ThenNow

15 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

advocating for parties to engage in ex parte communications with the court, especially where the party is represented by counsel who is asking them to do it. That whole process always seemed off (read: unethical) to me for that reason.

As valuable and appreciated as the letters depicting victims personal abuse experiences are, they’re heavily redacted. Yes, they were directed to the judge and she read some, but that was not the only purpose or intent. Regardless, the flooding of the court at the behest of the law firms seemed odd to me, as well. As lead plaintiff in a class action suit, my attorneys certainly never directed or allowed me to “speak” directly to the court, other than in mediation sessions even though I technically spoke for the class. As someone who’s worked in politics for a while, as I step back and consider it, this does feel like a campaign. I think Andrew Van Arsdale’s past experience and expertise drove this entire thing. If you want an idea of what I’m talking about, he is a noted speaker on the website of “Mass Torts Made Perfect, LLC.” Yes. That’s a real thing. For the record, I’m being serious (for a change).

28 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

Is isn't this the same Eric Green who the BSA wanted appointed as a mediator in April/May 2020 but the judge selected retired bankruptcy judge Kevin Carey instead?

From The Mutts back in the day:

On 7/1/2021 at 6:23 PM, CynicalScouter said:

The Settlement Trustee shall be Eric D. Green and will be appointed by the Bankruptcy Court. I assume it is this Eric D. Green. http://www.acctm.org/egreen/

"He’s very close to BSA’s lawyers. He’s done a LOT of mediations for Sidley and Austin which are Lauria and Andolina’s prior firm. Green was rejected by the TCC as a mediation team member for that reason and others. He is said to have a god complex. Lawyers who had dealings with him were not complimentary. A vocal lawyer on the Coalition advocated hard for him a year ago."

9 minutes ago, David CO said:

I think you have proven my point.  You ask for a reply.  You say you are serious.  Then you respond with smart aleck remarks.  I can't have a serious conversation with you. 

Not at all because your point, which was to say I didn’t want a reply, was inaccurate. It’s seems to me you’re having a lovely conversation with yourself, serious or otherwise. From past experience, I’m using humor to diffuse not the seriousness of my replies or to diminish you, but to mask the degree of upset I have with your presumptions and mind reading. I asked if there was something else we’ve yet to hear. Simple question and others are asking it, as well. 

25 minutes ago, SiouxRanger said:

A paragraph or two just setting out the basics-what is allegedly different now compared to then?.

I’m looking forward to understanding precisely what I lived through, in addition to child sexual abuse. 

47 minutes ago, David CO said:

No.  You are not seriously asking the question.  

Those of us who were around in those days know that the cultural norms of the day were different.  We lived through it.  We remember how it was. 

Ok. I give. You must be right. I thought perhaps something was missing from what we’ve heard all the other times. Fear not. I’ve been resoundingly put in my place. Or not. Never mind.

Um. If, let’s say for gee whiz sake, a Boy Scout was sexually abused by his SM (and technically others) at the ripe old age of age 10 in 1972. Just to pick a random scenario. Did that fella live through this mystical period of laissez faire attitudes toward child molestation? To this question, I mostly certain request the honor of your reply. A lot of people were “alive” in this timeframe. Some of us actually “lived through” it. Big difference.

5 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

I copied this from Wickpedia. For me it takes away any argument of  “different cultural norms of the day”.

Yes. Exactly. I’ve argued against that view over and over again. That’s why I suggested, “Are we really going back to that tired yarn?”

50 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Once BSA knew, for decades, it had a systematic problem with child sexual abuse it did nothing, did not do enough, or actively engaged in efforts to cover it up, such as the famous/infamous program safety review researcher (Menninger) was not told about the existence of the IV files at all.

I’ve added this little (not so little!) factoid to the briefs I’m preparing for The Great and Powerful. This single fact is not only damming, but illustrative of a pattern of denial that is utterly indefensible. Well, other than based on self-protection, organizational preservation, fire-walling donors from reality and not risking a decline in reputation and membership. How else can this be rationalized or excused? I’m seriously asking the question. I guess we revert back to the “different cultural norms of the day” argument? Search me.

PS - This is the sort of thing about which I was utterly clueless when I started thinking about pursuing anything, which was exclusively against my abuser and then only criminally. Just wanted him in prison. 

