ThenNow
-
Posts
2601 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
62
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Store
Posts posted by ThenNow
-
-
7 hours ago, SiouxRanger said:
I can't see how anyone with half a clue could see this as painless.
Um. I think you sliced well wide of the pin. Bay-Lakes Council takes its $2.9M from it’s interest and dividend portfolio and that is that. “Spit, spot,” as Mary Poppins would say. As to their contribution, not so painful. Others are having their entire contribution paid by donors. True. Others have donors standing in the wing to replenish the fund once the case is over. True. From a victim claimant’s standpoint, and that is what we were talking about here, that doesn’t seem to match the “crime.” (No one freak out. I’m using a phrase that is relevant and applicable to some of us.) Finally, we’re talking largely about perception, remember, though there is plenty to evidence this being pretty darn easy for some. For others, very painful. I get it. For most us? We stand in the “others” line.
/s/ <Half A. Clue
-
2
-
-
20 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:
Only if the victims hear about it en masse.
Back to the weird movie. That doesn't feel so good on this end of the stick. How many guys would even know to watch for an announcement from their LC? Not many. The first they'll see is the disclosure.
I'm not trying to tank the process, it just goes to how wonky it is trying to resolve mass torts in Chapter 11. "One of these things, is not like the other. One of these things, just doesn't belong..."
-
12 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:
I wonder if council after council, coming out, stating how painless this will be could impact the voting on the plan.
Reference my reaction to the announcement you shared about taking a $3M slice off the stock portfolio. For me, that was irritating, regardless the number of claims or Shade of Gray. For those 155 guys and especially the 5 with live claims, that has to be painful. My thinking, anyway.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, PeterHopkins said:
Their intention was to give reassurance that none of the camps would need to be sold and to praise those who had made good financial decisions on behalf of the council in the past, which put the council in a position to meet its obligations.
At the time of the call, they were not permitted to disclose their share of the amount in the RSA
Got it. (It's still a very weird movie...)
-
6 minutes ago, PeterHopkins said:
They said they could not tell us the number, but we should be prepared to hear a very large amount reported in the media in the near term.
"Honey, we're going to have a huge tax bill this year. Watch my Facebook posts over the next few days for the amount. I promise, we shouldn't have to sell your car or wedding ring."
As a relative outsider, this is a very weird movie. I shoulda checked the Rotten Tomatoes before I bought it.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:
In other words, the NUMBER is no longer confidential, but HOW the LC will pay may be if there's a deal being struck in the background
Yeah, yeah.
I know. But they be talking to the peeps who are footing the bill, in the moment and going forward. The honest thing is to say, "We are required to contribute $1.3B, but are still in the process of determining how to convert the Pollock, Klimt, deKoonig and Picasso into cash. Stay tuned." Something like that.
-
Do any of the Catholic experts have a list of the members of Catholic Mutual?
-
12 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:
It will be ugly for them if anything goes sideways.
Um, didn't that sorta just happen?
-
36 minutes ago, RandomScouter said:
The case is reaching a critical juncture and it is clear that Patriots’ Path Council will be required to make a significant contribution to the settlement trust. It is likely that this settlement contribution will be a blend of cash and property. Our council has been working diligently for almost two years through special committees and our Executive Board to ensure that we are best positioned to continue serving youth, families and communities in northern and central New Jersey. Because of confidentiality requirements, we cannot at this time provide exact details of how we will fund our settlement contribution, but we promise to do so as soon as plans finalize and confidentiality restrictions are lifted.
Obviously, some LCs saw the ruling in the best possible light pointing to with a reasonably near-term resolution built on the lame duck RSA. Who's communicating that? Also, what's this continuing claim of a confidentiality muzzle when we all know it's been lifted? Inquiring minds want to know...
-
42 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:
I saw a lot of people over inflating the judges decision and how this was the beginning of the end, etc. And many reporters lost the nuance.
if anything that RSA decision was one step forward two steps back.
Have there been any murmurings from AIS or the Coalition of Disappointed Attorneys for Justifiable Bribery?
