ThenNow

Yes. Yes. No. Can't answer etceteras. Yes, but "Scouting" was still in contact with the parents. Feel free to wager. You don't think there's a very real possibility they were asked to stand down and let the BSA deal with it? Really? It was taken seriously if there was an incident report and a jacket created. I can check the law at the time, but I have no idea why you would assume the "right laws" were not in place. Yes, as I said, I'm sure the family didn't want ABMSL ("ABUSED BY MY SCOUT LEADER") tattooed on their 11 year old's forehead. I get it 100% and said so. My dad would

Not sure what you mean. LC's aren't voting on the Plan or any Plan. Not sure I know what you mean here either. The BSA has committed to "equitably compensate ALL survivors of abuse" in Scouting. That's the deal. That's why we're here, open state or no. They invited this and will not have an approved plan without the "closed state" claimants. They invited us, we filed and we are now voting creditor/claimants. So, yes. We retain our right to vote. That time-bar isn't going down as you suggest AT THE LEAST as it related to the BSA portion of the "equitable compensation." The TCC is commit

By no means my area of the law, but I think they pretty much crashed dad's Caddy without a shoulder restraint or seatbelt. It's totaled. Now we're in the market for a tank they can't wreck. Enter the TCC. No way the BSA SHOULD "remain" anywhere but in the backseat (or in the trunk), at this point. I don't think they should get another at bat. This is ridic.

Is this paywalled or locked for anyone? Sent to my family and they can’t get in.

Now I understand. I was confused as well. And you were 1000% justified in that state of confusion. I don't know how I got where I went, other than to say I was a bit crazed, dazed and gravely disappointed. I'll blame that.

Not my point, which is totally my fault. Got lost in the forest. This is research for my case, since I am my own attorney. That case still bothers me, regardless, but didn't set out to try a dissection. Just wound up there. Poor frog. Never was good at that. Anyway...here's the punchline that was very buried in my ranting and rambling. This is my concern and, "Oh, YIKES!" moment. My DE (turned SE) was intimately involved in reporting and managing the other case. It happened one year after the first time I was abused. It put him on notice of this type of grooming (porn, booze, sexual sugge

I can see that. Still troubles me. Sounds like he never existed and the incident certainly didn't make the papers or hit the grapevine. I would've known about it. The place was full of my family from top to bottom and all new I was in Scouts. In part, that's my problem. Delete, redact, erase, cross out, white out, take off the rolls...whatever. It and he were gone from view and out of sight for those who should've been made aware to beware. I understand why parents didn't pursue, but what a mess, regardless.

Child Sexual Abuse. Detailed the incident. I don't know that the particulars are relevant or is that not what you're asking? I see no indication that there was a confrontation of any kind. Not noted in the police report, filed by the parents with a statement from the Scout. I'm now jaded by the "deletion" and wouldn't be at all surprised if it was a backdated resignation. I hear your point and it's valid. Neither of us know for sure. The SE is alive and well and living large. Maybe I'll call him. Not in the BSA, but a business man. The "deletion"? If that's what you mea

No incident report/awareness of the abuse is acknowledged by the BSA or by the police report until the second week of the month. His resignation was dated the first week of the month. Appears, to me, as a backdate. Further, from one of the Regional Executives: "...and the attached letter we received from you dated _____ 11th, concerning ___________. We have placed this information in our file and have taken steps to see that his name is deleted from our records as Institutional Representative of Troop __." "Deleted" not noted as resigned.

Sorry. Yeah. I'm going back into it the file. Yes, I may have been premature. Part of what set me off is the DE who became SE, and who I knew well and was around our Unit A LOT, was at the center of this. So, the SE I knew, who lived in my town knew this was going on in my LC, in my District and in my town. The pattern of this incident is very familiar to what happened to me and others in the Unit and he was on notice to be aware of this pattern. He had to have been complicit. It's a bit much for me to process at the moment. Again, apologies...