2 hours ago, elitts said:

The fact that an abuser may have changed their identity, took elaborate steps to hide their predilections, lied their way through an interview and then spent years gaining people's trust before beginning to abuse scouts is basically just considered "proof" that the BSA's screening process is negligent rather than considering the situation to be one that no organization could reasonably have prevented.

I’ve come to “know,” personally and anonymously, a good number of victims over the last fifteen months. For what it’s worth, not a single fact pattern of the abuse fits this hypothetical. Not even close. My bet is these are truly outliers, but what do I know? Oh. That’s right. Not what, but who. Victims of BSA child sexual abuse.

39 minutes ago, DuctTape said:

I am not sure a better word exists, nor do I think we should spend too much energy of finding one. Our energy should be spent on finding ways to eliminate the exploitation of children (and others).

Agreed. I’m certainly not forming a committee to study the alternatives for the word grooming in this contex. I was partly being “smart” picking a language nit. I was also speaking to the issue of people not knowing the clinical definition and reality of sexual abuse grooming. We’re in a thread created because I was going on about grooming and the term was deemed “psycho-babble.” Maybe some need to call it something else to come along and get it. Dunno. Absolutely 100% there are better things do. I hope you believe it takes no selling to get me on board with the your last statement. 

Oops. Posted over and over. Apologies.

On 8/1/2021 at 12:57 PM, SiouxRanger said:

Maybe a new word is needed.

Very good point. Grooming is an effective term, if you know it’s clinical definition. Your invitation made me consult my love of language thinker. The result? “Houston, we have a problem.” A word that depicts something terrible, exploitative and insidious while describing good human hygiene in means one definition is seriously diluted. On reflection, I understand why grooming was chosen to describe the a component of sexual abuse, but you are probably right. Perhaps it needs to be reconsidered. A word from the animal kingdom reduces it to the proper base perspective and captures intent, forethought, methodical process, baiting, stalking lying in wait and execution: predation. If you’ve read my posts, I like to use this word because it truly encapsulates the concept and process. All predators engage in predation. Child sexual predators are just that and do just that.

26 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

The Unsecured Creditors Committee for the Archdiocese of Guam's bankruptcy filed its objection to the BSA disclosure statement. In it, they ask that the court at least reach some of the aspects of confirmability now rather than wait for a vote of victims to approve/reject only to at confirmation veto the whole thing.

Quote

14. Evaluating confirmability at the disclosure statement stage avoids “engaging in a wasteful and fruitless exercise of sending the disclosure statement to creditors and soliciting votes on the plan when the plan is unconfirmable on its face. Such an exercise in futility only serves to further delay a debtor’s attempts to reorganize.”

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/bd4e3bde-0056-4944-a1b0-031ea56d53c7_5842.pdf

And the cheese that is this process continues to get more binding...

12 hours ago, fred8033 said:

I just think it's unhealthy to overly focus a discussion the "truly good" versus the abusers.  ... I just don't think it's that simple.  Grooming happens, but I'm not sure "intent" is that clean or if the abusers even knows in advance what their intent really is.

As someone who now knows a bit about grooming, both experientially and clinically, this is very true. If “we” try to formulate any sort of litmus test for purity of intent, whether based on words, observed actions or personality quirks, we get into deep trouble. You protect the sheep by putting up fences, making better ones when they prove inadequate, walking among them frequently, discussing techniques with other ranchers who share your desire to protect and defend and you sending them out with a Great Pyrenees, Akbash or Anatolian Shepherd. Think mindful, trusted, educated, equipped and proven Scouters. In twos. (Maybe they even have a spy detection gadget!) 

For personal examples, there was my SM, ASM and the SE I’ve mentioned. Then, there was an older, beloved man who befriended me and, unfortunately knew nothing of what was going on. I won’t go into the whys, again. He was an OA leader from another LC and took us to the 1977 National Conference in Tennessee. I had another friend, an older Scout nearing Scouter status, who I now think had a sense that all was not well with me. He was a bit effeminate and kind of hovered around me, in a protective, older brotherly way. “Hm. What’s going on here?” He never asked me, just befriended. He was a solid Scout and Scouter who was emotionally aware and concerned. We played tennis together and other things. All was well. This delving into intent would be trixy and dangerous b’ness. 

Btw, I said “we” up there for a reason. I still wonder if there may be the prospect of me participating in Scouting going forward. Likely not on a local/Unit level. As some of you know, that was actually underway in late December 2019. It was a huge step for me after 40+ years of distance from Scouting. Then it completely plotzed two months later. I’m still not over that timing. Hard to believe. 

