"Leave No Trace" - BSA Documentary

[skeptic]

23 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Oh, my. This is a VERY troubling, angry, reactive and clearly prejudicial statement sans confirmed facts. “Book. Cover. Etc.”  Who are you speaking of regarding disgorging profits? I find that very close to the line of utterly absurd. Are you indicting those watch the film? Want some money from Ron Howard and Brian Glazer? They have gobs of money. You have NOT even watched it. Are you interested in the truth? Truth requires humbly receiving and assessing all data. I came to this forum because I’m interested in that precious outcome and in contributing to it. This is troubling. Is an effort to understand others’ views worthless? $15 is a piece of pie and cup-o joe. Yikes…

Sorry you cannot see beyond the lines apparently, or simply choose not to.  The fact that it is being advertised and that few make these types of things without expectation of profits, is my reason for comment.  The price of $15 is not the issue, it is the fact that they are charging for it in the first place.  As I said, if they were to guarantee those profits all went to your Trust, I would be less critical.  I am not indicting those that watch the film; that is their option.  You seem overly critical yourself, and that is not like you. 

Whatever; frankly this has carried on far too long and the continued appearance of people using the hype and controversy for profit is just as bad as trying to rewrite the past.  Think what you will, I have never suggested the issue is not real, only that the approach is unbalanced and too often egregious efforts to make profit off the survivors, either as lawyers or just these kinds of "films".  

I hope the case soon comes to an end and the survivors or victims can maybe get on with their lives the best they can.  This entire thing has just added more pain to most of you.

[ThenNow]

17 minutes ago, skeptic said:

Sorry you cannot see beyond the lines apparently, or simply choose not to...

Whatever; frankly this has carried on far too long

Again, apologies, but are you really saying that to me? You've read my posts and, frankly, it shocks me you would say that. Oh, well.

Commerce is dead. Film makers should be non-profits and make no money for their work product. Oh, wait. Hm. Isn't BSA a non-profit? No more charges for uniforms, camps, patches...

Yes. It has gone on far too long. My first summer camp started 50 years and one month ago today. You may recall, that will usher in the 50th anniversary of my first abuse. I'm not baking a cake or having a surprise party. Cards, letters, cash and well wishes NOT requested.

Edited June 16, 2022 by ThenNow

[ThenNow]

On 6/11/2022 at 8:13 PM, yknot said:

I just watched it. I think it's very effective from the standpoint of presenting the case to the public that BSA has covered up the child abuse scandal and that its corporate culture really hasn't changed. At one point towards the end of the documentary the National Director says the bankruptcy is about compensation for victims, and not about the BSA doing anything much different going forward. In his mind, they've already addressed most of the issues although he later says they will always look to improve. But for those of us hoping there would be some kind of meaningful reorganization, that apparently is not the corporate BSA view or goal.  The documentary takes a very quiet, measured, reflective approach to the topic, and it looks at systemic dysfunction within BSA as a whole, not just the abuse scandal. It doesn't come across at all sensationalized to me. The whole film has a very weary, sad feel to it that's very evocative. I have no idea how much attention it will get on Hulu but I think it's going to raise a lot of questions for the average person who views it. 

I just finished it 30 minutes ago and agree with every word in this post. Jim Turley did the BSA no favors and probably caused more damage. He put his foot up BSA's mouth all the way to his hip. Smug, defensive and revealing. I was very surprised at what he said and the way he said it. He did "better" on his last appearance. Though a survivor, John Stewart was smirking half the time and was filmed at what was apparently his horse ranch. He showed off his custom saddles with custom made silver medallions in tribute to BSA. His commentary about not having to take a pay cut to work for National was a jaw dropping bit of...I will refrain from what I want to say.

As to its impact on me, I was and am still disoriented to the point of feeling off balance and a bit nauseated. "The body keeps the score."