I doubt anyone but the victims here can relate to what I'm feeling after reading and digesting that file, but I'm shellshocked. The whole ugly picture just hit home in pile driver fashion. This may well force a tectonic shift in my thinking, approach and emotional posture to this whole matter. Vaporizing the incident with date manipulation is pernicious. You simply cannot say an organization, "did the best it could under the circumstances and according to the mores and standards of the day" after reading what I did. I don't care if it was 1973. I cross-referenced and checked the dates 5 times

Oh. Thanks. I'm a bit wild-eyed at this discovery. I don't know what anyone else thinks, but the date on that letter says to me, "we vanished it...didn't happen." The parents didn't press charges, but insisted he be removed. I wonder if that's typical and if they were "asked" to say that to law enforcement. Maybe I don't need to wonder.

For what this is worth, I've been digging around in the IVF and just discovered and thoroughly read an abuse case in my District. It happened during the same period of my abuse, just one year from the first incident. To the best of my recollection and research, all the key BSA professionals involved in the case were the same for the majority of my abuse duration, 1972-1978/9. The DE became the SE the year after my first incident, smack in the middle of the one I found. I knew him well. As to the CSA incident reporting, the correspondence between the parents, law enforcement and BSA is pretty

On average, what do you guys estimate is the average weekly time commitment for a Scout and, separately, a volunteer? I realize the outer will be wildly variable, likely more so for volunteers, but a guesstimated average. For me, this is a critical part of any equation considering involvement and long term commitment to any youth activity. Curious. I know what mine was, but that was decades ago and irrelevant...before the age of the microchip, resume building from birth and the panoply of menu options.

Thank you for your service, past and ongoing, and for the example you are setting for your family and others in all respects. Well done, you!

Not the case at all. I was just asking and appreciate all the perspectives. As to "this is not the military," my SM called us the Green Berets of Scouting. He would measure the placement of patches on our uniforms and sashes, and point out poor stitching.

The provisions you noted seem rather squishy. Enough to bring the CO into the liability tent, but by no means enough to allow the insurers to wash their hands of policy obligation or, of course, give the BSA wiggle room against their own negligence. I'm just trying to cipher out this relatively new terrain (for me). Didn't realize the CO is charged with "conducting" the train. Huh. Quite a layer cake of liability. Plenty of pieces to go around, me thinks. The Chartered Organization agrees to: … • Conduct the Scouting program consistent with BSA rules, regulations, and policies.

"Understanding," as conditions of the policies or by implication? Wouldn't that be a policy by policy and heavily fact-based assessment? I get the general argument, but I still don't buy any blanket defense of coverage denial. They continued to gladly accept premiums-o-plenty far, wide and in the middle of the country. "Cha-Ching! Cha-Ching!"

Do you say that because of the organizational complexity or your experience with a lack of full compliance with the structures as defined and directed by the BSA?

Good grief. No wonder there's confusion, laying off of duties and gaps in the ranks. Forgive me for saying so, but that's quite a web. This all helps me understand why there are so many job openings in the professional areas, as well. As I said, I think the church janitor gave us a key and the Unit was passed to my SM when the previous one became sick with cancer and died shortly after. They key was similarly passed. I don't know if the church was involved, other than I recall the priest visiting a meeting after the new SM was installed. I was a kid, so maybe I missed the behind the scene

Sorry to quote myself, but it seemed the easiest way to include all of you who were kind enough to reply. So, who is responsible (directly and ultimately) for the selection and oversight of Unit leaders and what is the interplay between the COs, who I've come to understand have more responsibility and a greater role than I knew or certainly ever experienced during my 7-8 years in Scouting? I might need a Venn Diagram or A Beautiful Mind string board wall...

Would someone be kind enough to briefly list (or point me to a link) of the professional Scouter tiers? You talk about Key 3 and SE, DE and such. I recall our Scout Executive and District Executive, but don't have a working knowledge of the chain of command, if you will. It might help me understand who's making decisions (or not) at the various levels. Thanks very much.

I thought I was going to get a nice long nap. I woke up for a minute and here we are again. Or, maybe I’m dreaming?

This is extremely interesting. Not something that was on my radar. Shows my limited knowledge of all of this. Although an Illinois ruling, I suppose it could have major ripple effects going forward. I am very curious to do more reading about this case and any commentaries or cross-references to the decision. This goes to the "date of the discovery of injury," as opposed to the date of the abuse, starting the SoL clock. The delayed date of discovery is based on the application of their fraudulent concealment statute. "The statute of limitations issue [is] a question of fact for the jury." Wow.

Whew. I can take a nap...