Chapter 11 Announced - Part 9 - Confirmation Hearing

[Eagle1993]

1 hour ago, Muttsy said:

She is awful. It was a 20 minute cross x that she's dragging out to four hours or longer. 

She is rigid in her thinking and demonstrates little understanding of how sexual abuse cases are actually handled in the tort system. 

She spent 90 mind-deadening minutes to make the point that the claim review process is not the tort system.. Yes you are right Ms. McNally. Does your client prefer to face 84,000 claims in the tort system? If the claims review process is gong to adopt all of the procedures found in the tort system, then this Plan cannot be confirmed. 

 

 

I left for a while and just rejoined and she is going on now about the neutral.  Yes, if insurance doesn't want to pay the bill they could get sued.  They can fight these in court.  She was asking if insurance could force this into court (I think they can by simply refusing to pay).  However, she really doesn't like the fact they enter court with a $ amount from the process.  I'm confused and she pretty much burnt a day and from what I can tell, almost no impact on the case.

[PACAN]

Two comments:

 

@Eagle 1993    80 Councils from 250 now.   I'm sure a lot of SEs puckered.

@Eagle 94-A1   "I am not so sure. Sounds local volunteers will be pushed aside. I see a lot of headaches with all the mergers" ...Did you mean like the the local volunteers are pushed aside like they are now?  

[Eagle94-A1]

7 minutes ago, PACAN said:

did you mean like the the local volunteers are pushed aside like they are now?  

More so.  

[Eagle1993]

Interesting points now coming up.  Basically, no defendants want to take sex abuse claims to trial.  The losses are big.  Juries award large amounts.  In addition, there was a case where the jury determined the case was outside SOL; however, still awarded $15K with no reason given.  The witness is basically indicating why the TDPs are valid (and why insurance is probably wrong when they say they are too high).

[Eagle1993]

16 minutes ago, PACAN said:

Two comments:

 

@Eagle 1993    80 Councils from 250 now.   I'm sure a lot of SEs puckered.

 

That AND the possibility of freezing of pensions.

 

 

[Muttsy]

3 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

3 hours ago, PACAN said:

Two comments:

 

@Eagle 1993    80 Councils from 250 now.   I'm sure a lot of SEs puckered.

 

Expand  

That AND the possibility of freezing of pensions.

 

Wouldn’t these revelations from yesterday foment rebellion about this plan? Can the Ad Hoc of LC’s hold it together?

[yknot]

32 minutes ago, Muttsy said:

Wouldn’t these revelations from yesterday foment rebellion about this plan? Can the Ad Hoc of LC’s hold it together?

Except who other than us is paying any attention at all? Scouters have been told to keep their heads down and focus on their local units. So many are doing so. 

[Eagle1993]

9 minutes ago, yknot said:

Except who other than us is paying any attention at all? Scouters have been told to keep their heads down and focus on their local units. So many are doing so. 

I expect a lot of council leaders watched Monday.  There was over 450 on the call at one point and the last two days <300.  I expect many knew to watch Devang Desai's testimony.  Those power point slides came up very early ... so you didn't need to watch long.

That said ... I expect for most it wasn't a surprise.   

[Eagle94-A1]

43 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

I expect a lot of council leaders watched Monday.  There was over 450 on the call at one point and the last two days <300.  I expect many knew to watch Devang Desai's testimony.  Those power point slides came up very early ... so you didn't need to watch long.

That said ... I expect for most it wasn't a surprise.   

Maybe for the professionals, but I am not so sure about the volunteers.

1 hour ago, Muttsy said:

Wouldn’t these revelations from yesterday foment rebellion about this plan? Can the Ad Hoc of LC’s hold it together?

I am waiting for that to come up on Facebook.

[Eagle1993]

1 minute ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Maybe for the professionals, but I am not so sure about the volunteers.

I am waiting for that to come up on Facebook.

I agree. I don't think most of the volunteers (unit, district and council) have a clue what is coming. The national volunteers seem well connected so they probably have a good idea. 

To be fair, I don't think any of us really know either (at least specifics), but we at least know some major changes are coming.  I'll see if I can find those slides on the docket.  I hate going by memory.  I remember seeing a full digital or improved digital experience, a single scout program, girls something, more relevant, outdoors (emphasized) as some of the key points.  Again, this was a brainstorming session and doesn't mean anything is locked down, but it gives an idea of what changes they have in mind.  

Also note Dr. Kennedy who made a short appearance on Scouter.com will be the first witness tomorrow.  I believe he was one of the key negotiators behind the youth protection changes.  They stated his testimony will be brief.  10 AM Eastern start. 

[SiouxRanger]

Is anyone aware of abuse cases where unit leaders, not the alleged abuser, were named as defendants?

Thank you.

[SiouxRanger]

Has anyone received official confirmation, from National, that us volunteers are now insured against abuse and molestation claims?  Why should any of us register if the liability of the past is not fixed for the future?

Why is National not reassuring us volunteers that regardless of the neglect (or worse) by National of the past, National has our back in the future?

Is anyone familiar with any reassurances by National to that effect?

[Eagle94-A1]

8 hours ago, SiouxRanger said:

Is anyone familiar with any reassurances by National to that effect?

Well,  National reassured Charter Organizations that they have the CO's back, and look how that is turning out.

[Eagle1993]

11 hours ago, SiouxRanger said:

Is anyone aware of abuse cases where unit leaders, not the alleged abuser, were named as defendants?

Thank you.

I am not aware of any; however, from what I heard yesterday the VAST majority of cases are being settled out of court so few would know.  I would not be surprised if a leader is named in the future, especially if they violated BSA policy.

[SiouxRanger]

1 hour ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Well,  National reassured Charter Organizations that they have the CO's back, and look how that is turning out.

Well, my posts, just doing my due diligence after my SE reassured me (yesterday at a face-to-face meeting along with others from my unit) that I need not question whether us volunteers were covered by insurance for abuse and molestation issues. "Why would we ask?"

Yeah, well, I AM a lawyer, and yeah, where is the PROOF we are covered?

No proof offered. (SE offered to look into it.)

At my age, and hating THE LAW as I do, (and as everyone should-I am a professional) the prospect of spending my retirement years at a counsel table in a courtroom, at my expense, defending myself as a mere volunteer because of the deep and hidden actions of some skulking, pseudo volunteer, near (or) professional level predator, and thereby risking my net worth, being unpaid for my effort, yeah, I am not about to sign on to unlimited liability for someone else's sordid activities.

And there it is in a nutshell.

All of us were duped to do so in the past, and apparently National expects us to accept such in the future.

NO.

No Proof-No Play.

Why would anyone voluntarily subject themselves to this liability?

I am still "percolating" about my resignation from Scouting, and after a 60+ year run, and all so the wonderful times , I am but hours away from pulling the plug.

How has it all come to this?

And so the spinning of the World slowed and all turned to a darker shade of gray.