Jump to content

Chapter 11 announced


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

What is legally right is not always morally right.

I would encourage everyone to not ask @ThenNow to rehash particular circumstances. They can be found by patiently browsing his posts. From what I read, they were far from legal. His claim would have b

Posted Images

On 4/1/2021 at 4:10 PM, ThenNow said:

All intellectual property is wedded to the congressionally chartered entity or entities. It goes away and they can't "deal" or assign it.

Let's say National is liquidated and the LCs remain separate to live another day. You do understand, without the protection of a release by the abuse survivors they would be the named defendants in the sexual abuse lawsuits, along with the COs/SOs, yes? That's the reason people are calling to "burn it all [National] down" and liquidate. The most significant assets are with the secondary, "non-party" entities and insurance policies. 

The intellectual property is owned by National, but what makes you think they don't have full control over it the way any other entity would; including the right to license it?  I will grant you that if the organization goes away, there would no longer be anyone to do ongoing licensing, but that doesn't mean they couldn't make it all "public use", or license it to the WOSM, in perpetuity and have that hold up past their liquidation. 

And yes, I realize without an agreement the LCs and COs aren't covered.  Ideally I'd like to see a settlement that leaves BSA intact and functional even if some of the property was scraped away.  But my sympathy for abuses survivors doesn't extend to the point of being willing to see the BSA as a program go away, or even to selling off the local camps; and I know that if cases had to be filed against local councils and COs ONLY, many of them (definitely not all) would wither up and blow away.  Between having to file and litigate the case in the state/district the abuse took place in and it being easier to actually argue against vague/unreliable allegations from decades ago with a smaller number of cases; I think most of the cases wouldn't stand a chance in actual litigation.

Plus, as much as the lawyers (and some victims) would like to get LCs and COs on the hook for this, in reality they are a much harder target if they have to be sued directly.  The primary justification for most of the liability against the BSA is "You had all this data that showed pedophiles were infiltrating your program but didn't tell anyone".  But that's not going to be true with the LCs and especially the COs.  I don't think there is any disputing the fact that the BSA didn't advertise their data on abuse accusations, even with the LCs, let alone the COs.  So while each LC might be aware of accusations made locally, that's it.  At that point, a defense against liability of "This person had never been accused or convicted of a crime so how would we know to screen them out?" becomes much stronger, particularly given how good most pedophiles are at disguising themselves.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, elitts said:

Between having to file and litigate the case in the state/district the abuse took place in and it being easier to actually argue against vague/unreliable allegations from decades ago with a smaller number of cases; I think most of the cases wouldn't stand a chance in actual litigation.

I can't speak to all of your thoughts as well as others certainly can. I do think you may well underestimate the reliability, clarity, corroboration, witness availability and strength inherent in a sufficient number of valid claims to crash the bus. It seems underestimation is somewhat epidemic. (Refer to he responses to the now infamous "chart.") All I can say is, give me a shot in court along with one or two of the other guys victimized by our abuser, and we'll see what's what. Won't be pretty. Team me up with all of them, by the looks of it in the 6-10 range, and it's SHOW TIME. The negligence and reckless endangerment threads are not as thin as you believe, imho. Again, I know my case well. Not so much the other 83,836.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/4/2021 at 5:08 AM, David CO said:

I don't believe it.  

 

They included sexual harassment in the definition, and with as broadly as some folks think that extends, it becomes easier to imagine.  It's much like the whole 1:4 women will be sexually assaulted statistic.  (they included stuff like any kind of kiss without consent as a sexual assault)

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, David CO said:

He won.  His kid was given a "C".

personal story ... sadly ... LOL ... I recently had a rather hard headed discussion with my youngest son where I emphasized I did not view a C as something to be proud of.  ... I might have said that "C" reflected he attended, was breathing and awake, but it did not reflected that he learned anything.  ...   It's not that I was that upset about the grade itself.  I was upset that he was holding up the C as if it's something he should be proud of.   He's in school.  I expect him to invest effort to learn.  If he invests effort, he should be able to get at least a B.   C is a good indication he did not invest the effort.