-
This is an interview with Kathryn Robb, Exec Director of CHILDUSA Advocacy. Aired in February, but worth the five minutes.
https://www.yourerie.com/on-our-air/newsmaker/newsmaker-kathryn-robb/
-
1 hour ago, CynicalScouter said:
The August 25 hearing is now officially cancelled.
https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2021/08/23/628273.htm
-
Just now, SiouxRanger said:
Well, then there should be a mosaic of treatment in the Catholic Church.
Okay. I guess it's time to pull out my Hardon's "Modern Catholic Dictionary." I'm rusty, to the chagrin of my Franciscan, Jesuit and Sisters of St. Agnes teachers.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, SiouxRanger said:
Parishes answer to Dioceses, Dioceses to Archdioceses, and they answer to ? Papal Nuncio?
"Answer to," but that doesn't seem to in any way "draw up" the liability. I believe it stops and rests with each Diocese. That's why they are the ones being sued and moving into their own 11s. No?
Maybe this strand in the thread is about who gets to open the mail. Call me when it's over.
-
2 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:
The August 25 hearing is now officially cancelled.
Dang it. That impacts my revenue trickle. Now, I have to cancel the food truck and outdoor big screen. I've been making some serious coin airing these. Korean BBQ on Wheels will be upset, as will the neighbors. Tanc is a celebrity. We place bets on when his pen will burst as he chews on it.
-
5 minutes ago, David CO said:
BSA is now a left-wing organization.
THAT explains everything! BSA is circling the drain because it lost a wing. Man. I wish I had thought of that...
-
2
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, yknot said:
What happens to the BSA restructuring plan if it starts to become clear in the next month that 700,000 scouts in 2021 will go far south of that in 2022? I think that's what you are alluding to?
Counsel for the Methodist and Catholic Ad Hoc Committees made this point very forcefully. He was nearly incredulous that BSA would be putting out any presumptive numbers for a business model, while simultaneously leaving the COs out of the current RSA. In effect, he asked, “Have you even considered how your business plan pencils if we go away? Have you lost your mind, as well as your calculator? You need us and, well, we really don’t ‘need’ you if it comes right down to it.”
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, yknot said:
Let's hope you are right. All I know from a business persepctive is that insurance is more of a problem and an expense every year no matter what your safety record or training credentials. You might be able to get insurance but what if it requires doubling fees. Fewer scouts means fewer paying. I think a lot also will depend on the status and importance of the CO relationship when this is done. BSA may be able to get insurance, but COs may not care.
This one of area of the insurance matters my wife commented on. From her view, there may very well be a high threshold of premiums at least until they have a “wait and see what happens” period. She was dubious about it being easier *poof* after discharge.
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, David CO said:
I don't know. The juvenile justice system is a mystery. I was asked to write out a statement. Then I never heard anything about it after that. The whole process is very secret.
Sorry. My cousin was a PD representing almost exclusively juveniles and it sure seems to be, as she described it. Of course, those made it into the judicial system. She’s now a judge magistrate and sees many of her “kids” cycle back. Not encouraging.
-
5 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:
Moreover, ALL abuse take took place prior to February 2020 is covered in the bankruptcy (it is why the Future Claims Representative exists).
Though I’m frequently wrong, but never in doubt, I believe it was suggested to me by an insider that BSA’s goal is to loop in all claims that arose/arise prior to discharge. As it was relayed, that was part of discussions. I haven’t seen such a provision. Love to receive a confirmation or slap down.
-
1 hour ago, David CO said:
I was physically assaulted by a student, leaving me with a very painful permanent disability. I haven't had a pain free day in the last 30 years. It forced me to quit coaching (which I loved). I also had to step down as Scoutmaster of the troop I founded.
Since I was the only teacher in the school for my subject, I had to teach that kid for a semester. I hated it. The kid never raised his hand or spoke to me. I never spoke to him. At the end of the semester, I gave him a fair grade. Is that professional enough for you?
I’m truly sorry for that and what you lost, physically and things dear to your heart. That’s awful. What was the reporting and disciplinary process?
-
4 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:
If the rapist in your class had victimized someone in your family or someone you were close to how courteous or professional would you be?
Yes. My point in the hypothetical was not to request a generalization, rather a specific response to a senario. You know the guy. He was in you Unit or LC or at a camp you attended or staffed. Now, you know some horrible stuff you and everyone in your LC Cone of Silence Brigade believes is true. And, he’s beyond the reach of the law. Does that change your feeling or reaction? Some guys who are reading those POCs will confront that exact scenario.