 

Edited June 16, 2022 by ThenNow

[InquisitiveScouter]

Just finished the film with my lovely bride, and my daughter [inaugural Eagle Scout who is a rising college junior).  Although wifey has heard all points from film from me before, they were never delineated, condensed, and connected by me in such a good way as the documentary does.

She thinks (and so does DD) I should leave the organization.

Dear Daughter said, "It makes me ashamed to be associated with Scouts."  I haven't processed that yet.

One question that popped into my head: Does the Congressionally sanctioned BSA "monopoly", and the revenue stream generated from that unique position, contribute to the cultural intransigence within BSA we have discussed in this forum?

 

[Tron]

9 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Just finished the film with my lovely bride, and my daughter [inaugural Eagle Scout who is a rising college junior).  Although wifey has heard all points from film from me before, they were never delineated, condensed, and connected by me in such a good way as the documentary does.

She thinks (and so does DD) I should leave the organization.

Dear Daughter said, "It makes me ashamed to be associated with Scouts."  I haven't processed that yet.

One question that popped into my head: Does the Congressionally sanctioned BSA "monopoly", and the revenue stream generated from that unique position, contribute to the cultural intransigence within BSA we have discussed in this forum?

 

No ... I think if there is a cause for cultural intransigence it is actually the inability of any other Scouting organization to get off the ground due to inferior programming. As much as there are issues, and as much as detractors point out all of the flaws of BSA, BSA is the best Scouting program in the country. Especially so is the relative generalness of BSA compared to it's niche competitors. My X just hates BSA and did not want our kids to join, but when we looked at all of the competing programs there really wasn't a competition. BSA is not perfect, there is room for improvement; however, BSA is lightyears ahead of every other Scouting organization in America. BSA doesn't have a monopoly against competition, there just isn't competition; it's like BSA is MLB, and everyone else is bar leagues. 

[ALongWalk]

Just finished watching it.  Just truly heartbreaking but I do hope all Scouters will take the time to watch it.

Lots to process but a couple of lines near the end standout to me. I think it was Glazer who said (paraphrasing) “I used to be a commodity trader. When you purchased a ship load of grain you knew that some of it would be bad. It was collateral damage of doing business. The BSA treats boys as commodities and they just accept that some boys will be collateral damage”.  Gut punch.

Edited June 17, 2022 by ALongWalk

[1980Scouter]

I just saw ABC news featured it on their web page. Hopefully more people can watch it and decide how they feel about the BSA.

[RememberSchiff]

Some questions, @T2Eagle @Eagle1993 @MYCVAStory

1. Can a bankruptcy judge research the debtor and creditor outside of court, view the documentary in this instance, or would that be considered prejudicial since there would not be an opportunity for rebuttal?

2. Could say the TCC request a court hearing to view documentary and allow the opportunity for rebuttals?

Thanks

Edited June 17, 2022 by RememberSchiff

[ThenNow]

5 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

1. Can a bankruptcy judge research the debtor and creditor outside of court, view the documentary in this instance, or would that be considered prejudicial since there would not be an opportunity for rebuttal?

2. Could say the TCC request a court hearing to view documentary and allow the opportunity for rebuttals?

 

 

The ABA Commission to evaluate the Code of Judicial Conduct explicitly addressed the research issue in the 2007 ABA Model Code. Rule 2.9(C) provides: “A judge shall not investigate facts in a matter independently, and shall consider only the evidence presented and any facts that may be properly judicially noticed.”

[ThenNow]

3 hours ago, ALongWalk said:

I think it was Glazer who said (paraphrasing) “I used to be a commodity trader. When you purchased a ship load of grain you knew that some of it would be bad. It was collateral damage of doing business. The BSA treats boys as commodities and they just accept that some boys will be collateral damage”.

That was Nigel Jaquiss, the investigative reporter who drove the project and is the featured on-screen narrator. 

[yknot]

3 hours ago, 1980Scouter said:

I just saw ABC news featured it on their web page. Hopefully more people can watch it and decide how they feel about the BSA.

