Jump to content

Chapter 11 announced - Part 3 - BSA's Toggle Plan


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

I think we may look back and see a huge strategic error with the Hartford settlement.  Why even go there

We went there when it happened, so I pretty much agree, from the BSA’s perspective. From my perspective as a victim/survivor BSA CSA claimant, it revealed much and flipped the switch. For that, I’m perfectly content.

Maybe it’s worth noting that when Ms. Lauria changed firms there was a vociferous objection to her and her partners continuing to represent the BSA, due to potential “confidential information” they had previously acquired in dealings with Century. As I’ve said before, and I’m certain she’s a top notch bk attorney, there has been a demeanor and approach I felt was incompatible with this case since I heard her speak at the TCC selection meeting in Delaware. I do believe they chose poorly and it is showing. My take.

5 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

7.  I expect the only chance is give up the HA bases, withdraw the insurance settlement and move on. The other side knows there is likely 10's of billions of dollars at stake with the insurance side.

I think it’s too late. The cow has left the barn and said cattle keeper is well ablaze. 

5 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

(I don't think the TCC lawyers actually directly represent claimants).

Correct. Contrary to what the Coalition has projected, the TCC is the SOLE and EXCLUSIVE representative of ALL victim/survivor BSA CSA claimants. (Sorry. I keep using “CSA.” Is stands for Child Sexual Abuse.)

Edited by ThenNow
Oops.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Forums work well in many ways, but it is probably not the best way to discuss the difficult feelings of this bankruptcy while also discussing the impact to child sex abuse survivors.  However, there a

The mental fallout from my abuse was mostly dormant prior to the current lawsuit. It would still torment me in idle moments. Or at night sometimes when I lay in bed trying not to blame myself after so

I would like to not lock the thread but we seem to be in a rut that we need to get out of before any progress can be made. Here are some observations that might help. First, human dignity is the

Posted Images

15 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

So what?

My COR, CC, and DE had to remove two parents from the committee , because they were bullying scouts. Those two parents lawyered up and I, as scoutmaster, was made out as the criminal in this process. 

Myself and leaders in my troop have put their necks on the line for youth protection, yet as we struggled through this mess the BSA and CO could be held liable, because someone did not fix this fast enough? 

I am a member of the BSA. So when the BSA is being sued, I am being sued. You know who is not being sued? The people actually responsible for the abuse. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Owls_are_cool said:

I am a member of the BSA. So when the BSA is being sued, I am being sued. You know who is not being sued? The people actually responsible for the abuse. 

That's actually not true. Where the abuser is still alive, they are in fact named as defendants in these cases.

So, your facts are just wrong.

29 minutes ago, Owls_are_cool said:

Myself and leaders in my troop have put their necks on the line for youth protection, yet as we struggled through this mess the BSA and CO could be held liable, because someone did not fix this fast enough? 

Yep. Because they failed to do what they were supposed to do or negligent in the way they did it. And because the state legislature(s) allowed the statute of limitations to be reopened on such cases.

And no, you are not being sued. BSA is being sued. The COs are being sued. You are not a named defendant in any of these cases UNLESS you were an abuser.

Edited by CynicalScouter
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Owls_are_cool said:

My COR, CC, and DE had to remove two parents from the committee , because they were bullying scouts. Those two parents lawyered up and I, as scoutmaster, was made out as the criminal in this process. 

Myself and leaders in my troop have put their necks on the line for youth protection, yet as we struggled through this mess the BSA and CO could be held liable, because someone did not fix this fast enough? 

I am a member of the BSA. So when the BSA is being sued, I am being sued. You know who is not being sued? The people actually responsible for the abuse. 

The people responsible for the abuse goes beyond the abuser.  It goes to volunteers, employees and the organization that let it happen.  

I go back to the Scout's Honor article and book.  This dates back to 1991 and shows how BSA knew they had a problem, but kept it quiet.  I recommend reading the articles ... it shows why the BSA is where it is today.

Quote

 

Nearly once every two weeks for the past 19 years, a Scout leader or camp worker has been banned for sexual misconduct with children. Except for a few people at national headquarters, no one - either in the public or in Scouting itself - knew how many Scouts said they were abused.

But Scout officials knew that if the public heard about leaders having sexual relations with boys, parents would be afraid to let their children join.

"Like anybody, we were not interested in broadcasting it," said Joseph Anglim, director of administration for the Boy Scouts. "For years and years it was one of America's greatest secrets."

 

https://www.bishop-accountability.org/news5/1991_05_20_Boyle_Scoutings_Sex.htm

https://www.amazon.com/Scouts-Honor-Patrick-Boyle/dp/1559583657

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Owls_are_cool said:

I am a member of the BSA. So when the BSA is being sued, I am being sued. You know who is not being sued? The people actually responsible for the abuse. 

You keep saying that. Are you certain? Have you reviewed all 870 cases and the criminal statutes of limitations in each respective states? It’s the law, like it or not. You’re “kicking agains the goads,” as the Bible says. Too late now. I do think we did break off a discussion along these lines. 

Do you really want to be sued for real, and not just metaphorically or by implication based on your contributions, dues, time invested and, etc.? The cost of that will be much, much greater. Again, this hyperbole about concomitant “abuse” of the current and future Scouts/Scouters and being sued in proxy does not advance the conversation about this Chapter 11. Just my opinion, of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

The people responsible for the abuse goes beyond the abuser.  It goes to volunteers, employees and the organization that let it happen.  

I go back to the Scout's Honor article and book.  This dates back to 1991 and shows how BSA knew they had a problem, but kept it quiet.  I recommend reading the articles ... it shows why the BSA is where it is today.

Exactly. This was an INSTITUTIONAL failing. BSA knew it had major problems with sexual abuse for decades, hid it, and did not admit it until forced to release the IVF files.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the $650 million Hartford deal, the TCC has come out in the press with its own estimation of how much Hartford should be paying: $8 billion at least.
 

Quote

Jim Stang, an attorney for the tort claimants committee, or TCC, said there are at least 24,000 sexual abuse claims subject to The Hartford’s policies. The actual number is likely significantly higher, given that many victims did not include the dates they were abused on their claim forms, he noted.

“We think their exposure is $8 billion for the 24,000 claims,” Stang said, adding the committee will be objecting to the settlement. “They’re not even paying 10% of what we think they’re on the hook for.”

 

Edited by CynicalScouter
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

“We think their exposure is $8 billion for the 24,000 claims,”

Is anyone aware of the coverage years? The TCC has obviously pegged the number of relevant claims according to those years, as well as indicated there may be more since some claims omitted the year(s).

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Is anyone aware of the coverage years? The TCC has obviously pegged the number of relevant claims according to those years, as well as indicated there may be more since some claims omitted the year(s).

I mentioned previously this all started when Hartford refused to pay out on its insurance policies and BSA sued them in state court over it.

Here's the original petition in that state action. It lists all the Hartford policies.

Exhibit A lists the dates as 1971-1980.

image.thumb.png.80c20907c16ebbf9c86eed27e898fe0a[1].png

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