Chapter 11 Announced - Part 8 - TCC Term Sheet & Plan Confirmation

[NJScout1980]

27 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

My bad! That’s what happens when I lazily read tiny print on my phone while trying to use chopsticks at my favorite hole in the wall Chinese restaurant! Ya miss stuff! 🤦🏼‍♂️

I vote for her. Oh, yeah. We don’t get to vote…

I’m seriously OCD and have to read and reread everything.  Maybe a visit to my local Chinese restaurant will do me some good.  Chopsticks and OCD would be a sight to see…after all the BS of this case we could all use a laugh.  Hopefully the cookie at the end offered you a great fortune. 
 

Trying to keep the faith.  

[NJScout1980]

6 hours ago, johnsch322 said:

For anyone who may be interested I am not going to change my vote from reject to yes. We may be pawns in this bankruptcy, but we do not have to act like sheep.

We were told "fair and equitable" and in this plan we are far from fair and there is no equality.

I need to call you out.  You were offended by the “lottery” comment and expressed how important words were.  You also expressed how concerned your are that comments will lead to divisiveness between survivors.  Are you seriously calling survivors who changed their vote, sheep?

Those of us changing our vote to ACCEPT are stupid and blindly following our lawyers and the TCC?  We somehow have no clue as to what should be important to us, and are unable to look at all the info and make a decision as we see best?    Is that what you are saying?   We are stupid and blind and gullible?
 

We totally disagree on our votes, that is perfectly acceptable and understandable.  We are all victims but we are all extremely different from each other.  Each of us have had different experiences in life and each has been impacted in a variety of ways.   Perhaps you were offended by my previous words, but I was critical of myself, which I have every right to do. 
 

I respect everyone’s right to vote in any manner they see fit.  I don’t judge them nor will I refer to them in a negative light.  Words do matter!   Yours and mine. 

[Muttsy]

BSA Spread sheet.pdf

Hiring an adjudicator and Trustee 10% of the 2.7 =270M? What for? The amounts are too minimal to waste any more money. This is just terrible. 

[johnsch322]

1 hour ago, NJScout1980 said:

I need to call you out.  You were offended by the “lottery” comment and expressed how important words were.  You also expressed how concerned your are that comments will lead to divisiveness between survivors.  Are you seriously calling survivors who changed their vote, sheep?

Those of us changing our vote to ACCEPT are stupid and blindly following our lawyers and the TCC?  We somehow have no clue as to what should be important to us, and are unable to look at all the info and make a decision as we see best?    Is that what you are saying?   We are stupid and blind and gullible?
 

We totally disagree on our votes, that is perfectly acceptable and understandable.  We are all victims but we are all extremely different from each other.  Each of us have had different experiences in life and each has been impacted in a variety of ways.   Perhaps you were offended by my previous words, but I was critical of myself, which I have every right to do. 
 

I respect everyone’s right to vote in any manner they see fit.  I don’t judge them nor will I refer to them in a negative light.  Words do matter!   Yours and mine. 

It’s funny how I do not feel like I won the lottery just because I am in an open state (California). I also do not feel like I have to accept something just because I am told it is the best as it will be after being told there will be more from LC’s, CO’s and insurance companies. But that is not the reason I will not be changing my vote and maybe not changing it probably won’t change anything. I am not changing it because it isn’t fair to those in closed states. 

[NJScout1980]

2 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

It’s funny how I do not feel like I won the lottery just because I am in an open state (California). I also do not feel like I have to accept something just because I am told it is the best as it will be after being told there will be more from LC’s, CO’s and insurance companies. But that is not the reason I will not be changing my vote and maybe not changing it probably won’t change anything. I am not changing it because it isn’t fair to those in closed states. 

I respect your decision and I never stated you won the lottery…both of us can be accused of that because I too come from an open state.  I also agree with all receiving something…what that is is different for us.  I am a total “black & white” type of person so we disagree which is ok. 
 

I am wondering why, if words are so important and you don’t want divisiveness,  you would refer to people changing their vote as SHEEP.   You were offended by the “lottery” comment and I am offended by your reference of sheep. Are you saying that me and other survivors who change our votes are stupid, blind or gullible?    Again, like you said, words are important.   

