ThenNow

Having followed the case since the outset, as you have, and after reading many of the other cases and RCC Chapter 11 files, I think Judge Silverstein will seriously consider proactively "piercing the veil" to access the LC's. This is obviously being hotly debated in the mediation. When the issues surrounding transferring assets to Protection Trusts arose with the Middle TN Council, she was not happy. From my reading, National holds a reversionary interest in LC assets upon revocation or relinquishment of Charter. If so, that is the thread upon which one tugs to show the two entities are, indeed, of the same cloth.

I'm going to predict something and it's not something I am inclined to do. This will likely energize the national effort to 'reform' statutes of limitations for child sexual abuse cases. There could not be a better platform than this offer (Plan) and the way it will almost certainly be perceived.

Most anyone who has followed the case to any degree or reads this cold will see the offer as smug, insolent defiance sprinkled on top of contempt for sexual abuse survivors. Just sayin'...

This a $100,000 less than my therapy bill alone. Session costs for a decent therapist have skyrocketed since 2005 or so.

Yes, provided he only went to therapy a total of 48 times over the course of 26 years at a rate of $125 per session.

Well, if that is true, then he has certainly come to the right forum. If it is, may I please order a heapin’ helpin’ of honest, hold the brutal?

Good grief. This is absolute solid gold. I wish you had been my father, SM, coach, and so on and so forth. Pick one or several. Seriously and more so, I wish I had heard this when raising my boys. Then again, I would settle for having been in my right mind at that time. I was in and out of residential and IOP treatment, including three stints in the psyche hospital, for twelve years starting when they were 9 and 10.

I've read this multiple times and cannot figure out what you meant. I get sentence one, but struggle with two and three. Leg up, please? As to two, what is it if not? And, three I simply can't decode. I even tried lemon juice and a flashlight.

Many times as I've considered a response or making a point, I realize it may not help the process for you men, given your ongoing roles. As always, I offer this to add personal history and context, however anecdotal you consider it to be. Maybe my stories allow you to put a 'face' on the anonymous survivors. Years after I left Scouting, having achieved my goals and weathered the storm, my youngest brother told me about a close friend who was going through the same drug and alcohol mess I did. He was also a high achiever and suddenly fell off the cliff at pretty much the same point in high school. By then, my brother knew about my abuse and asked his friend about it. He quietly acknowledged, but would not come forward or speak further about it. He drank himself to death. I am now aware, through friends on the inside of this case, of multiple men who have filed claims against our mutual abuser. All of them are younger than I. My assumption has always been I was the first in our Troop. Our SM likely molested and abused other boys prior. Well, he almost certainly did. I hinted at it with a girl I dated years later and she all but confirmed. She was his first cousin and they shared a last name. All this is a segue back to an earlier topic. Namely, I emphatically forbad my two younger brothers from joining Scouts and gave no reason. I did not help anyone but them. Self-forgiveness has never come for that failure to act. I did not protect myself by reporting it nor the boys who came after me. My brothers are grateful, which is some consolation. To be candid, I too often look at their lives and wonder what mine would have been if someone had stopped him, including me. Put that in your psycho-babble pipe and try to smoke it. Tell me when you decipher the signals that emanate therefrom.

I don’t see any such babble, but your choice to downplay what’s underlying what you grasp as inexplicable inaction. Absent the loathsome, pesky babble, we’re left with a one word reiteration: fear. Fear on several levels. If you’ve not experienced it, you will remain unable to understand unless you don your waders and enter the babbling brook.

As in, why I did not say anything?

Exactly what can’t you understand? Do you mean literally or the complex psychological conundrum inherent in making dark disclosures related to the child/adult and powerless/powerful dynamic?

Thanks. I do appreciate that, especially from this group.

For my part, I offer two points: 1) I literally was looking at my dad and thought about telling him. I knew my dad would 'kill' my Scout Master so I said nothing. I did not want my dad to go to prison nor ruin the Troop I loved. There were 10 people in my family and we would't have survived without him, not to mention the pain it would have caused. I was 10 and never again thought of telling an adult, though it continued for 6 years; and 2) I became aware just a few years ago that other parents/adults, besides those complicit or tangentially involved none of whom had kids in Scouting, were aware. The parents/dads only challenged him as to their own boys: "Touch my kid and you're dead."

1) Allegations were leveled, shown to be factual, the judge ruled that this was a no-no, and the TCC and LC's, at least MTC as an example, reached an agreement. I don't believe the substance was disclosed. The unresolved issue, unless it was covered in the settlement agreement, is whether there is a reversionary interest held by the Debtors in the even of charter revocation or relinquishment. 2) I'm almost certain this is going on, but whether it is the sticking point, I don't know. My bet is, it's not. Just my gut feeling from all I know and have read on the docket and in press coverage. Some closed state LC's have produced and just said, "You can look, but you ain't gonna touch." That is a problem, however, because the BSA and insurance companies want all LC's protected to close the deal. 3) You guys are better positioned to opine than I, but offer my anecdotal pennies. I recall back when I was involved with our LC and OA Lodge, 'fast and loose' might well describe the most utilized accounting method.

Noting the data withholding and cases is not to celebrate the pending cases, but to wonder why in the heck they aren't giving up the goods. It must be very significant to put the reorganization at risk. Personally, I don't believe the judge will overrule the TCC's desire to receive full disclosure, which appears to be the only thing that will keep the case on track and shelter the LC's and other entities. I could be wrong, of course. I think how she rules would depend on what the information is, how relevant she believes it to be in assessing the assets and whether the LC's have some legal right to withhold it.

I am unsure what the Debtors and LC's are withholding in a death grip, but time is running out to turn it over to the TCC. Whatever it is/they are, the TCC is not playing. Fact.

There are approximately 860 cases pending in which at least one LC is a named defendant. These are locked and loaded if the Chapter 11 protective stay is not extended.

You're an excellent, insightful and compelling writer. Perhaps you can spearhead the effort. Just a thought. Not many groups have someone with your capabilities.

This is where the attorneys come in and say, "No can do." Too many ways that can go south. Quickly. There are two specific examples illustrating the degree to which the internal message has been and is being managed. Check out the Mosby and Turley statements last year. Not once is the word "sexual" used. Lots of references to "victims," "abuse" and "harm," but no mention of the type, source or nature.

I worked in Washington, DC on two separate gigs. One, for a Member of Congress and the other many years later as Exec. Director of a Policy office. I believe this is precisely on point. The element I see missing is the critical secret weapon in these situations: surrogates. When an individual is in a difficult situation and cannot afford to have anyone officially affiliated with them speak in their defense, they release the carefully chosen surrogates. If well selected, their ability to offer commentary and support is a key leveraging strategy to influence public opinion and bolster the position of the principal. I've wondered where the power players are who are deeply involved with and still love Scouting. In this critical moment, crickets...

You are obviously very intelligent, highly invested, extremely articulate, a problem solver and angry. I'm curious, what is the most frustrating: (1) the inability to control the process and thereby solve the riddle; or (2) the prospect of losing Scouting? (And yes, I am now wearing my therapist hat as well as the wingtips.)

On nearly my first day in practice, the partner who mentored me gave me a cardinal rule: "Say little. Write less. As to your clients, they refer all inquiries to you."

I was a candidate for the TCC. When I interviewed with the US Trustee & Co., I told them I did not wish for the demise of the Scouts. He said, "That sentiment is pretty much universal among all the men we are interviewing." I thought you might find that interesting, though clients seldom drive cases of this type, which loops back to the motives and goals of certain attorneys.