ThenNow

If the case is broken down to BSA and its affiliates, survivor claimants and attorneys/law firms, the preponderance of the "benefit," particularly financial reward, will go to Team Three on BSA Bankruptcy Survivor Island. I've discovered that cases like this one, and big law bankruptcy specifically, is a very small world. Only two firms were in Delaware to interview before the TCC for the role of counsel. Two. Cases like this are the best advertising imaginable and the promo is not merely free, but you get paid when the ads run. In a transactional case like this with forced compromise, you don't even have to "win." I'm not casting aspersions on these firms or attorneys, just stating facts. As to negative impact or repercussions, as much as I imagine most here will say it is the program for current and future Scouts, I say it is the survivor claimants, many of whom will get little or nothing. For me, this has been a literal near death experience. And, it's no where near at the denouement. Regarding National, I don't see this being particularly painful for "them," after hearing your stories and the reports from the field, as it were.

2018 Snapshot: Here are the median fees according to the type of case: Administrative $813 Bankruptcy $1,200 Collections $450 Contracts $600 Corporate $800 Criminal $750 Elder Law $788 Family Law $1,538 Immigration $950 Juvenile $538 Real Estate $535 Small Claims $478 Traffic $300 Wills & Estates $750

I imagine a lot of you guys are or grew up hunting. Sexual predators are called "predators" for a reason. As prey, I now understand this extremely well, both by examining my experience and through study. Hunters hunt prey. The chose a type of prey and obsess over it. They create environments, food plots, access points, stands and blinds. They gather the right equipment to attract and bag that specific prey and use masking devices, clothing and scents to hide who they really are so as not to scare off the target. They have charts, tracking data, know the terrain, watch the population, the movement patterns and all of the above and on and on. Some of them, maybe most, don't even know they're doing it, like any other predator. It is or was or became hardwired. (I'll avoid wrestling around with that Gordian Knot.) Anyway, I believe any deterrent is of benefit. Maybe not a penultimate or optimal benefit, but some is better than none. I hope it can be made better and eagerly await the YPT effectiveness data I understand is coming out soon. One last note. In reading many accounts of men who were sexually abused as Scouts, the similarity of grooming techniques, contexts, methodologies of isolating victims and even the language used by abusers across a good number of accounts is eerily consistent. Some of them were my story almost to the letter, give or take. As I took in the data and considered it, I told an attorney friend who represents claimants in this case that there has to be some measure of collusion, cooperation and/or sharing of information among predators. The stories read like the abusers have a manual. It's chilling...

I think TCC counsel was taken completely by surprise when the claim numbers skyrocketed. It is a complex case, no doubt. Other than those who assert that "each BSA sexual predator likely abused an average of 100 victims," no one I know expected this. I believe that rough average has some "lifetime of a sexual predator" research backing it up, but extrapolating it across every application and context is scientifically and statistically disingenuous. He who shall not be named noted this 100x potential in press conferences back when, particularly at the presser launching AIS. HWSNBN clearly intended to create this choke point in the case. I honestly don't know if it was purely to control the case and max out the 40% bank run or ensure he could crash it. In so doing, the crew of hedge fund aggregating miners have ensured the attorneys billing the Estate hourly can take the case to the bank. Sad definitely sums it up. As I said above, I watch those monthly applications for fees and expenses and shake my head. They faithfully roll across the docket straight to the accountant stroking checks like so much confetti flying around a ticker-tape parade.

Depending on how policies are written - insured/additional named insured, per occurrence/claims made, and etc. - liquidation and leaving the LC's to fend off suits may or may not be a great thing for plaintiff's attorneys. Do all policies stand and delivery after the principal insured is liquidated? Granted, some LC's have big coin and property assets, so that may be plenty, but if the number of survivor plaintiffs is too high, it's likely to be a race to the trough.

Ha! I have no influence whatsoever. You guys contact your representatives and use your muscle. Another, “HA!” am I correct?