[ThenNow]

42 minutes ago, Muttsy said:

Hiring an adjudicator and Trustee 10% of the 2.7 =270M? What for? The amounts are too minimal to waste any more money. This is just terrible. 

Anyone know if the Independent Reviewer is to be paid on top of the $10,000-$20,000 per claimant who selects Door #3 (where Carol Merrill is standing)? I assume so. If so, how much?

[NJScout1980]

3 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Anyone know if the Independent Reviewer is to be paid on top of the $10,000-$20,000 per claimant who selects Door #3 (where Carol Merrill is standing)? I assume so. If so, how much?

I personally spoke with my attorney last week and he basically stated the $10,000 fee is to start the Independent review and the other $10,000 is to finish it.  Being that the  reasoning behind this fee is for the individual claimant, as opposed to the settlement trust,  to pay for this review; I would assume nothing from the settlement trust will be used to pay for the judge or these reviews.  I would hope she would be paid for from the $20,000.  As someone who is considering this route I don’t think it would be fair for everyone else to pay for independent reviews, why should the entire trust pay for me or others to take a risk?  
 

I was also told my law firm will pay the $20,000 and assume the risk. If I lose I owe nothing, but if I win the $20,000 fee will be paid by me.  I am not sure how other firms will handle this.  

[johnsch322]

1 hour ago, NJScout1980 said:

I am wondering why, if words are so important and you don’t want divisiveness,  you would refer to people changing their vote as SHEEP.

I was speaking from a perspective of myself.  I do not have to be a sheep and I would personally feel that way if I now voted yes.  I can stand up for what I believe, and I do not believe in the settlement for the stated reason and my only voice is my vote. Obviously, you have the same choices that I do, and I respect that.

Edited February 20, 2022 by johnsch322

[NJScout1980]

27 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

I was speaking from a perspective of myself.  I do not have to be a sheep and I would personally feel that way if I now voted yes.  I can stand up for what I believe, and I do not believe in the settlement for the stated reason and my only voice is my vote. Obviously, you have the same choices that I do, and I respect that.

Again you are a stickler for words, and as your say words matter.  Ok, you would say you would feel like a sheep, I get that. My question is whether you think anyone who changes their vote is a sheep.  Am I a sheep?  You certainly implied that and because words matter, you should probably choose them better.  I certainly am not a sheep, and would never imply others who keep their votes are sheep either.   
 

I accept and understand why people think survivors like us have won the lottery.  You were offended and called the poster out.  I didn’t like being called a sheep, and accept and understand why you might believe that, but I am calling you out for the same reason.

If you don’t understand why someone would be offended by the word sheep than maybe you shouldn’t be offended when someone uses the words “lottery winner.”   That is their opinion and you were offended, sheep is your opinion and others could be offended   You should really think about what you expect of others, and what others should expect of you.  

Again words matter.  If I don’t live by mine I would hope someone would call me out!   You and I will never agree…sadly for others I really am a “lottery winner” and fortunately for me I am not a sheep.  
 

I am done with this issue. You can have the last word.  Either you know what you should do or you don’t.  

 

[johnsch322]

27 minutes ago, NJScout1980 said:

Again you are a stickler for words, and as your say words matter.  Ok, you would say you would feel like a sheep, I get that. My question is whether you think anyone who changes their vote is a sheep.  Am I a sheep?  You certainly implied that and because words matter, you should probably choose them better.  I certainly am not a sheep, and would never imply others who keep their votes are sheep either.   
 

I accept and understand why people think survivors like us have won the lottery.  You were offended and called the poster out.  I didn’t like being called a sheep, and accept and understand why you might believe that, but I am calling you out for the same reason.

If you don’t understand why someone would be offended by the word sheep than maybe you shouldn’t be offended when someone uses the words “lottery winner.”   That is their opinion and you were offended, sheep is your opinion and others could be offended   You should really think about what you expect of others, and what others should expect of you.  

