Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by ThenNow

  1. 41 minutes ago, MattR said:

    I'm assuming it would help survivors when they're ready to talk, to whatever level they're comfortable with. You were the first to have the courage to speak up and there have been a few more since.

    We can pin the thread so it stays visible when people look through the forums. Just let me know if you think that would help.

    I believe you're correct in your assumption and think that's a great idea. That said, I have no idea what a pin is. Is it the digital version of an old school bulletin board thumbtack with which we would put notices in the hallway? 

  2. 2 minutes ago, MattR said:

    If I could I'd set up a sub thread for everything related to the bankruptcy to keep some of the many subjects cohesive, but I don't have those powers.

    Very good point. Hm. Hopefully others will continue to be attracted to the thread title and venture in. I really hope so bc it's one of the most gracious and humble posts supporting us I've seen over these months. 

  3. 53 minutes ago, DavidLeeLambert said:

    Some of the insurers have also mentioned in pleadings that they believe they have defenses against many of the "open window" or "look-back" cases, as well, such as that the "look-back window" laws are unconstitutional.

    Thanks for all these references. I know there are others helped by your direction and I encourage them to go to the source documents, as well.

    Good luck to them with that approach. They have a passel of powerful states to take on, if they try it. I don't think it will go well with them, either in open water in the smaller pond of this case. I say, "Nonstarter," but they will swing at it anyway.

  4. 3 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

    I reached out today to my health care providor to get me help.

    Thank you for posting. Truly. This is the best thing I've heard in a while and it has boosted my flagging spirit! You have made a brave move and, though I don't know you, I'm proud of you. I most sincerely hope for additional healing and forward progress. "Baby steps" and "Just for today," as they say.

    • Like 1
  5. 22 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

    To clarify, will they likely reduce awards to victims who were abused in States with expired SOL's?  Somewhere I saw that when claims receive point value, that is a factor.  Is there a case to remove claims that are time-barred?

    The insurers have mentioned time-bar defenses and this chart from the BSA says something, too. As they have said publicly, the TCC is deeply committed to seeking awards for all survivors and I have confidence they will fight for that. As to the application of time-bars, we shall see. I have legal arguments against the application in my case...I will keep battling. 

  6. 1 hour ago, Eagle1970 said:

    So how do the time-barred cases line up against those abused where statutes have been revised?  The State where my abuse occurred seems to have a new bill every year to eliminate the SOL, that seems to barely fail but certainly could change with one election cycle.

    Line up in terms of numbers or subject to defenses and, thus, attempts to reduce awards due to the running of the statute(s)? Or, line up in terms of face value?

    Yes. Same with my state. I was working with the legislative sponsors prior to COVID locking them out of the capitol. We had planned a summer study session and were literally on the phone the day I was in Delaware for the TCC selection process. Now, it's back in limbo.

  7. Would you consider reposting this on the main Chapter 11 Part 175 thread? Well, Part 3, but...Please feel invited to edit the mention of me, as I'm asking so all survivors who visit that thread will see it and no other reason. Your call, of course. Many may not find it here. Thanks, again.

    • Upvote 1
  8. 12 hours ago, RandomScouter said:

    want need to thank you.  By speaking up here, you have put a (virtual) face on the issue.  By sharing some of the stories of your abuse, you have made it feel real in ways that "numbers" can't.  By opening up about the struggles you have faced as a result of the abuse, you have exposed raw truths which many of us have probably never even considered.

    I am terribly sorry it happened to you.  But I am grateful you are here. now. at the virtual campfire. with other scouters.  I have learned a lot from you.

    I especially want to say these things to @ThenNow.  You have given me a lot to think about in terms of how I look at this whole process. 

    (I still want my kids in Scouting, I still love the program, I still want the good things to continue.)

    I hope, I pray, that at the end of the day, the pain and difficulties you have gone through in filing claims and trudging through the bankruptcy process will somehow have been "worth it" in your eyes.

    Thank you. I am not afraid to say this made me cry. In addition to the DMs I've received and some of affirming commentary,  this makes the effort to stand in amid the cyclic barrage(s) worth it. Again, you have my gratitude.

  9. 45 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

    So one is probably safe to say that Scouting is an order of magnitude to maybe two orders of magnitude safer than the schools.

    Again, "schools" vs one single organization is apples to turnips. Also, I'm sure you're aware of the variance and scale of difference in safety between public schools in Memphis and, say, those in Pleasanton, CA. Compare MI State with Elon University in NC. Which level of "school" do you mean? How many have on duty law enforcement and/or metal detectors? Our oldest son went to middle and high school in a pretty affluent counties and school districts and had them. That's a bit of a deterrent. These are simply not relevant or apt standards of comparison. As you also know, I'm sure, school counselors and teachers have a much higher rate of reporting than almost any other population group. Your statement may be "comforting" to recite, but not viably or objectively. 