This is the mirror image of an Asset Protection Trust, with the same result. I contend they are, in fact, asset shielding creatures of the state to protect them from creditors masked as maintenance and funding shells. The lease-back and closely held board control, by essentially the same principals of the related lessee entity, are identical. "Arrow WV Inc., in fact, owns the Summit Bechtel Reserve and leases it to the Boy Scouts, according to bankruptcy filings. It was incorporated in Fayette County in June 2009, according to the West Virginia Secretary of State’s office. Texas equity investor Jack D. Furst, who led the Boy Scouts task force chosen to identify a permanent National Jamboree site, is listed as president; current Scouts President and CEO Roger Mosby, vice president; and Charleston attorney and current Scouts general counsel Steve McGowan, secretary."

Ah. I understand now and I agree with you. I'm not sure about the 60%, but those I speak with may be biased, even if they don't know my situation. Many have little sympathy for anyone accused of child sexual abuse, especially to the degree the BSA has. Again, historic "per capita" numbers and the upsides of Scouting are disregarded after hearing the number of claims and reading the stories.

Seems like an easy ask and a fairly simple app build and rollout. How is it monitored, by whom and with what impact? Just wondering, again, if it's a good exemplar with proven results. I can research, as well. Update: From the App Store reviews, it falls down in the implementation. Kids are frequently told they need to report in person. Also, lots of false reports to get alleged abusers/bullies in trouble. Seems to have the potential to be a nightmare for the abused, accused and administrators.

This is a great point and almost assumed it was happening, at least to some degree. Seems right, good and fair, ensuring all parties sign up and on the dotted line.

What organizations and do they have materials available to the public?

My apologies. I shouldn't have used the word "rumor" and then reinforced it with jocularity. All points are solidly sourced.

A few random points: 1) Rumor is, compelling data illustrating the YPT has not been as effective as claimed will be released soon, countering the narrative that the existing program is sufficient and there is no need to address enhanced measures in the Plan. I'm told the data is dispositive. I make no assertion about the effectiveness one way or the other, since I don't know the facts. I do know this is a major issue for many claimants, some of them with positions of influence in the case. If the BSA is unwilling to adopt and implement additional measures, whatever that means, those players will not be supportive of the Plan. Don't shoot the messenger. "I got my news from the Chinese plate!" Another arcane reference and one I use to say, I have it on good authority that this is so. 2) Continuing with the next verse of, "I heard it through the grapevine," apparently National has until Monday at 4PM ET to satisfy the TCC that they are working on and will produce the requested asset data from the LC's. If that doesn't happen, I'm told, the TCC will formally oppose the BSA's motion to extend the protective injunction shielding the LC's from lawsuits. Joinders to that opposition are expected. 3) Subject to further scrutiny by the insurers, should the judge grant their motion for Rule 2004 discovery, there are just south of 60,000 potentially time-barred claims among the remaining 83,837. 4) The guess is that Judge Silverstein may rule on the discovery motion during the March 17 hearing. I heard that one from a little bird. Said plate was otherwise occupied.

One thing I would note on the other side of the "slowing down" argument is the cultural mood against iconic institutions doesn't necessarily result in slowing down reforms. Some people would love to "burn it all down," as has been seen across the country and stated pretty much verbatim in this case. I am not inviting a discussion or debate on culture, ideology or politics, just stating that in the wave of "cancel all vestiges and institutions of the colonizers!", some will see the demise as a thing to be praised and hastened. I hate that, but there it is.

I understood his statement to question whether the filing and "litigating" of 95,000 sexual abuse survivor claims against the Boy Scouts of America, an iconic American institution trapped in time with the #METOO movement, would be enough to inspire SoL reform in the area of child sexual abuse. He said he didn't believe it would have any impact. I said several organizations and state legislators disagree. That's all. Sorry if I misinterpreted.

When Members of Congress take note, in the midst of publicity over the release of the dreaded files and fending off abuse suits, it's on the radar of advocacy groups. In our conversations related to child sexual abuse SoL reform, they specifically mention the BSA and RCC in the same breath. I should have added that CHILD USA and CEO/law professor, Marci Hamilton, have filed friend of the court briefs in BSA cases. They are adamant state that courts are have proper jurisdiction for child sexual abuse cases, not bankruptcy courts.

