Jump to content

Eagle1993

Moderators
  • Content Count

    2824
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    104

Everything posted by Eagle1993

  1. First ... I'm shocked that the judge allowed the voting to push out but the objection dates to remain. That doesn't seem right. I remember she questioned the old dates as being a tight timeline between vote & confirmation ... this smells a bit fishy. Second ... ER sounds like he is very concerned if this is released ... I wonder what he is hiding.
  2. Could you explain? Is the judge upset? Was this during the hearing or just the docket?
  3. Again, if the numbers were smaller (like 5% of the claims) I think it could likely be ignored. I don't think they would sway the vote and would probably take a very small portion of the money. I definitely could see a small percent, even after working with lawyers, wouldn't be able to narrow down some details. I am now very concerned as it seems like this number may be much larger. I also expect that some law firms didn't do much if any vetting of the claims (or even help fill them out). A good lawyer would have sat down with the claimant. Asked questions about where they lived/grew
  4. I do question if all of these should have the same voting value. 1) .Really, someone who was abused and impacted cannot provide a date range on when they were a youth? 2) One would think they could at minimum provide a city/town/state. That info + date range would give a LC. 38,663 seems incredibly high. Yes, I can imagine a few ... youth that moved a lot ... that would struggle with this. But 46% of the claims don't have enough data to provide a council? 3) I'm sure that could happen. I'm also sure rosters could be lost. 4/5) Agreed; however, the LCs also stated
  5. Thanks for the background, and the BSA was definitely clear they did all of the review of files that they have and the councils did as well. Part of this was legitimate questioning. I think the other part is just Century causing trouble. Sometimes I think Century's lawyer is a bit like the Blues Brothers when they were recruiting Alan Rubin. Tanc is simply there to create cahos, causing extra hearings, pontificating, jumping in on arguments he isn't a party to. I expect in mediation, he is telling BSA and the Coalition ... "If you say no, I will file requests morning, noon and night,
  6. Short TCC call today. They introduced Richard Pachulski, emphsized votes are due at Omni by December 14, 4:00PM and their recommendation is to vote no ... but everyone should vote regardless of their decision. They also mentioned that mediation is ongoing ... so perhaps good news that TCC is back in mediation. There was some mention of some optimism on where mediation is headed; however, there is no agreement and nothing is in writing/plan yet. To me, this is actually really good news. I expect this first plan to fail, so for BSA to exit any time soon, they need an agreement
  7. No. They are saying that they looked through all of their rosters and only found 5% of the claimants (number from Baltimore Area Council). They said they have too many rosters to scan them in. I think 5% is far lower than the actual end number. However, one would think those not on rosters may be asked a few more questions. I definitely believe there are many abuse victims who would not show up on rosters. However, it seems possible many claims are simply people looking for a check who were not abused. That is not fair to anyone involved. If that was 5-10% of cla
  8. I think the concern being raised is that if councils purged records, then councils would simply say they don't have roster information. Instead, councils are saying they do have rosters, they have 5% of the claimants found, and in fact, they have so much data from rosters they don't have the man power to scan in all of the records to provide Century. Century's lawyer said in court ... so, what you are telling me, is that only 5% of claimants are showing up PLUS you have a ton of roster data (hundreds of thousands, etc.) to the point that you cannot scan them all in. The council said yes
  9. What I found very interesting was the following point. BSA councils are saying that they cannot even find the vast majority of claimants on their rosters. They are also saying they have so many rosters from that time period they cannot possibly scan them all in. Century is preparing some big hits during plan confirmation
  10. Judge ruling on various discovery .... believes that it should proceed including information into the $3500 and how the claims were vetted. Most of the requests do not implicate privilege info, or they may, but discovery could be not privilege . In general, how the claims were obtained/vetted are likely not protected by privilege. She is opening up advertising, intake, proof of claim, how it was done ... pretty much everything.
  11. Other councils similar ... 3% confirmed for one. Century going through a few councils. Basically, they are finding a very small number of abuse claimants are showing up on rosters. In addition, nearly no incident reports confirming the abuse.
  12. Century is stating they are going to push back that the vast majority of claims are false and were not vetted. Century is making the statement ... BAC is saying they have a TON of data on rosters and are certifying that only 5% of claimants were really scouts.
  13. Well ... were these ever vetted? Councils have released rosters and many are showing most claimants were never scouts. There are reasons for this (records destroyed, etc.). Century is indicating there are ways to address this but councils are not supporting that (per Century). Basically, Century is claiming the BSA is paying as if most of the claims are false. However, the insurance companies as part of distribution will be paying as if the claims are all true. So, they are asking what the BSA did to vet any of these claims as clearly they think most are not valid (based on their o
  14. I'm not sure this is true, but Kosnoff is stating (via Twitter) that the Coalition has votes they are not releasing as they are not good news. So they continue to fight to get voters to switch. I think it probably is underreported as the master spreadsheet ones are being held back. Now, if the votes were good news, I don't think BSA would be pushing (as is the Coalition) to push out the deadline. I also found it interesting that the TCC was actually somewhat against pushing out the deadline. So there could be some truth in Kosnoff's tweet.
  15. Century insurance fighting for discovery. They are very concerned that the confirmed number of scouts in terms of claimants are very low. Basically, BSA has not been able to clarify that the majority claimants are actually were even scouts.
  16. Proposed schedule of dates would be ... Voting Deadline - December 28, 4PM (2 weeks delay) Voting Report (Preliminary) - January 4 Objection Deadline - January 7 Final Audited Report - January 17 Confirmation Brief Support Deadline - January 17 Confirmation Hearing - January 24 Judge is concerned as in other case she had the preliminary & final report had big differences in votes. Even the Jan 4 to Jan 7 isn't enough time. BSA lawyers agree this is a big concern. Now more and more are concerned about the resulting timelines if vote is delayed....
  17. Debtors (BSA) would like to delay, hoping mediation will lead to further settlements before the deadline.
  18. TCC - RP - Prepared to file modified motion. Would like to keep voting deadline UNLESS the changes are approved.
  19. Concern about voting deadline, sounds like most parties want to push it out including BSA. Preliminary results would be January 7, final a few weeks later. So far, no objections to pushing out the date.
  20. Hearing started ... 1) Meditation went into midnight last night. 2) Total votes to date (Wednesday before Thanksgiving) - 4,300 votes complete.
  21. @MattR is correct, if this is to the point you believe you may need a weapon, you should be talking with the police. In terms of BSA, the first person I would go to is your charter organization rep. They are ultimately responsible for your unit and should be aware of any concerns. They decide who the adult leaders are in all cases ... so they decide the Committee Chair. If their is a parent/family causing trouble, there is no reason they must remain in your pack. @David CO is a COR and has mentioned multiple times that their unit does not approve applications for every youth ... they
×
×
  • Create New...