Again words matter.  If I don’t live by mine I would hope someone would call me out!   You and I will never agree…sadly for others I really am a “lottery winner” and fortunately for me I am not a sheep.  
 

I am done with this issue. You can have the last word.  Either you know what you should do or you don’t.  

 

I feel like there are a lot of sheep out there. I feel like most of them voted to accept in the initial voting. I am not calling you a "sheep" heck you are a self-professed "lottery winner", lucky for you. 

[qwazse]

Call me a sheep denier. You all are humans. (I am too, but in this context don’t have any decisions to make.) When you are hurt, you make decisions that guide you on the path to healing. Since you are different people with different means of regulating your emotions, you are going to come to different decisions.

There are people who are going to profit (material and intangible) by the majority of you making any given decision. That does not make you, whatever your choice, their blind followers. Not in the least.

[ThenNow]

14 hours ago, NJScout1980 said:

As someone who is considering this route

You said you’re in an open state. Do you also have a window within which you filed or tried to file, prior to 2.18.2020? It’s not readily apparently, but there are classes within classes. I’m trying to figure out who will be opting for the IR and how many. That goes to the potential rollover of excess awards back into the Settlement Trust. (For reference, there are 27,000 claims in statute, which includes live claims in non-window states.)

PS - Attorneys for the Debtors and TCC said the IR will be limited to those survivor claimants with “the most severe” and “most horrific” cases. This is puzzling to me for multiple reasons, among them the utter vagary of those statements. Who decides that? Are we talking the nature of the abuse incidents or the damages? Two very different things.

Edited February 20, 2022 by ThenNow

[NJScout1980]

17 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

You said you’re in an open state. Do you also have a window within which you filed or tried to file, prior to 2.18.2020? It’s not readily apparently, but there are classes within classes. I’m trying to figure out who will be opting for the IR and how many. That goes to the potential rollover of excess awards back into the Settlement Trust. (For reference, there are 27,000 claims in statute, which includes live claims in non-window states.)

PS - Attorneys for the Debtors and TCC said the IR will be limited to those survivor claimants with “the most severe” and “most horrific” cases. This is puzzling to me for multiple reasons, among them the utter vagary of those statements. Who decides that? Are we talking the nature of the abuse incidents or the damages? Two very different things.

My case was filed within the New York SOL open window and months and months before the BSA was reportedly considering a bankruptcy.  Therefor me case is SOL protected.  I was not joking about being OCD with this case.  I had all my information and evidence ready for years and years knowing New York would eventually change the SOL.  After my abuse a portion of what had happened was discovered through no action of my own…I hid the total truth for years.   My parents wanted to take legal action against the BSA and LC and visited many lawyers in New York at the time; unfortunately every lawyer refused the case saying we could not sue a non-profit in NY.  Secretly I was extremely happy; the last thing I wanted was for all the details to come out…both my parents passed away without ever knowing the truth, it would have killed them!

About 10 years ago NY made a basic change to the SOL law and allowed any civil case of child abuse that was dismissed to be reinstated.  By that time I was more than ready to tell my story, but thanks to all those lawyers years earlier, I was denied an opportunity for justice.  I became obsessed with the SOL in NY and followed the legislation sessions for years and years patiently waiting for the state to fully open the SOL for child sexual abuse.  Luckily for me NY granted so many wishes and opened the statute.  The exact day it was signed by the Governor I called a lawyer and discussed my case.  I met him a few days later and brought every piece of evidence I possessed; names, dates, events, etc…my parents saved everything they had gathered for the original case they wished to follow.  Again I was extremely lucky my parents did that, I would have tossed it all at the time.  
 

I have to honestly say I was sickened and vomited many times while I wrote down all the specific details of my abuse.  I had never once shared every little detail and writing them down  tore open every wound I experienced decades ago.  Telling the story to the lawyer was just as bad.  But I have to say after saying it a few times I began to feel better and better.  I opened up to my family and friends and they were so supportive.  
 

