Eagle Award Recinded

[Rooster7]

"I'm not positive this guy killed someone, but he's a bad apple anyway so let's find him guilty and send him tho the chair"?

 

First, what you describe is not the spirit of the law, but a Kangaroo Court. There's a big difference.

 

We may not always like the results, but I'd prefer the courts to stick to the letter of the law and apply it evenly to everyone.

 

Second, following the spirit of a law, does not preclude one from apply the law even handedly. Abuses will occur no matter how one interprets the law. However, I prefer jurists that understand and follow the intent of the law to protect the innocent over those that allow the law to be perverted to serve the guilty.

 

[Fat Old Guy]

" We may not always like the results, but I'd prefer the courts to stick to the letter of the law and apply it evenly to everyone. That is the only way justice can even begin to approach being fair."

 

That's a really frightening thought.

[OldGreyEagle]

 

 

As far as the subject of this thread, it may be time for the Who, Where, What, When and How as I dont think we are talking about a ficitonal case(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

[evmori]

OGE,

I agree (hey I made a rhyme!)

 

Ed

[CRANEACE]

Who, What, When, Where, How, and Why:

The matter is not yet settled so ALL of those answers would not be accurate. Here's the scenario though.

 

Age 12, scout makes a mistake . . . with a 12 year old girl, termed "innappropriate touching".

Girl does not stop scout. Girl is not forced by scout. It does not happen at a scouting event. Girl does not report this until both are now age 14. It is a one time event.

Both set of parents meet and guidelines are inacted including no sleepovers at the Scout's house. (Scout has a sister the same age who is friends with girl.) Scout is punished, taken to professional counseling, counseled by clergy, and even placed on medication for depression.

Scout earns Life and completes his Eagle Project.

Girl has older sister who comes home from college and is vendictive about getting Scout for this. (Although older sister has 2 illegitamate children herself) She tells everyone and anyone who will listen about the dastardly deed done by the scout.

Girl babysits for new scoutmaster's children and his wife is friends with sister. They decide to "get" the scout.

Wife of scoutmaster gets the girl to reveal information about the incident, now more than 2 years past. Wife reveals info to commissioner and scoutmaster husband.

Commissioner calls BSA District and reports scout as a "child molester". (third party information, hearsay, the victim did not reveal it to him.)

Scoutmaster assaults scout at a scout activity, due to his outrage at scout's behavior 2 years ago. . . is taken to court and "gets off" on technicality.

The day after the assault, the scoutmaster calls child protective services and reports the scout as a child molester. (and lots of other not so nice and not so true things about the family.)

CPS investigates and finds no evidence of these accusations.

CPS clears scout.

In the interim Scout Exec writes canned letter of removal to parents.

Parents appeal to region, denied. Appeal to national, denied.

After a year and a half of this "process" parents privately appeal to district leadership and are advised to go ahead a enroll scout in another troop, which they do, which the counsel accepts.

Scout attends meetings, earns another merit badge, collects letters of reference, etc., prepares to return to Eagle board for final approval.

Scout is reregistered x 2 more years. Scout attends meetings.

No leader wants to take scout to Eagle Board for fear of interferance and recommendations are made that scout should go to a different district/region to see Eagle Board.

Scout goes to another district, registers, sees Eagle Board, is approved, is sent the Eagle Award.

Father wants to have a formal presentation, makes announcement at church at a Sunday meeting.

Monday (next day) The national office receives a call from "someone" who reports Scout as ineligible.

Without notice or investigation, national contacts the Scoutmaster of troop where Eagle was awarded and requests return of Eagle award, but gives no reason, stating only, "The parents should know."

The request is not made in writing.

[Rooster7]

Monday (next day) The national office receives a call from "someone" who reports Scout as ineligible.

 

Just out of curiosityif no one is taking ownership of this alleged phone call, and there is no written notice from the BSA explaining how all of this came about, how did you know about his phone call?

 

Without notice or investigation, national contacts the Scoutmaster of troop where Eagle was awarded and requests return of Eagle award, but gives no reason, stating only, "The parents should know." The request is not made in writing.

 

Again, how do you know there was no investigation?

 

If all of the above is true, I have to say - it is disturbing because there seems to be no due process afforded the Scout and his parents. However, your story begs more questions.

 

Besides the ones I listed above If the Scoutmaster got off on a technicality, is he still a BSA leader? I find it difficult to believe that the BSA would allow someone to stay in a leadership position if he assaulted a Scout and got off on a technicality.

 

[Fat Old Guy]

Oh Good Lord! If the facts are indeed as presented, this requires another "Oh Good Lord!"

 

Inappropriate touching? That describes half of my dates from the parents' perspective. Were they smooching and and he put his hand somewhere? Did he ask her to play "radar"? Did he on her seat before she sat down so she's sit on his hand? (as an aside, many of the things that boys do to attract the attention of girls only serves to convince the girls that boys are idiots)

 

Child molestation? For once, it seems that the government got things right.

 

This seems to be a classic example of how our society has developed some severe knee-jerk reactions to "inappropriate actions." Second grader kisses a second grade girl and the world is about to come to an end (why is no one would care is the girl had kissed him?). Point a chicken finger at someone and say, "Bang!" and the world collapses around your shoulders.

 

Depression? Poor kid. Of course he's depressed. He's having a wonderful time and, BOOM!, all hell breaks loose.

 

Do I condone it? Not at all. If I was my daughter, I'd be talking to her about reputations, behavior and such things. If it was my son, I'd be making sure that he was thinking about the dangers and how life would change if he became a 12 year old dad. Be sure that I'd have some conversations with the other party's parents.