Nah. I'm sure you're not alone. The explosion of the case numbers in particular, plus the fact that CHILD USA and these legislators HATE the use of bankruptcy to dodge child sexual abuse liability is the combined driver. Magnitude, whether legitimate or not, have elevated the case to a Exhibit #1 for abuse liability avoidance abuse. Doubly abusive, if you will.

CHILD USA and multiple state legislatures strongly disagree with you on this point. I have spoke with the both groups numerous times about this case and the matter of state by state SoL reform.

The TCC's Complaint for Declaratory Judgement on the allegedly restricted assets has this at the heart of their contention. "The Debtors' History of Commingling Assets" is the leadoff hitter.

I've been thinking that for a while and asked others involved in the case why some LC's, who don't sense a legitimate "threat" to their asset base, would submit to voluntary surrender. The answer is as you stated, plus the BSA wants unanimity in order to be "one and done for all." I still didn't like that answer, because I can see it from a LC's viewpoint. If I were risk officer or any officer of a LC, I would know: exactly which legislators and groups are interested in SoL reform; the substance of all bills proposed, when and by whom; the disposition of each with votes cast;" what's going to be proposed; which committee(s) and chairpersons wield control; and so on. Going into this, I would've had a clear sense of the likelihood of seeing a VRA passed in my state. It's an inestimable threat and I can't imagine not having been keenly aware of its every move and machination. Then again, I have the luxury of distance and no need to battle the day to day effort to plug holes in the boat and keep programs afloat. (Another brief poem.) When I survey the map of "closed states," even considering those with pending Victims Rights Act legislation, many of them have legislatures controlled by BSA and/or RCC-inclined Members. Some of these pieces of legislation have come up years in succession, only to die in committee. I know one state has the legislation parked in a committee controlled by a Representative who is Catholic and involved in Scouting. I am not saying that necessarily inclines him to vote against the legislation, but as a matter of fact he is vehemently opposed. All that said, as I mentioned several days ago, the current political climate, coupled with the way the claimant side is reacting to the Plan and the amplification of it in the press, I think some VRA legislation could be dislodged in the wake of the case. Maybe. Those who feel totally safe today, may not be in the not too distant future.

Yeah. What he said. (I already loosened the lid, he just took it off...)

I have a vague recollection about this somewhere in my little brain. In those cases, an individual Diocese effectively equates to BSA National in this case. The RCC suits aren't against the local churches, though many are named I believe, because they don't have the big dollar assets. The local churches are more like Troops/Units. I don't believe there is a "RCC of the USA" or otherwise, in terms of a legal entity. The Vatican is a sovereign state and not reachable.

Not knowing a ton about franchises, I have looked at this more like the employee vs. independent contractor scenario, which is more familiar to me and provides a number of boxes to check to see which is which. The BSA and LC's want to say these are completely "independent contractors" who do their own thing, not sufficiently directed and dictated to by National to be deemed an "employee." I know this is apple to oranges, but bear with me. When you do a test of employee or indie contractor, you look at the factors of control, autonomy and influence on behavior and the overall relationship. The IRS has a 20 Factor Test, with three categories under which the points are sorted: Financial Control, Behavioral Control and Relationship of the Parties. To avoid applying all the factors, which is not the test one would use for this relationship anyway though I found it helpful, I just can't see how the LC's could be ruled independent, legally autonomous and "uncontrolled" entities. The various and specific Charter Rules and Regulations, especially the rights to subsume assets upon disbanding, do not bode well for a finding of independence. I'm not saying this as a claimant, just trying to look at it as objectively as I can. We shall see, indeed.

Right. I recall now. Thanks to both of you for the prompt. This reinforces the negative inference: the absence of any notices of appearance and/or a reservations of rights reveals the that ain't no "there there," I'm thinkin'.

The resolution of those points pretty much holds the keys to the kingdom, me thinks. There's a lot of arguing, resolving and ruling represented on that one page.