I am lucky to have had a successful life so money was not a motivating factor for me.  I wanted justice and wanted my story to be heard.  I am a retired educator and it was extremely important for me that my students heard my story and learned it was okay to come forward if they were sexually abused. I wanted them to see it doesn’t matter how long ago it happened, they needed to see that coming forward actually helps. I wanted them to see that people that care for you most will not change their opinion of you,   I wish someone I respected early in my life had given me some hope. 
 

I don’t want the BSA to end; that too was never my goal.   It needs to change dramatically and it needs to “own up” and accept responsibility for all the events they did in the past.  Yes own up financially, but also publicly and shamefully.   I never gave up on the BSA and actually my sons were members.  I of course was a leader because I wanted to ensure they received nothing but the positive side of scouting, never the negative.  I said before my experience, outside the sexual abuse, with scouting was positive.  I carry and continue to carry many scars and wounds from scouting, so I am somewhat conflicted.  It took years and years but I finally decided I wanted justice as opposed to revenge.  For some justice and revenge go hand in hand, and I don’t judge or hold any ill will towards anyone who believes that.  But to me a scorched earthed campaign will not make me feel better, it will honestly make it worse. Scouting benefits so many children including my sons and nephews.  Yes it has failed many, it sure has, but in many cases it helps.  I agree with the TCC and want scouting to change.  I am happy they pushed for changes and hopefully every problem will be solved. Yes I am wearing rose colored glasses and may be a hopeless optimist. 
 

As for the seriousness or most horrific question, I don’t think that is a factor. My lawyer told me anyone can go that route. The individual gets to determine what they consider serious or horrific. The difference is the level of evidence, a “hearing” and risk.  I don’t think many will be going this direction, perhaps the ones filed prior to the bankruptcy will.

The last point I wish to make deals with the lawyers and professionals.  I don’t give a crap what they think about anything.  Frankly lawyers saying scouting should be destroyed should just shut the hell up!  They shouldn’t be spewing forth their hatred, it’s we survivors, not the lawyers,  who have a legitimate right to express our thoughts.  Same goes for the ones pushing for the ACCEPT or REJECT vote.  Just give us the info and let us make up our own minds.  I have no problem with survivors sharing their opinions and making strong statements of support or opposition, we have that right.  We are the victims, not the lawyers or professionals!  We share a bond, unfortunate as it is, and we should be respected.  The Coalition, AIS, and others should say here is the info, and then let us vote our conscience without pressure.  But no, they won’t because to them money is justice.   Think what you want of the TCC, but at least they are family to us, 9 fellow survivors. They have earned their right to express their opinions and encourage us to vote a certain way.  I believe what they believe and see a genuineness in what Doug stands for as it relates to YP.  

In the end each of us have to make our own decisions.  Each of us has to use our own idea of justice and make a decision we believe would be best for us and others.   

[ThenNow]

23 minutes ago, NJScout1980 said:

My case was filed within the New York SOL open window and months and months before the BSA was reportedly considering a bankruptcy.

I think these and still open cases will be the majority taking the IR track. 

23 minutes ago, NJScout1980 said:

 I had all my information and evidence ready for years and years knowing New York would eventually change the SOL.  After my abuse a portion of what had happened was discovered through no action of my own

Of what nature is the evidence? The discovery was independent corroboration? Of what nature?

23 minutes ago, NJScout1980 said:

As for the seriousness or most horrific question, I don’t think that is a factor. My lawyer told me anyone can go that route. The individual gets to determine what they consider serious or horrific. The difference is the level of evidence, a “hearing” and risk.

It was said at least twice at the hearing. Perhaps they were trying to downplay the preferred class nature before the judge. She didn’t like it at the previous hearing. It’s a high risk endeavor. You can drop to zero. Also, as I understand it, time bar will be a complete defense to recovery. Black. White. No Shades of Gray. This is an open state path posing as “most horrific” and “most serious.” I want someone to be honest with me, if I’m correct.

Edited February 20, 2022 by ThenNow
Typos. On the run…

[johnsch322]

All else aside I think we should all keep in mind that this settlement is a long way from being done. It has to go thru confirmation and most importantly the appeals process. Just look at Purdue Pharma the Sacklers have offered up an additional 1 Billion dollars.