  10. 54 minutes ago, elitts said:

    There's plenty of actual evidence showing that the incidence of child sexual abuse is much higher among the general population than it is within Scouting (based upon known cases in Scouting).

    I'm not sure what the point is because:

    1) Are we taking the world - with far different standards and imbedded cultures of abuse - as the "acceptable" baseline or reasonable element of comparison?

    2) Are the legal systems in those countries set up in such a way as to have rigid standards and penalties - criminal and civil - for proven cases of abuse or has they had hundreds of years of "winking" at sexual abuse, even if their laws are similar to the US? The sex trade is rampant in some of these.

    3) Are we comparing nations to one organization with both a history of abuse and the knowledge of that abuse?

    4) Do these nations have reputations for and self-promotion of having higher standards of morality, honesty and integrity?

    I could go on, but these are good and relevant questions for the moment.

  11. 2 hours ago, qwazse said:

    If, legally, a survivor could give us a walk-through, he/she would have been welcomed  -- and supported as best we amateurs could.

    What do you mean by "if, legally"?

    2 hours ago, qwazse said:

    A subsequent video training involved interviews with survivors.

    BSA survivors?

    2 hours ago, qwazse said:

    engaging survivors in practical ways would empower future scouters to create an environment that reduces risk even more than the current 100-fold below what children face elsewhere.

    I would sign up for this.

    Sorry if this is getting back into improving YPT. Maybe I should go to that thread, if it's still holding together.

  12. 18 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

    It is OK to be snarky and I don't feel attacked.

    Good deal.


    19 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

    I feel like the Boy Scouts will not want any survivor to come around if and when there is some kind of conclusion for them to what has occurred.

    Most may not be aware, but there are more than a few survivors who are active Scouters. What becomes of them? Imagine what this is like for them right now?


    20 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

    Instead they opened up Pandora's Box, the Genie got of the bottle and now the lid won't close and the Genie is going nowhere.  Now they are kind of stuck with a legal strategy they had developed early on and it doesn't fit the new reality. 

    Agreed. I said much the same thing a few times. Not sure that matters, but want to confirm my agreement.


    20 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

    in short it is kind of like getting a divorce you tell the spouse don't worry I will take care of you and by the time the courts get done you barely have a pot to piss in and you hate her with all your heart.

    That would make it hard to believe in the sincerity of any resolve that comes our way. Maybe that's why the TCC consistently reminds us to "Remember, this is just a business transaction."

  13. 34 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

    Could you imagine the stories that would be told around the campfires.  I am sure the Boy Scouts would not welcome any of those conversations on their properties.

    Why do you say that? Is it because the BSA would not want the air, ground and spirit of the woods further "contaminated" with tales of sexual abuse? I am not being attacking or snarky, it's just the only reason I can come up with in my little brain. That and, possibly, fear of bad press. I'm really trying to understand why someone might feel that way if it provided a measure of healing and some small recompense.

  14. 1 hour ago, T2Eagle said:

    So, one of the things alluded to in the Ad Hoc statement that is not widely known, is that not all by-laws and charter agreements are alike:  "any such contractual interest – and the defenses thereto – also varies with the terms of the myriad organizational documents of individual Local Councils, as well as with the particular laws of jurisdictions throughout the United States."

    I'm going to look into this a bit more. Thanks for the info.


    1 hour ago, T2Eagle said:

    The BRG view of what constitutes my council's unrestricted assets is almost certainly different than what my council would say is their unrestricted assets.  Both parties are making their statements in good faith, but they are using very divergent assumptions to arrive at them.

    Yes. The TCC acknowledged they recognize some assets are restricted. Oddly, the AHC cited to some of the camps the TCC excluded from available assets as ones the TCC sought to include. The AHC may need to pay closer attention.

  15. 1 minute ago, Eagle1970 said:

    And, in fact, I have no interest in returning to the camp I was abused at.  We did camp nearby it last week, and I could feel my blood pressure rise.  So I get it.  My idea is probably not practical, but I would really like to see BSA honor survivors somehow in this process, rather than just a minimal payout.

    I wish that, too, if there is some way to do it. In the meantime, I will continue to press for cold, hard cash at every turn.

    I'm an odd duck (news flash!), but I actually went to my primary camp to scope things out and confirm my recollections after I filed my Proof of Claim. I happened to be in that neighborhood and went by myself. It was bittersweet and complicated, but affirming. Everything was as and where I said it was. I had even drawn and submitted maps with my POC. Until I did that, I had nightmares about having gotten things wrong, all rooted in the constant self-doubt that comes with my version of the ongoing aftermath. 

  16. 13 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

    how about if BSA sets aside and maintains a network of local and national campgrounds for the sole use of survivors?  I, for one, would eagerly enjoy the beauty of nature for a week or two per year at, say, Philmont-or even the local camps in my council (with 50 Amp full hookups, of course).  Actually, it would be somewhat healing for me AND would paint BSA in the light of acknowledging the facts and publicly welcoming the victims.