 

Oh Good Lord!

 

Maybe the Scout should sue the sister of the girl and the Scoutmaster.

[kasane]

My question is:

 

After the entire revocation of membership appeal process is pursued up to National and they deny reinstatement of membership, how is it that the District can re-enroll the scout and permit him to complete his scouting career up to Eagle?

 

i have seen these revocation of membership letters (from District up to National). Once the National office has denied membership - no council is going to re-enroll a scout - you are banned for life. Possibly somebody wasn't checking the paper trail? Was the boy registered under a different version of his name (eg danny vs daniel for example?). If the council accepted his registration (under the table it seems) - then they have basically admitted that the National ban has no standing (the council/district can do what they please) and or that the original allegations were bogus and that they are hiding liability in this mess.

 

I hope the parents have a good lawyer - this should be interesting.

[CRANEACE]

FOG -

 

Thank you for your comments and openness about pointing out that most boys behave badly at that age and if that's why he can't have his Eagle, or even have membership in BSA, then BSA had better close their doors and send Scout Executives out looking for a "real" job.

 

 

 

[NJCubScouter]

Perhaps this should be another thread, I'm just concerned that it would get too confusing.

 

Rooster, I don't see how I am even "interpreting" the policy at all. The statement you quote deals only with adult leaders. The BSA web site has (or had) a different statement about how the BSA would deal with a youth member who states he is openly gay, and although I do not recall the details, I do recall that it does NOT involve an automatic termination. That being the case, it is you who are "interpreting" the policy to deal with a situation it does not deal with, that is, the revocation of an Eagle award. I think you are trying to expand what the policy really means, just like you did a few days ago when you supported the BSA cutting off religions that ordain gay clergy from being CO's. The policy is wrong enough to begin with, it does not need any expansion.

 

Rooster asks me:

 

Do you believe that there is a moral distinction between an avowed homosexual and a closet homosexual?

 

No, I don't. (Of course, I assume it is clear by now that I do not think that either is "immoral.") But I do know that the BSA policy deals only with avowed gays, not "closet" ones. I do understand that the BSA national executive committee (or at least the current majority of it) believes homosexuality is immoral, whether it is open or "closeted." The difference is that they have a membership policy dealing with the former and not with the latter. I do not see why a policy barring openly gay leaders would in any way require the retroactive revocation of an Eagle award earned before a Scout "came out." (By the way, do you know if Mr. Dale himself had discovered he was gay when he earned his Eagle? I don't know if the facts of the case go into that detail.)

 

Your slam at "liberal lawyers" does not bother me, I hear it all the time. In this case, it is you who are trying to give the policy a "spirit" it does not have, because anything that constitutes an attack on a gay person seems to win your approval.

[NJCubScouter]

Craneace, although it means that I am coming perilously close to agreeing with Rooster about something, I also have to wonder how you know some of the facts you report. Most particularly, do you know with absolute certainty, not second-hand, that the Scoutmaster actually did receive a call from National (not just someone claiming to be from "national") saying the award was rescinded? I do not see how the answer to that could be yes unless you are the Scoutmaster.

 

Assuming the answer to that question is no, and also assuming that all the other facts you have related are correct, if I were the boy's parents, here is what I think I would do:

 

I would call the Scoutmaster and tell him that as far as I was concerned, the award has not been rescinded, and I would not consider it rescinded until I got a letter directly from National (not a phone call through the SM and not even a letter to the SM) saying it has been rescinded. I would hope that what National would actually do is allow a boy to give his side of the story before taking any action, but I will readily admit that I do not know that for certain, since I am not familiar with this aspect of BSA procedure. Logic would suggest that more than a phone call from someone claiming to be a victim, or a victim's relative, when there is no public record of an offense, would be necessary for this type of action.

[CRANEACE]

Gay or not gay, sex outside the bonds of marriage is immoral. SEX, SEXUAL INTERCOURSE, not touching, not looking at pictures. I'm not condoning these behaviors either, but it is SEX and sexual orientation we are talking about and not curiosities, isn't it?

 

Checkout FatOldGuy statement above and see why BSA should better define what it means by morally straight. . . . what it means by "does not meet membership criteria." Because they are not just ousting gay men, they are ousting curious little boys also, while they allow other men who have live-in girlfriends or who cheat on their wives to be leaders.

 

BSA policy should protect the children requiring more from adult leaders. There is nothing wrong with that. But we ALL know an adult BSA leader who is "immoral" while they expell scouts for being curious -- with boys and with girls.

 

And yes, perhaps this should be another thread, because the original question is still in question.

 

Can an Eagle be recinded with just a phone call? Does anyone really know?

[OldGreyEagle]

I dont know if an Eagle rank can be taken away by a single phone call, but to whip a really dead old horse of an analogy, you are barking up the wrong tree. I would suggest a single phone call to BSA headquarters in Irving, Texas would serve you better that using this forum. We have a bunch of good intentioned people trying to give advice and divine the situation, but you should really be talking to the horses mouth. I cant find a phone number, but I think if you tried directory service for Irving, Texas you could get one. Then again, I am sure other readers will be posting numbers after they read this. This situation is one that calls for immediate real actions and as helpful as this forum is, it doesnt replace real official action and thats what you need.

[Twocubdad]

"Half your dates," FOG? I think someone's bragging!

[NJCubScouter]

Good point OGE. It sounds like there has been way too much "whisper down the lane" in this situation. It's time for someone to get the straight story.