Sorry to horn in on this topic again, but I thought I might be able to add a beneficial perspective.

2 hours ago, swilliams said:

As a parent, I’d want the abuser to suffer in ways more creative than any I could even come up with. I’m not sure that would be of any help to a child. Or a grown man who was abused as a child. It appears there’s not much that does help - no undoing what was done. 

Thank you very much for your even-handed and heartfelt post. For me, and many of us I think, the question of “What if it was your child?” seems too often deflected and not answered honestly. It may appear (or feel) like we are asking it as a weapon of debate, not a deep and sincere entreaty to another human being. Personally, I think yours is the answer most people would have to give. I’m not advocating or condoning violence or any such, I just mean if you don’t have a visceral, protective reaction when confronted with the prospect of the sexual abuse victim being your child or a child you know, something seems amiss. Or, you’re refusing to look at it so you can fire back the next missive. 

As to the sense that “there’s not much that does help - no undoing what was done,” that’s true in part and less so as to the other. We can all agree about the undoing. What’s done is done, as to our historic BSA child sexual abuse. As I say, the abuse is the abuse is the abuse. It happened. It was bad. For many brutal. For nearly all of us, life changing to one degree or another. “Help” is very relative, of course, so it’s terribly hard to accurately define. I will give some examples of things that, for me, have qualified as “helping.” Then, I’ll recap what I said before about a good result, which would “help.”

1. Acknowledgment. I see you. I believe you. You are not alone. You are not forgotten. You are not crazy. You are not worthless. You have a future. You are a man. You did not invite this. You are not defective, even though you have been broken.

2. Listening. As you’ve seen/read, this forum has been helpful for some/many of us. It has been critical to my sanity since I first posted in December of last year. I’m grateful to have been welcomed, even in the midst of occasional canon fire. Sometimes, we just need to express the turmoil and be allowed to do so. It’s one of the most difficult things to do, especially when we are attacked for expressing it strongly. We’re doing our best, which may not seem like enough or an adequate excuse for heightened emotions. When others fail to consider what we’re going through and don’t understand we’re not just lurking around on an online forum looking to pick a fight, it is doubly difficult. When strongly challenged, especially as to our veracity or motive, we either attack back, flee or go numb. 

3. Support. One of the ways people support me is by simply asking, “Is there anything I can do for you today?” Sometimes, they get frustrated when I say “not that I can think of,” possibly surmising I’m trying to be a martyr, carrying the burden alone. When, in fact, I often just can’t think of anything. It’s the ASK and the obvious willingness to DO something that is important. This is why when some of you ask me/us what are obviously compassionate questions about what can be done (for us and in the future of Scouting) it means so much. When I/we sense the sincerity and concern, followed by active (virtual) listening and reflective responses, it’s powerful.

4. Don’t Solve for X. We can’t be “fixed” or solved, as to what happened to us. Fix the BSA. Please don’t come with your tool kit and try to look under the hood of victims and do your magic to make things run smoothly. Men, in particular, can be prone to over-simplify, race to a diagnosis and set off banging on things to make them work. This is way too complex. As I’ve said before, if you want to really understand, you’ll need to study the subject matter. You can read, The Body Keeps the Score and Complex PTSD: From Surviving to Thriving, to understand a bit about impacts. I can suggest others, as well. I could go on, but I’ll leave it there and other guys can add.

I did this in a previous post about a “good outcome” and may forget a couple point, but what would help at this stage, relative to the BSA drawing us out and into this would include:

1) YPT improvements (with all the elements I, MYCVAStory and others have noted); 

2) Full disclosure and accountability;

3) AG investigations;

4) As much money as we can get; and

5) An actual apology, not just “We are so saddened...that some were abused while a part of Scouting.” I tried to teach our kids, if you know you did something wrong, you don’t just throw out an obligatory, “Sorry” and think it’s over. Being sorry is about sorrow for what you said or did or didn’t do. That’s the root of the word. What I requested they do is say, “I’m sorry I ______. Would you please forgive me?” In my experience, adults have a very hard time doing that. Men are particularly challenged. I tried to let my kids hear me ask for forgiveness whenever it was appropriate. I tried to tell them I’m proud of them as often as possible. Still do. It’s something most of us as adults don’t hear. I make it a point to tell those around me on a regular basis. It’s interesting to see the look on a 50 year old man’s face when I tell him, “I’m proud of you for making that difficult decision.” Interestingly, I can see my little men in his eyes when it slides down into his heart. 