-
50 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:
However, in a good number of states due to mandatory reporting statutes plus BSA's YPT rules, the scouter who finds out about the abuse does not have a choice about whether or not they report to law enforcement. T
A bunch of us are old guys and our abusers are dead or lost in life’s shuffle. This doesn’t apply and needs to be factored in when you respond to his comments.
52 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:Moreover, and this is also another completely realistic possibility, is that the confidential claim information wasn't used directly at all. By that I mean the following (and I've seen this in criminal cases before).
Jane Smith accuses John Doe of a having a gun illegally and shows a picture of John Doe holding it. A crime? Sure. So that gives enough reasonable suspicion to start an investigation. Turns out John Doe DID have a gun and he had a permit for it, but police as part of that investigation observe John Doe making drug deals. John Doe is arrested and charged with possession with intent to distribute.
In other words, the proof of claim may only have been used to the extent necessary to get police to start to take an active interest in this person and that led not to a child abuse or child sexual abuse charge but possession of child porn.
Right. That’s why I, anyway, have moved on to the substance of our reaction and am not trying to analyze that case. And, as I said, I aim to find out what happened.
51 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:Someone in BSA or the LC got this information and relayed it to law enforcement (or did so through lawyers).
We have I believe NO idea if law enforcement then contacted the victim.
Yes, as I said before.
-
1 hour ago, MattR said:
why not send it to a local news source?
Tried that. They wouldn’t touch it without something “official.” Too much exposure if it turns out to be at all iffy or fabricated. Dandy defamation law suit in the making.
1 hour ago, MattR said:I understand that the victims might be hesitant, but if not, maybe CSA needs it's own #metoo movement?
It’s very different when you initiate, as I did, however futile. As I said earlier, totally different when you’re in an assumed “confidential”situation like this and someone else launches it. I’m not sure how that can/could be handled. I agree with Tim Kosnoff that someone needs to step in and clarify for the sake of all victim claimants. I think its importance can’t be overstated, at least from my crappy antique Windsor chair.
Hm. Not sure of the latter. I think #metoo has become extremely problematic. Frankly, I’ve viewed it rise and have commented to many in my circle that the “celebritization” (I that new non-word) of sexual abuse, depression, PTSD has done tons of damage. I would love to delve further into that topic, including how it could be done differently.
1 hour ago, MattR said:How much of the pain comes from not being able to confront it? My guess is the shame and helplessness that victims of regular sexual abuse have would also apply to CSA? Isn't the shame and helplessness the source of power the men had over all the children they abused? Why not take that away from them?
In order:
1) The life impact pain, which is enormous, often is rampaging when before the confrontation. For me, the greatest emotional/psychological cratering came after it revealed itself when my dad died and my boys asked to join Scouting. I utterly fell apart.
2) For sure and, for boys abused by men, multiply by some X factor, not sure what it is. You’ve heard lots of this here.
3) Yes, in part, but for me not primarily. I was locked up and down, coming to dissociate and act normal in all other contexts, even immediately after. Hero worship, the lure of feeling “special” and getting more attention can be huge during extended periods of abuse.
3) You mean in the form of “prosecution” by public humiliation? If so, doing the same to my abuser isn’t going to put mine to rest. It will feel like a measure of justice, but that won’t heal it. That’s going to go on for a long time. Remember, there is potentially an unspeakable shame in admitting all this publicly. That’s a large part of the reaction you’re seeing from several of us.
Hope that helps. Sorry for any typos. Moving fast today.
Chapter 11 Announced - Part 5 - RSA Ruling
in Issues & Politics
Posted · Edited by ThenNow
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I have learned what my LC is contributing and I am not happy about it. I understand this is a process and it is bankruptcy, not state court. As has been said, no one is going to be “happy” at the end, unless there is a Chapter 7. Then, Tim Kosnoff has a phat yacht party with a massive fireworks display, complete with flaming effigies. Back to the point, it hurts to see and feel such a relative incongruity between the injury and the “penalty.” I know for a fact that some LCs were surprised and pleased by the number they were given and easily found the money. They were prepared to go much more deeply into their cash and assets. From a messaging perspective, that was stupid to say, but now it’s out.