ThenNow

I have not heard a full-throated "acknowledgement" of "what they done." Ever. Did I miss it? I don't expect one, either. Like any settlement agreement, it's often entered into with no admission of guilt or liability. Because you cough up money, you aren't shouting to the world, "We really screwed up and a lot of boys paid the price." I know I'm parsing and he's in an interview, but this is more vague, global language that sets us up for another let down. The tank is still technically empty, won't be anywhere close to full and the spigot is being guarded by time, insurance companies, COs and the Great and Powerful Oz. Not to mention SoLs. I've been hammering on my press contacts to talk about this. The public is almost universally under the impression that this is going to be an equal slicing of the available assets. It's not fair to anyone to continue the perpetuation of that misperception. Bah. He needed a better answer than, "Those guys are just stupid and ign'ert!" No substantive attempt to rebut or explain the opposition was the easy way out. "Trust me. I know what I'm talking about and those weenies don't." I'm not saying I agree with those accused of ignorance, but let's be lawyerly and honest. C'mon, man!

And I, for one, am proud of you for that tenacity. It is not easy in any respect.

I drone on further not to pile on, but to add to my effort in kindness. Please take it that way. The feeling this has elicited in many of us is one of being defrauded and abused, again, now in a very public way. Most of our abuse was "private," to use the best word I can think of at the moment. Many told their stories for the first time, including to loved ones, therapists, attorneys, the court and others. A huge, enormous, immense, momentous and ginormous event. In most cases, no one thing or moment was more difficult or wrenching than that one. Now, exposed and out in the open, we came with hands out to receive long over due restitution, compensation, recompense or whatever we want to call it. We did that at the public invitation of the BSA, which in hindsight we now see was very amorphous, vague and speculative. We didn't realize that or grasp the mantras known to insiders of, "welcome to bankruptcy" and this is "just business." It feels soooo humiliating and soul-crushing. We are reasonably intelligent and reasonable men. We feel foolish, gullible and confused like a the sexual abuse. I hope my description helps paint the emotion image. I've never before felt this kind of see-sawing between hope, elation and anticipation on one side and depression, confusion, anger and dismay on the other. Well, maybe when I joined Scouts and ended up being abuse by those I admired and trusted. The BSA Bankruptcy Seesaw Game: "It's going to be good. Wait, that sounds terrible. The LCs are hiding their assets and the HABs are protected?" "Ouch! The judge likes the BSA more than us. We are less important than 700,000 happy Scouts and annual dues. That don't feel so hot." "Those guys are XXXXX and their lawyers are such and so! Um. How do we do this without help?!" "What? The Hartford gets out for a fraction of their exposure? Gah...Oh, wait. That deal won't stick. Whew!" It's mind numbing and exhausting. Just standing and watching the legal gamesmanship has felt that way, as you've heard from a number of us. I apologize for continuing to try, but my effort is for myself (and the other guys) as much as hoping you can better understand.

I'm sorry, but again, you don't get it and you won't convince claimants by repeating the technical details. Being right is not the same as it feeling right and resting comfortably on one's fragile psyche. I mean no offense, but you simply can't understand or reason it away with legal precision. Sorry.

I'm going with the Child Catcher in Pinocchio.

As I've said in detail several times prior to my above post. Remember the one about, "the documentation burden alone is going to be nearly insurmountable to some claimants" and the ever popular "fulcrum to flip to the Expedited Track"?

And why does the advertising copy and content of the video ads look so similar to that used by other firms? Benevolent sharing of material for the common good? I don’t think so.

As I just posted, I don’t have a clear line of sight on what the heck is going on here. At one point, it seemed like it would be straightforward. As the judge failed to rule and impose some order on the process, it seems like it devolved from there. Now, it feels like no one knows what to make of this, if they are completely candid. I will keep beating this drum, to what end or good I don’t know. The re-traumatization of this process for victims is so hard to accurately state and more so to understand if you’re not in our seat. Vulnerability. Someone else holding the advantage and seeming to take ours. Looming uncertainty. The high likelihood of more pain. Crushed expectations and very few who want to listen. Fewer who can understand. Decision makers busy decision making as we huddle in the corner of our tents. I hate that it can’t be voiced to a broader audience. It’s not just about the effectiveness of this or that path to some award, it’s about the horribly convoluted and confusing process. As I’ve said, I am fairly tuned in and I had no clue it would look like this 16 months after the announcement. My therapist is about ready to burn something down. She asked for Tim Kosnoff’s contact information, but I thought better of it. Hang in there, brother. I hear you and am praying for you. I hope that’s okay. If not, I’ll send good thoughts.

