HelpfulTracks

I think that the words “These allegations represents reports of abuse between an alleged victim and an alleged abused” would all that would be necessary. Again, not sure why you quoted me, particularly on joking comment about dirty cloths at camp. But to answer you. Hardly. The CDC which has been referenced here and in yesterdays presser as good source on prevent CSA see Risqué jokes as inappropriate and harmful. Accordingly, it is entirely plausible that that makes up some portion of the 50%. In addition Vieth list items that are considered developmental

That and the one set of dirty cloths they have rides on top of the vehicle.

I wondered what that rushing wind sound above me was.

WOW!! I go away for a couple meetings and lunch and the board explodes. Questioning what was meant by greater than 50% of reported cases is relevant, pertinent, even critical if we are to understand what constitutes abuse and how to prevent it. I have gone back and read (quickly, want to read a couple more times at least) both Vieths paper and some of the CDC papers on child abuse. Even they have conflicting information on what the threshold of appropriate, including some of the things that have been discussed here, like talking about sex, risque jokes etc. I want to add

Meaning some scout will not take a shower any more often that every 72 hours. I think that is a generous count, some will try to make through the entire week. As I have heard often, swimming is not showering/bathing.

I did a few Google searches and did not come up with anything. Doesn't mean its not there, it could be, just buried in a minutia of metadata, particularly if it is a photo and not a searchable page or document.

One more thing. NESA used to have a database that you could look up Eagle Scouts, it was being reworked before the layoffs. Unfortunately, they did not finish, so it has never come back online. However, NESA prints annuals FREQUENTLY (fundraiser). It seems a I get a notice every year to update my info and by the latest version. Usually, there are one or two around the lobby at the Scout Service Center, you could look it up there. I have also seen some older editions in some libraries. It used to be you could call or email national for the details, but I think all the cu

If BSA says you earned it, then you earned it. But here is are the requirements as set in 1970 and 1972. Which you use is based on when you earned Life. 1970 Earn 21 merit badges, including the following 11: Camping Citizenship in the Community Citizenship in the Nation Conservation of Natural Resources Cooking First Aid Lifesaving Nature Personal Fitness Safety Swimming While a Life Scout, serve actively for 6 months as a troop warrant officer [patrol leader, senior patrol leader, assistant senior patrol leader, junior assistant scoutma

Why let the #$%&! take any more from you. You did the work to earn the Eagle. I guess I have more of the mind set to say "look #$%&!, even with all the horrible crap you did, I still earned it in spite of you." Though I would likely have even more expletives.

No, if anything, I have doubled down. BSA has some serious issues and deficiencies. But they also have a great mission and a solid program. I don't think a start up organization to replace BSA could be half of what we have now. So, I am rolling up my sleeves for the hard work of rooting out the evil and preserving the program that achieves its mission, aims, methods, oath and law. I think our youth need and deserve a program that lives up to the standards that were set forth back in 1910

Actually, now that I read your reply I think I jumped the gun on DelMarVA, He did not mention Delaware, It is likely National Capital Area - which has many districts including the Virgin Islands. and BTW I have some of their beautiful patches from the 70's and 80's

This ^^^ I think it is fairly standard across states that murder 1 requires premeditation. After that it seems to be a hodge podge of murder classifications, felony classifications, special circumstances etc. Some have no SOL on lesser classifications (or didn't) and some do. Same goes for various crimes, rape, sexual assault, even arson.

I agree it is a conundrum. At this point I believe most state laws require reporting of CSA. So the authorities should at least know, but if that gets prosecuted, or even charged is up to the legal system. So hopefully, that is how things are working now and going forward. One would think that investigations are not public until charges are filed, but I'm sure that is not always the case. You are correct that everyone assumes IVF means CSA, it does not. I have heard estimates as high as 80% are not CSA. Based on my experience that sounds very plausible. In todays technologica

True for 1st degree, but (I am going from memory for a college debate decades ago) Murder less than 1st degree did have a SOL in some states. In some states now, rape and sexual abuse of a minor (and other crimes) do not have a criminal SOL.

Not likely to find that. Document retention requirements were not as robust back then, and even the current strongest requirements would not require maintaining a document that long. But my understanding is that BSA started indemnifying CO's around '73 or '76 or so.

The principle of Ex Post Facto is so old and and entrenched I seriously doubt they will allow retroactive SOL changes for criminal law. That is a good thing because of broader implications. But I am on board with extending SOL to longer time frames and making punishment for rape and child molestation right behind that for murder.

DelMarVa!! I have several versions of you CSP's from the 70's and 80's I traded for at '81 NSJ. Or I should say, my son now has them now. I just get to look at them.

Interesting, I was unaware of Calder v. Bull (1798). I was aware some states barred the change. So a challenge may or may not make to SCOTUS. But even if it does, considering the court has flipped from liberal to conservative, a challenge to over turn the civil SOL changes would likely fail. But in the end, if it gets to SCOTUS, who knows what will happen, its a roll of the dice for both sides.

I like it. Good luck. Your response is much more Scout like than mine would be. Though I will admit making SOL retroactive even for civil cases makes me a bit queasy. Politicians are not know for writing laws very well, so I worry about expansion and abuse.

That is not even an option for most as the SOL expansion laws are for civil laws only. The SCOTUS has held that retroactive SOL laws were unconstitutional for criminal laws. I expect to see challenges to the civil laws as well, but given the current makeup of the court, they might stand.

That was such a bizarre and anomalous case I don't think is a good example. But, we have seen less strange and lower profile examples. I want to nail as many predators to the wall as we can, I just don't want someone innocent up on the wall next to them.

I don't think that is what he meant. I think he is saying if MJ gives a deposition he will be able to name names, dates and meeting at which his efforts were blocked by BSA.

I am not exactly following what you are saying, but if you mean someone who has publicly admitted their guilt, but never had a complaint, plea deal or conviction, I would agree they need to be on the list. I would also include those that lost civil complaints against them. But if you mean anyone put on the list I disagree. There are certainly people their that are falsely accused but even worse, it would weaponize the process and make the list less valuable as a tool to prevent abuse.

I know, right! I can only guess that it is either a council that has a large metro area and densely populated a western council that covers a huge expanse of territory or a council that has been merged with several others

@RememberSchiff's sarcasm or maybe better labeled dry wit can easily be missed, so don't feel bad.