It's been reviewed on a number of major media sites but more significantly is getting attention on social media, including Twitter which reaches wider and different audiences. A lot of younger parents and youngsters get a lot of their information from these other types of channels. 

[johnsch322]

20 hours ago, skeptic said:

This entire thing has just added more pain to most of you.

Please do not speak for survivors. Frankly you are way underqualified and have a bias against survivors views.

Edited June 17, 2022 by johnsch322

[ThenNow]

Just watched it again. A few things that stood out to me when I was not so off balance and reeling:

* Stephen Crew, Esq. (CrewJanci) - These men are "haunted by who they would have been if this hadn't happened to them." I've wondered about that ghost who's been shadowing for 50 years. Good to have him identified.

* Jim Turley (Former Chair and CEO of Ernst & Young and Past BSA President) - When asked if BSA would be different culturally and operationally following the bankruptcy, he said, "I think the cultural changes around youth protection have already been made. We're not going to be more focused on this because of going through the bankruptcy. Bankruptcy is a process to compensate victims not a process of changing the characteristic of Scouting." Well, just ouch and holy guacamole. Thank GOD the first vote failed and the Survivor Working Group and TCC got a crack at rewriting what BSA had in that initial plan to "enhance YP." Their successful efforts to ensure enforceable changes both culturally and organizationally. Again, THANK GOD! 

* Paul Ernst (Former Keeper of the IV Files) - When it was put to him that he/BSA kept all the records confidential,  he responded, "Sure." When it was put to him that he/BSA didn't share the information with the public or even parents, he said, "Yes" that's "true." He continued, "Here's the thing. You don't give it out to the public. You don't tell people that this person has done something that will affect his job or his relationships with others and so forth. We're not the type of person that wanted to do that to an individual." What? Not even in corroborated and clearly convincing cases? As I've said, I and MANY OTHER BOYS would have been saved from early 1973 forward had the LC, including the SE, warned other local leaders, parents and Scouts AND specifically called out the behavior he knew was going on in our Troop that mirrored the IV case across town. He knew about the porn and the drinking and, based on his efforts to have sex with me when I was 18 (and possibly 17...it's fuzzy), he may well have been complicit. So, per Ernst, this was not just about the reputation of BSA but also the predators. If they had just identified the incident and described the grooming, etc., that would've helped. I now recall the abuser in the case I mention, the ASM and COR, was noted as "resigning for personal reasons" in the fine. Personal indeed. Ack.

* John Stewart (Uber Successful Brand Guru, Survivor and Past (?) Managing Director of Corporate Engagement & Sustainability and sounds like some other stuff in Global Scouting) - He put together in one sentence the abuse with the line that "Scouting prepares you for life." Hm. In his final segment, his only moment of emotion is when he said, "I'm confident Scouting will survive. I'm hopeful Scouting will survive." Odd juxtaposition in the course of his several segments where I found him sorta smug and self-promoting. Custom BSA saddles and silver medallions. Bad form to trumpet, IMHO. 

NOTE: Again, I am simply reporting some of what struck me the second time through the film.

/s/ Glutton for Punishment

Edited June 17, 2022 by ThenNow

[MYCVAStory]

3 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Thank GOD the first vote failed and the Survivor Working Group and TCC got a crack at rewriting what BSA had in that initial plan to "enhance YP." Their successful efforts force enforceable changes both culturally and organizationally. Again, THANK GOD! 

Thank you to the Survivors who voted to reject the first plan and THANK YOU to those that voted to approve it and were then patient while the BSA was pulled back into mediation to strengthen YP as part of a second plan.  While I might not be happy where we are, I know it's a better place for any child going into scouting in the future.

[ThenNow]

TV interview with Irene Taylor, the director of the film. The genesis of the project is related to her being an Oregonian who watched their Supreme Court rule to admit the IV Files as evidence in the 2010 case of Lewis v BSA.

https://www.kltv.com/2022/06/10/boy-scouts-documentary-investigates-history-abuse-allegations/