Just so my post isn’t misinterpreted, I wasn’t saying I’d like to see or support the rejection of the plan in favor of a state court shoot out and race for the cash. I was just sure Muttsy was locked and loaded to give his view of where the judge would tell us all to go. I couldn’t resist the lob. I’m coming to the conclusion that I have even less control than I thought I did a month, which wasn’t much. Since Deal 4.0 was announced, it’s also becoming clear that I have almost no idea how this is going to play out. I don’t like being out of control and vulnerable to so much uncertainty. I try to lighten it up with humor, however meager my attempts. “Nobody told me there’d be days like these. Strange days, indeed.”

In case you didn’t recognize that, it was a perfect soft lob to the center of the net. Well played. I think it ended up in John McEnroe’s mouth as he sat in the press booth screaming, “You cannot be serious!?!?”

Do you have a prediction on where that will be? Is it interminably hot with red guys wielding pitchforks?

I believe his question was a compound, including both the severity and the chart issues. He was asking if the Shades of Gray percentages dictate the best case scenario for us with the insurance companies, as well as the BSA. “Are we locked into...,” as in, “Is that all we can possibly get even if our claim is severe?”

I don’t think you’re in a club by yourself. I believe it is/was a widely held impression. That’s what I thought the day I read the BSA press release. That’s how it reads. Others can confirm. I’ve kinda given up reading this stuff cover to cover as soon as it lands. I come here for the Cliff Notes and rancid trunk jokes.

This is me, except no purely open or closed state, per the chart dealio. Gray 3 is Tier One abuse and Gray 1 and 2 lower tiers. This is all academic, however, because I will win my fraudulent concealment case and be sprinkled with open state fairy dust and receive the Never Surrender merit badge. And yes, I will design it myself and will not get BSA approval.

To me, the big question is what happens if it tanks? I’m not doing a better than/less than calculation at this point. I’m doing risk and pain tolerance assessment, which leads me to conclude it’s best to go on to Phase...what phase are we on, again? Let’s call it the CO & Insurance Mud Wrestling Phase, shall we? I don’t expect more to come other than grief and delay if this circles the proverbial.

Ah. I was in a remote area and the video kept dumping on me, so I missed that. Haven’t been able to go back and listen just yet. Thanks. That’s what I figured. “Objective” turns out to be a tad a subjective and anecdotal, but that’s dandy enough.

What objective factors went into creating the Gray area? Cleverly named, btw. Someone is going to have to be prepared to present a compelling case for these significant distinctions. And, the Trustee has the ability to force insurers to pay on awards according to these SoL bucking percentages by what mechanism and precedent? I’m still unclear. (My insurance exec wife is dubious.)

I wasn’t referring to the attorneys or costs to resolve or allocation of funds. I’m talking about victim claimants staring down another daunting process of extruding the details of our abuse, again, and dancing through the maze and jumping through the flaming hoops.

What an ungodly mess this is...

Ok. State specific. I’m just reacting to this quote and will need to click to the link later or tomorrow. (I appreciate that you already posted it once.) The first part of that paragraph is about delayed discovery of psychological injury, the other, fraudulent concealment. I’m not seeing the jump to the FC statement, but I will check it out in context.

There is at least one I know of for p-positive.

Self-interested curiosity here. If you were abused in Gray 1- Gray 3, how does the Trustee determine into which shade of Gray bucket thou shalt be dropped? What is the abuse Tier in the G1 is different that in G2 is different than that in G3? Is your conclusion of “almost impossible” based on case law and/or statute?

I was just speaking to why they may not be celebrating the Plan. The 3-Ds can also be Delay, Delay & Delay, PLC.

I want to be there for voir dire and jury selection. They will need to impanel law professors and insurance experts. That’ll be a great trial!

I’d start with, because they didn’t get their crack at whittling down claims and they wanted BSA and the LCs to take up more of the cash slack so they don’t eventually have to, however that comes to pass. Defend, defend, defend.