    This is simply meant as a counter view presented by other victims. During preparations for the Miami mediation, it was suggested here that the parties meet at a camp or HAB. Some responded adamantly that the very last place on earth they would ever want to be is at a Boy Scout camp, office or facility of any kind. For many, this would be incredibly triggering and traumatic. I'm sure others, like you, would enjoy it tremendously, which is great. Just wanted to provide that bit of info from posts waaay back when.

  17. 11 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

    Yes, both sides could be very close to a mediated settlement and this is signaling that the BSA will deliver on certain things or both sides could be far apart and this is positioning for the next phase in this Chapter 11.  While all of us would hope that this is heading to a resolution soon, the second possibility is the more likely the case.

    Based on the TCC's town hall last week and the new fairly oblivious filings over the weekend, I see no evidence, smoke signals or cloud formations indicating there is any prospect of a pending mediated settlement. I supposed there is always a very, very remote possibility, but I highly doubt it.

    • Like 1
  18. 1 hour ago, CynicalScouter said:

    oh, by the way, all LC funds (or almost all) are restricted ("with the bulk of many Local Councils’ assets legally restricted and unavailable to fund any contribution").

    For those who are keenly aware, even pretty much aware, of the state of your LC's assets, how does/will this feel if the AHC is saying the "bulk" of the assets are legally restricted and you know that not to be the case for your LC? Admittedly, their language is intentionally very squishy -- "all (or almost all") and "many," so I guess they can wiggle it however they want. Convenient. I just want to see the BRG dashboards next to the internal financial statements for the LCs implicated in my claim. I've previously brought up the point of the actual constituency of the AHC and still wonder whose voice they truly are. I guess they represent "all (or almost all") or maybe just "many" of the LCs?

    • Thanks 1
  19. 20 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

    Why would a lawyer be as qualified as say, CSA researchers, CSA focused socialists, and I don't know, anyone who is an expert in the area vs. someone who is a lawyer in the field? I am not saying this as anti-lawyer, but as someone who knows that lawyers who specialize are good at what they do, but CSA programs isn't an area that lawyers specialize in. Can lawyers confirm that the prescribed advice is being carried out? Sure. Know the current best practices in the area? Not likely. 

    PS - I wrote this. 1 + 2 = Bingo. Process and Compliance Monitor + Expert Consultant (who has zippo interest in being a monitor, they’re substance experts) = Excellent Team. See how easy that is. We are straining at gnats...

    Adding a note at risk of causing heads to exploit. Tim Kosnoff (aka, he who shall not be named) has spent a long, successful career representing child sexual abuse victims. Thousands and thousands and thousands of hours listening to children tell their ugly stories of who, what, where, when and how. Why is inexplicable, other than selfishness, craven appetite, evil and easy access, in multiple contexts. Imagine, if you dare, how much he knows about grooming, predation tactics, methodologies, patterns, points of access, opportunity gaps and all the like. I know he, and other such practitioners, are not Dr. Conte. That’s what we have men like the good doctor who drill down to the core of these issues and make their wisdom available to us. What I’m saying is, you really do yourself and others no fair service by so flippantly discarding the prospect of an attorney being an effective monitor. I’m not for a minute saying that’s who should do it or that the TCC would ever recommend one. Just sayin...you know what I’m sayin. I hope. 

    1) Some of these lawyers have decades of experience handling sensitive CSA cases and are dedicated, brilliant, compassionate people. They are as qualified as anyone, except maybe...

    2) This is the man the TCC engaged to work with them on the Proof of Claim form, perhaps among other things. These are the sorts of professionals we’re talking about, people. Let’s give some credit. The victims and our representatives are not Neanderthals, nincompoops, knuckleheads or nitwits. You be the judge of their judge of character, quality and qualifications. 

    https://socialwork.uw.edu/sites/default/files/faculty_cv/cv-conte_jon2012 (1).pdf



    8 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

    The court will appoint an attorney who will likely not be a researcher into child abuse and so not qualified to manage such an effort.

    Not sure how that assumption was culled out of the TCC’s demand (as it’s being interpreted), but two things:

    1) Some of these lawyers have decades of experience handling sensitive CSA cases and are dedicated, brilliant, compassionate people. They are as qualified as anyone, except maybe...

    2) This is the man the TCC engaged to work with them on the Proof of Claim form, perhaps among other things. These are the sorts of professionals we’re talking about, people. Let’s give some credit. The victims and our representatives are not Neanderthals, nincompoops, knuckleheads or nitwits. You be the judge of their judge of character, quality and qualifications. 

    https://socialwork.uw.edu/sites/default/files/faculty_cv/cv-conte_jon2012 (1).pdf

    • Upvote 1
  • Create New...