johnsch322

As long as there are those who downplay what happened There will never be enough of this.

It is a comment from a former BSA National insider. Why would you cast aspersions on MJ? Surely he was higher up the knowledge chain then yourself. He was laid off from a position of Youth Protection and not replaced by anyone. He is an acknowledged expert in his field. What more do you need?

If as much effort was made to combat the issue as was made to hide the danger, we may not be having this conversation. This from Michael Johnson former Youth Protection Director of the BSA "In my professional opinion, the truth is clear: no child is safe in Scouts BSA programs. The institution, as it stands today, continues to be a HIGH-RISK1 organization for child sexual abuse, due to the accessibility and opportunity the program presents to a range of sex offenders. Scouts BSA’s continued disregard for needed safety reforms, the organization’s long- established business and progra

Unfortunately, some posters see us as greedy and looking for more than our pain has been valued in similar cases.

Soo it is perfectly OK if you depict survivors as Peanuts characters looking for a handout but calling the perversion files as they are known today wrong? I would bet donuts for dollars you don't give an answer.

I am a little confused by what you are saying is the "right side". James E West was the Chief Scout Executive from 1911 to 1943 and would have definitely known of the creation of the "perversion files" and it was under his direction that everything was to be kept hidden. Soo what is the "right side" he would be on?

Fred I have always felt your sincerity in your posts.

The system failed the victims. I am a victim of John L Brady and I was never asked about my abuse. If I had been asked I would have told them about his accomplice. How many more times did his accomplice victimize children. How would my life had turned out if I had been asked and then been offered therapy. I honestly believe that the BSA had a keep it quiet policy and that greatly contributed to the amount of CSA that was going on.

You can reply and the replies to you should be civil. That is what it should be and I know that at times my own emotions get the better of me. The unfortunate fact in all of this is Child Sexual Abuse has been a part of scouting for a very long time. The survivors who are posting were scouters so these posts are relevant to the forum. Because of the bankruptcy a lot of old wounds have been reopened and some of us are less equipped to handle the pain. For me personally it is posters who try to whitewash with wide brushes. For others it could be something else. It may be hard for those whose

I think what should be noted here is that John L Brady was able to molest and rape 11 plus boys in a short period of time. As far as the families go no one except themselves knows what pressure was put on them to not prosecute from the BSA. And I also know that he had an accomplice which would have come out if every boy was interviewed to find out if they also had been molested and raped. And this is just one perpetrator. I know this firsthand it is not supposition or speculation. By not following thru properly and protecting youth, not pushing for punishment a case could easi

I find you are as far from a Doofus Magoo as one could be.

There definitely is no clearcut answers to anything you have just brought up. My attorneys are asking for a yes vote and their reasoning sounds like what the coalition was saying 6 months ago.

I take no offense. For myself I call them like I see them. I am not always correct. The reason I brought up Purdue Pharma and the Sacklers is the third party releases. If the plan is confirmed it appears the DOJ will challenge this upon appeal. So if that happens will the LC’s CO’s and most importantly the insurance companies up their settlement offers?

All else aside I think we should all keep in mind that this settlement is a long way from being done. It has to go thru confirmation and most importantly the appeals process. Just look at Purdue Pharma the Sacklers have offered up an additional 1 Billion dollars.

I feel like there are a lot of sheep out there. I feel like most of them voted to accept in the initial voting. I am not calling you a "sheep" heck you are a self-professed "lottery winner", lucky for you.

I was speaking from a perspective of myself. I do not have to be a sheep and I would personally feel that way if I now voted yes. I can stand up for what I believe, and I do not believe in the settlement for the stated reason and my only voice is my vote. Obviously, you have the same choices that I do, and I respect that.

It’s funny how I do not feel like I won the lottery just because I am in an open state (California). I also do not feel like I have to accept something just because I am told it is the best as it will be after being told there will be more from LC’s, CO’s and insurance companies. But that is not the reason I will not be changing my vote and maybe not changing it probably won’t change anything. I am not changing it because it isn’t fair to those in closed states.

For anyone who may be interested I am not going to change my vote from reject to yes. We may be pawns in this bankruptcy, but we do not have to act like sheep. We were told "fair and equitable" and in this plan we are far from fair and there is no equality.

One last one from me. As a child my father was stationed in Germany and as a family we went to Dachau. It was one of the most moving experiences I ever had. I could feel the presence of the souls who lost their life. To this day I can recall that feeling.

Thru this forum I know that I am not alone but exactly what that means I am not sure of. I have connected with fellow survivors and have felt their pain as I believe they have felt mine. I have tried to stand up to those who have tried to minimalize the damage that has been done and at the same time tried to insinuate that we are greedy. I have laughed at posts and cried over others. I have learned about mass tort bankruptcy and I wish I never had to. I have learned that I and my fellow survivors were pawns at the hands of our perpetrators and continue to be pawns within this bankruptcy.

How about if I just leave it at disappointment in the $amounts?

You are probably correct maybe I should have said that some or most are disappointed in the amounts they will get and might prefer to take a chance on their state opening up. I think the coalition lawyers did a good job at selling snake oil in this situation.

This is how I feel, a BSA National only bankruptcy preserves the right of claimants in open states to sue if their state opens up. As the settlement read now the future right to sue is being taken away for paltry dollar amounts and some if not most of the claimants in those states would rather bet for the future. This would only mean that those with legitimate claims in open states would have to wait longer for their settlements as they would have to file a state claim against the LC's and CO's.

I would like someone from a closed state answer this please.

I also have lived for over 50 years with the scars of my abuse. In a perfect world there would be no open or closed states we all would be able to receive the value of our abuse. I wasn't trying to scold or chastise you. I do not feel lucky in any of this and honestly wish none of it happened to any of us, but I cannot rewrite history. The only equity I see for those in closed states is a BSA National bankruptcy only and for that reason I will not be changing my vote. That might make it more difficult for me but would leave doors open for people like yourself and @ThenNowif your states chan