johnsch322

12 minutes ago, Ojoman said:

I had to check out several 'red flags' on volunteers with similar names and ages to people on the ineligable volunteer list which the lawyers suing us renamed the perversion files... catchy isn't it.

Kind of ironic that BSA had a list of known perpetrators, but they would not voluntarily release the list to survivors. Yet one of the former BSA employees is now espousing that victims/survivors should go after the actual perpetrators. Imagine if 40 years ago I had wanted the name of my perpetrators (one of them is in the files) and asked about any knowledge they may have had about incidents in the time period I was abused. They would have roadblocked me and any lawyer I had at the time. I could of filed suit asking for the knowledge and they would have fought me all the way to the state supreme court...oh wait they actually happened in 2012 in real case.  Thank you to all the lawyers that made that happen.

11 hours ago, Ojoman said:

Perhaps...

Allow me to point out a few facts to you:

Majority of claims involved BSA employees and volunteers at the local level and the courts had already established that the LC's were directly connected to national.

For most of the abused due to their young age they had no recollections of their abusers' names. BSA would not give the troop rosters or other info to help anyone recollect.  

BSA did know what was happening hence the perversion files.

Because of threats and feelings of shame/guilt a vast majority of survivors told no one or very few people of what happened to them. Even if they had rape kits and DNA analysis where part of the future for most cases.

The BSA using "pitbull" lawyers had already lost quite a few cases or had settled with victims before the cases went to court.

BSA voluntarily went into bankruptcy as business decision because the organization knew it would not be able to survive because it had already lost so many state court cases. The bankruptcy procedures were not about guilt it was about how little the BSA, Local Councils, Charter Organizations, and insurers could get away with paying to claimants.

As a last point I ask politely that you not use how little some claimants may receive as an argument for what a bad hand the BSA was dealt. 

33 minutes ago, Ojoman said:

Meaning no disrespect to survivors... if any youths were abused by council staff then they ought to receive a significant settlement from that council. The vast majority of cases were volunteers that violated the trust of  parents, chartered partners and the youth. Those are the ones that ought to be in jail and pay compensation. 1.4 billion divided by 82k comes out to around $1,700 per person on average. That is inadequate for anyone that was sexually abused. Having said that, the vast majority of scouts were not abused and had a positive experience in the program. To force councils to deplete their cash reserves and sell off properties and increase fees to pay damages for abuses committed by pedophiles that lied to get access to kids is not right. I can understand anyone that was abused being angry and frustrated and wanting justice. Personally, the one case I came in contact with in my 30 years as a professional the guy ended up in jail where he belonged. That, at least, put the blame where it belonged. 

You are so misinformed. 

5 minutes ago, Ojoman said:

Personally I think the settlement was a bad deal for the BSA for a number of reasons. The NBC documentary said that of the 2.4 BILLION that the claiments would get 1.4 Billion (average $1,700) and the lawyers would split 1 Billion. Makes a lot of lawyers and law firms very wealthy. Most of the claims (90%) were over 30 years old. Very few cases involved BSA employees or camp staff as abusers so why sue the BSA and not the abusers? The lawyers went for the deep pockets... imagine trying to track down 10's of thousands of predators, many of whom had died and others with little or no assets. In so many cases the BSA employees were 3 or 4 times removed from the incident. The scout might disclose to a leader or parent or other adult and they would contact perhaps the council or chartered partner that would contact the local council who would notify the national office. Most BSA staff at any level really only had hearsay, 2nd or 3rd hand information that might not be allowed in court. Add to that little or no physical evidence. The BSA lawyers didn't do a very good job of defending the National organization. The BSA needed some 'pitbull' lawyers to defend it. I say, go for a new trial. I doubt that the BSA has much to lose and a lot to gain.... as long as they get some new lawyers to represent them. 

 

All of what you say here is very disrespectful to survivors. 

7 minutes ago, JBWest said:

Use a free clinic if you must, but you are unlikely to get good service from claims consolidators who are nominally in the employ of a law firm.

From my understanding the lawyer from the AVA firm says he knew that mistakes had been made before the plan was passed but never spoke up. I say let everything stand as is and have those claimants sue their respective lawyers for malpractice. Might make more from their insurance than they would have from a valid claim.

1 hour ago, Eagle1970 said:

Just wondering how you can select a quick-pay option "without understanding its ramifications".  The form was very clear, to me.

With all of the TCC and Coalition Town Halls explaining everything it seems like it would have been impossible to check that box not knowing the ramifications. 

5 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

One of the attorneys is on the record,

One attorney Tim Kosnoff. But one attorney is not a movement...it is just one opinion.

32 minutes ago, Tron said:

This is the core point of the lawsuit and bankruptcy for so many; they want BSA to fold, they are not seeking justice.

Yes, there was lawsuits prior to the bankruptcy, but the core point of the bankruptcy is the survival of the BSA. The bankruptcy took away ability to seek justice thru the courts in the form of lawsuits.

But then for many blaming the survivors of abuse wanting to be fairly compensated is an easy way out for their explanation of all that is wrong in the BSA.

18 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Agreed, so four wrongs still do not make a right.

Yes, but the first two wrongs means that the organization BSA put themselves in a position of having to pay for what happened. All of the property, Rockwell paintings, gas rights and insurance policies etc. etc. was acquired prior to entering bankruptcy. Very little of the settlement is coming from promissory notes. 

In fact, future or present BSA members hopefully will gain from what has come out of the settlement which is enhanced YPT. I believe the rise in fees is not because of the settlement but more because of loss of membership. Less members mean loss of revenue and increase of fees.