Honestly, I don’t think BSA has expressed sorrow. I think we are their embarrassing and vexing albatross. They are certainly not proud of us. Imagine being the poster boys for bringing down the Boy Scouts. I’ll stop there.

2 hours ago, swilliams said:

And yes, I’d want the organization that allowed it to pay.   Still, I want to see scouting continue because I see my older son, who had some pretty major issues with anxiety, self-doubt, and suicidal thoughts as a 10-11 year old, and who has a very mild learning disability, become stronger and more confident through the opportunities he has gotten from scouting.  (He actually corrected his swim coach the other day. A major achievement for him to speak up for himself.)

Yeah. This is my internal dilemma, as well. I gained much, lost more.

2 hours ago, swilliams said:

There has been a lot of discussion about what can be given up and still have a functioning program. Camping, and the learning and leadership that goes along with it, has been the largest part of my son’s progress. Maybe everything should be given, as it’s not like camping doesn’t exist outside of a scout reservation. My own bigger worry would be that without an actual organization it all falls apart.

Camping, and all that goes into it, definitely produced the core benefit for me.

2 hours ago, swilliams said:

I’m not sure, after being part of this thread and having all of you willing to share your thoughts and stories, that the trade off of helping some boys is worth risking the abuse of another.  I don’t know what the right answer is.  I’m just a mom who wants what’s best for her own child, and is having a hard time reconciling. I’m getting there, though. 

Again, your candor in expressing your struggle is appreciated. 

9 minutes ago, David CO said:

Now we are being told that we can't question the statements of anyone who claims to have been abused in scouting because exposing a few fraudulent claims might, by implication, subject those victims who were actually abused in scouting to false accusations of dishonesty.

Not by me. I’ve repeatedly and passionately talked about my concern over fraud among the claims. It doesn’t delegitimize me, my abuse or my claim. My concern has been, as stated, letting the insurers’ (camels’) nose so far under and into the tent that there is premature and inappropriate questioning of legitimate claims. I’ve been pretty specific about this.

12 minutes ago, David CO said:

No.  The stink is not on us.

This, I can agree with because you are not the “us” I mentioned. I forgive you for not reading carefully as you prepared to respond. I’ve done the same.

1 hour ago, johnsch322 said:

The Boy Scout files have 5 documents relating to my perpetrator and one of them says that they suspected he abused 11 to 13 others in my troop.

How close in time to your abuse was the record created?

1 hour ago, johnsch322 said:

Not once did they reach out to me to find out if I had been abused and if they could offer any help. That was the Boy Scout way. 

I first reported the abuse to BSA via letter in 2008. That was preceded by my effort to have him investigated by local law enforcement in 2002/3. (I talk about that well back in the forum.) I sent the letter to a LC (not mine but where I lived at the time), as well as to National. I named my abuser, the years and my certainty he had abused others after me. Crickets. When I filed my claim, I called the legal department where I understood these records were kept and they not only said in so many words that I didn’t send the letter, but they also said his name did not appear in their records. 2008 is not ancient history before records were kept. The letter was above my signature and I included my BSA credentials, the LC and my Troop. How does that happen?

5 minutes ago, skeptic said:

Any suggestion that there might be some lack of accuity over time is somehow blaming the victim.  We saw that in the deplorable side show in the Kavanaugh hearings.  I am not yet senile enough to not continue to see the probability of some enhancements over time of traumatic and also amusing incidents in life. 

Well, Justice Kavanaugh was nominated to serve on the US Supreme Court and an accuser came out of nowhere with pretty much zero corroboration and a very sketchy memory. It’s unfair to compare these two situations and maybe a little absurd. Yes. Probability. But, remember there are those among you that are among the “us” of this story. The tenor of questioning both a recounting in a widely circulated press outlet and by implication us, isn’t just a random assertion about faulty memory or impure motive. You put the stink on us, as well. 

11 minutes ago, skeptic said:

but if it was NOT brought out then, how was BSA to know?  And, if it was brought out to parents, what did they do to mitigate it?  

Do we have to go back there? We have told you and others the answers to this ad nauseous. (Used advisedly.) Further, the first reaction is to question the victim? Really? If others of us had it in us and/or if the court didn’t redact, there would be more AND more AND more such articles. 

2 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

I guess if I had a chance to ask a single question to the author of that piece, I'd ask: given the above, what would be "fair" compensation to the victims?

