussion below. Again, absolutely agree. The SCt taking up the Purdue case hands "advantage" to those parties who oppose releases for non debtors from non-consenting claimants. Those who object to the BSA bankruptcy now find themselves handed a hammer. Heavy, or light, it is still a hammer. Competent legal counsel will seek to leverage that hammer as the "market will bear." Agree. Not likely that the objectors will be offered an acceptable concession. And even if so, it may not stop a SCt ruling in the Purdue case from affecting a settlement. Not so sure what they can do. Seems likely that both are passengers on the ship and have to ride out the storm. Agree with this paragraph and the balance of the post. The Purdue case is docketed as: William K. Harrington, United States Trustee, Region 2, Petitioner, v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al. Case/Docket #: 23-24 A synopsis of the legal issue of interest to the SCt, from its website, is: The parties are directed to brief and argue the following question: Whether the Bankruptcy Code authorizes a court to approve, as part of a plan of reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, a release that extinguishes claims held by nondebtors against nondebtor third parties, without the claimants’ consent. To my recollection, that is precisely the issue raised by the BSA trustee very early on. And now, it appears the the SCt is poised to resolve it. "Watson, step lively-the game is afoot." Holmes.

It appears that both audio files and written transcripts of US Supreme Court oral arguments are posted to the Court's website. The site indicates "posted the same day" as the argument. This will be helpful in studying the questions asked by the Justices.

Normally, I don't quote a post simply to "agree" with the post. I usually just upvote, but this issue is an exception. @MYCVAStory has precisely and concisely summed up the current state of the BSA bankruptcy in light of the Purdue case and the Supreme Court's recent action. The questions asked by the Supreme Court Justices during oral argument in December will be the next, best hint as to which way they are leaning.