1 hour ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Two wrongs do not make a right.

In my opinion the two wrongs were first the CSA itself and the second was the cover up by the BSA. The third has been the BSA electing to enter bankruptcy which took away most of the legal rights of the survivors. 

When all else fails and you can't really write a good response use the down vote or the sad face. 

3 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Passing on part of the cost to current members.

If you find that the cost of belonging to an organization who has to pay for their past too expensive you can always quit.

1 hour ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Two wrongs do not make a right.

If the first wrong was the CSA, what was the second?

30 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

As you stated, not everywhere. I visit high schools on a regular basis. I get buzzed into the office, register via computer which takes my photo and issues me a badge that is a sticker. No ID or fingerprints required.

 

I had to present my drivers license to get access into my daughters high school. 

3 hours ago, yknot said:

Things don't always show up on background checks. Parental searches have turned up convictions, charges, and headlines that have resulted in people being removed from kid facing roles despite having passed recent checks. I don't know what to make of that except maybe one of the youth protection guidelines should be for parents to also do searches. People who repeatedly slide out of accusations reported in headlines without charges or convictions should be a red flag but not sure if they are picked up on these checks. 

you are correct not everything may show and for that reason every possible avenue of investigation should be used.

50 minutes ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

You've got a point, although I have to admit that I was thinking "well, at least they're not trying to fingerprint me".

My worry isn't so much what the BSA is going to do with it, it's more about whether criminals could steal the information from the BSA. And to be honest, I don't really know how well-founded it is. 

In the case of giving my SSN that concern is still there, but it's also obvious to me that SSN is required for any even theoretically effective background check. So, it's a bit take it or leave it.

Perhaps the important question to ask is what combination of information and checks of scout-facing volunteers is needed to be very effective. Presumably what background checks turn up can be made more effective by cross-checking with other things, like ID and fingerprints, but I'm not sure where you've already gotten excellent detection of pedos (and anyone else who might hurt children in some other way) and more checking doesn't really improve things any more. Somebody out there knows, though.

You can fake ID and Social Security number but I have not heard of anyone faking fingerprints. If you are going to do a thorough background check I would think that fingerprinting and running them thru the FBI database would be mandatory. 

19 minutes ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

Nope.

Fingerprinting and running them thru databases would seem to be a must do. Can you imagine the next lawsuit (outside of the bankruptcy) when a lawyer says to a jury that the BSA says that they are doing everything possible to keep children safe yet they don’t do fingerprinting. 

59 minutes ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

recently went through all this to become a leader, and I have never showed ID to anyone in Scouts BSA. I filled out background check papers, but they ran that based on the names and SSN I gave. I imagine it's not just a matter of making up a new name to fool a background check, but the easy step of showing ID was omitted either way unlike with the background checks for employment where you also have to show ID and work authorization papers that march what comes up in the background check.

I work at the same company as our CC, so there is a de facto check on that the name I gave is my real name and that I am who I say I am, but that's luck.

Just curious, did they run your fingerprints thru any data base or even ask for your fingerprints?

2 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

This is the first time that I have heard about the possibility of requesting a driver's license (DL) or some other form of government issued identification (ID).  My guess is that the concern was who would be responsible to check such an ID?  The Scout Master when a registration is turned into the Troop?  The Chartered Organization is actually responsible but are nearly never present.  Many IDs have shading to prevent copying, and no one will leave a DL with someone to get it checked in a day or two.  Would have been helpful to have asked for an explanation.

I ask people for their Drivers License and copy them every day as part of my job in the auto industry. It is required under red flag laws and i must even scrutinize them to make sure the DL is valid and that the person looks like the picture. This is for fraud protection to make sure that the person is who they say they are when applying for credit and even if paying cash for a vehicle. If no ID is required to be a volunteer or scout leader, then I see where this could be major issue.

2 hours ago, ThenNow said:

For once, I am going to have an opinion that diverges from my brother John.

Your opinions are always welcome and looked forward to.

I watched Scouts Honour a couple of days ago. Took me a little while to get up the courage since I wasn't sure about any triggers.

In my opinion it was well done and very factual.

Michael Johnson presented his opinion very eloquently and was quite believable and Steve McGowan the ex-counsel of the BSA was able to give what has become the old guard BSA talking points. 

I recommend everyone to watch it.

2 hours ago, fred8033 said:

Stop trying to chastise

I made that post because it was the first time, I read it and I thought it was interesting from both sides of the coin. Using the number 90,000 claimants may not be accurate but neither is 80,000 there are more than 82,000. I guess PBS is wrong also. 

2 hours ago, fred8033 said:

Missing is the late night infomercial marketing; the lawyers not vetting claims; etc.  The number is definitely higher than expected, but the 92,000 is wrong.  Even the 80,000 seems extremely improbable.   

The Wikipedia was about BSA Sex abuse cases and what the BSA has done to try to curb the amount of abuse, not so much centered on the bankruptcy itself. I would say it is a general overview.  I saw no need to pick out anything within it to attack any point of view.

If anyone here has not read the Wikipedia page on Boy Scout sexual abuse cases than here is the link

Boy Scouts of America sex abuse cases - Wikipedia

Please read the whole page.

Yes @skeptic once again you are correct, and I guess from you feeling sad that you finally realize that the BSA created the perfect environment for pedophiles with their indoctrination to young boys to trust and obey what their Boy Scout Leaders said and did. And maybe now you can see that they covered up the amount of damage that the pedophiles did to young boys by not releasing the files that they had to the public. Because if it was known to the general public then maybe one parent would have not let their son join an organization that ultimately scarred them for life.