Thank you for posting this link. My first reaction is, finally, finally, finally. This article was too long in the coming. 

As to “fair,” hm. Let me see. While most know my BSA future split personality, when you read something like this, the only answer can be: absolutely everything humanly possible. How can you not? Seriously. I know I have minimized my abuse every day of my life, including this one. My therapist reminds me that I am a ferocious survivor and many, many people would be long dead or in prison. (Survivors, please tell yourself that RIGHT NOW!) That “everything possible”would include whatever the insurance companies can be forced to disgorge at the hands of those best of the best of the best insurance attorneys assisting the Trustee Muttsy told us about. Hopefully, they can get us every single thin dime that can be scraped from every single policy covering every single entity that was covered by this policies. Here’s how I feel after reading that and have increasingly so lately as this drags on and the circus plays on.

If BSA really and truly believed they owe victims “equitable compensation,” they would open their hands and unlock the safes to anything they have. Does that mean they don’t survive? You can fill in the answer. In light of that view, honor dictates BSA should face the risk of shuttering the operation and donating the body to forensic science and law enforcement to examine every aspect of what went down. That said, I still don’t know if I can personally let go of the potential good the BSA can do going forward. My human reaction to that piece, and probably should be to my own abuse, is ransack the castle and take all you can get.

Sorry. That is a wicked, wicked, WICKED experience he went through. The fact that it was not isolated to one event, one time frame, one type of abuse AND involved way more than one person disgusts me. That word doesn’t even touch my reaction. My God, mercy on him and all of us who went through this. I weep...

2 hours ago, SiouxRanger said:

Probably not all hidden cameras emit RF if not broadcasting images in real time but merely storing data on a chip for later retrieval.  Can THEY be detected?)

I think the Mack Daddy among them can. I don’t read spy, but it seems pretty comprehensive. This will link you to what I was surfing. You can see the less expensive models, too.

https://www.spygadgets.com/andre-deluxe-advance-bug-detector/

10 hours ago, SiouxRanger said:

Electronic sweeping and such are virtually impossible to do effectively at a price anyone is willing to pay.

A basic RF detector is $150 and the size of a small remote transmitter. Perhaps Swiss Army can incorporate it into the knife? A slightly more precise pen light size device (“wand”) is $300. RF Signal Detector 1205li. It has an attenuation feature so you can dial in more precisely on the signal. The Andre Deluxe Advanced Detector will set you back $7000 and looks a lot like a really nice fish finder. I am going to buy one of the lower priced models and use it around the house to see if it finds the cameras, on and/or off. Just for fun. It will be in my Dopp kit for travel, as well. Should we ever meet, don’t be surprised if I have a pen light in my pocket protector with all the pens, a bulky Swiss Army knife and a fish finder pendant sorta like Flava Flav’s clock.

59 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Whoever said he wasn't an attorney any longer was misinformed.

What MAY have happened (pure speculation) is he was admitted to practice in Texas and let that lapse OR he let his Washington State Bar admission lapse and then became active again.

I said that, but it was qualified with, “I simply state what was told to me by the Chinese plate.” Insurance companies made this inference based on the “no body’s home” sign at his defunct office in Texas and that he now calls himself a consultant. I later said I would be happy to have him as my attorney. If I gave the impression that he unequivocally is not licensed, please chalk it up to a senior moment of cognitive weakness. Or, perhaps, you just don’t yet know how to read my mind.

25 minutes ago, SiouxRanger said:

They are not all bad;  more attorneys signed the Declaration of Independence than any other profession.

And, for fun, you don’t have to go far to find one. In the US, we have one attorney for every 240 people. Does that seem odd? I used to hope they would keep making the California bar harder and harder — it’s notoriously rugged for many — so the market would stop the annual flood of puppies. If that statistic is meaningless to you, I can also report that “the human head weighs 8 pounds.” (Nod to little man Ray.)

2 minutes ago, David CO said:

Do you happen to know about this stuff?  

Sorry. I was specifically talking about if I caught someone. When this was brought up, I did some research and there are instructions about how to spot and identify them. I hate the thought of having to sweep for surveillance gear, whether visually or through technology. Yeah. I don’t know nuttin about such complexities. Heck. I hate knowing I’m being filmed everywhere I go/am in public, and often when I think it’s private. Creeps me out on 20 different levels. 

8 minutes ago, Bronco1821 said:

. maybe attorneys.

Present company excepted?