He didn't like the class.  So he didn't care.   ... That was not acceptable.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

I can't speak to all of your thoughts as well as others certainly can. I do think you may well underestimate the reliability, clarity, corroboration, witness availability and strength inherent in a sufficient number of valid claims to crash the bus. It seems underestimation is somewhat epidemic. (Refer to he responses to the now infamous "chart.") All I can say is, give me a shot in court along with one or two of the other guys victimized by our abuser, and we'll see what's what. Won't be pretty. Team me up with all of them, by the looks of it in the 6-10 range, and it's SHOW TIME. The negligence and reckless endangerment threads are not as thin as you believe, imho. Again, I know my case well. Not so much the other 83,836.

I don't actually doubt the severity of many of the claims, or that there were cases of negligence.  Where my doubt really comes into play when it comes to actually prosecuting lawsuits, is in the area of direct liability.  If an abuser had been accused and the BSA failed to act, I think there should be liability.  If the BSA admitted a known abuser due to negligence (as opposed to being deceived), I think there is liability.  But I don't think that the simple fact of a pedophile (who hasn't been caught) being a registered scouter means the BSA should be held liable for the rapists actions. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, yknot said:

I think this depends on where you are. I started going into the local districts in the early 2000s and teachers were rarely alone with kids by that point. There was almost always a parent or an aide in the classroom. Open door policies. One on one was often done at desks in hallways. After Sandy Hook, a lot of schools also put in surveillance cameras. School busses have cameras. School grounds have exterior cameras. You might think teachers are alone with kids -- and in some cases they are -- but they are rarely unobserved.  

Yep.  Most of the time there are "open doors" and smart teachers try to avoid being alone.  But students are often in the building at all hours when there are often few other observers.  Those wanting to can and will find/create opportunities.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, elitts said:

I don't actually doubt the severity of many of the claims, or that there were cases of negligence.  Where my doubt really comes into play when it comes to actually prosecuting lawsuits, is in the area of direct liability.  If an abuser had been accused and the BSA failed to act, I think there should be liability.  If the BSA admitted a known abuser due to negligence (as opposed to being deceived), I think there is liability.  But I don't think that the simple fact of a pedophile (who hasn't been caught) being a registered scouter means the BSA should be held liable for the rapists actions. 

The problem is ... a single case can result in a very large verdict.  For example, the 2010 Oregon case of a $18.5M verdict for 1 case is a warning.

https://abcnews.go.com/WN/boy-scouts-pay-man-185m-punitive-damages/story?id=10463429

Most councils could face 10s if not hundreds of cases.  I doubt they can handle the legal fees let alone 1 or 2 losses of this magnitude.  

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

Most councils could face 10s if not hundreds of cases.  I doubt they can handle the legal fees let alone 1 or 2 losses of this magnitude.  

From the claims data analysis done by the TCC, and CynicalScouter's rundown of the LCs, all have claims against them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, elitts said:

Regardless of whether or not they thought they were going to be included in the lawsuits, it should have been a heads up to get their ducks in a row. 

From my knowledge of Scouting back when and up to today, I'm also baffled by the lack of strategic organizational, financial and risk management planning. With the number or high-level attorneys and professionals associated with the organization, what were they thinking? Also, what were they doing? This goes to YPT, too. (DavidCO - please don't get your waterboard.) This is personal and corporate tax, estate and legacy planning 101. Maybe 201. Put stuff in trust. Create holding companies. Install distance and buffer entities. Protect and sequester assets. Don't commingle. It sounds complicated, but it's not so much so that an organization like the BSA couldn't have a poop sheet to tell LCs how to do what...years ago. Just sayin'. They brought this on themselves with denial and a good deal of arrogance, imho. That relates to the asset scramble and the abuse cases. Fast and loose.

Edited by ThenNow
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This loooong topic which became impossible to navigate during the big slow is now locked , however the Chapter 11 discussion continues in new topic

Also, the recent embedded Eagle discussion now has its own separate topic

RS

Edited by RememberSchiff
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...