Jump to content

Chapter 11 Announced - Part 5 - RSA Ruling


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 918
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I also was abused at home. Best thing my father ever did was leave. Scouting was my safe place, and all of the adults were positive role models who i can never thank enough. They showed me positive wa

@David CO Sometimes, things end up being what you weren't trying to do. You may not think that your troop was a safe place, that you didn't adopt any of the scouts, and that it wasn't a big brother pr

Sir, I find your comments juvenile, vile and disgusting. You certainly disgrace the few decent people I have personally spoke with who are still trying to defend the organization as being still worth-

Posted Images

25 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Sorry it’s all confusing 

No surprise there. I suspect you took my description a little to literally. If the words tcc, stang, kossnoff, rsa, omni, the names of the insurance companies, the judge's name, any dates the case must abide by or plans 1 through 5, put it here. I'm sure I'm missing a lot but will try and keep a list. 

Honestly, I suspect a lot of people are lurking here because this thread is the best analysis of this case. I suspect there are a few CEs following this as it's the best source of information around. Those not reading this are posting comments like "there's been a deal made and so ...." So, for the most part, this thread is related to the facts and expert opinions of this case. There will always be grey areas but I hope this helps.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, skeptic said:

 

I continue to find it odd that Mr. K. continues to post on Twitter after being indirectly chastised by the court.  

Meanwhile, he claims he did not approve some of the claims with his signature and had not idea that the aggregator would do such a thing.  Is that much different then than Scout officials suggesting that they did not know that some abusers might find their way into the program?  There is a likelihood that Mr. K. knew full well that by pawning it off into their hands that cutting corners would occur, as he has dealt with these people for a long time, and they are known for pushing the envelope and getting away with things if they can.    Still, Mr. K. is surprised at the suggestion?  Where is that bridge?😬

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MattR said:

Honestly, I suspect a lot of people are lurking here because this thread is the best analysis of this case. I suspect there are a few CEs following this as it's the best source of information around. Those not reading this are posting comments like "there's been a deal made and so ...." So, for the most part, this thread is related to the facts and expert opinions of this case. There will always be grey areas but I hope this helps.

Pretty much spot on. I know I made some comments at roundtable when the topic came up, and everyone, including the DE, was listening. At a district meeting with council folks in attendance who signed the NDA, I estimated how much my council will owe, based upon what I have gleamed here. Their eyes expressed shock that I knew as much as I did.

Edited by Eagle94-A1
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

, I estimated how much my council will owe, based upon what I have gleamed here. Their eyes expressed shock that I knew as much as I did.

Knowledge is power. I don’t mind when council and other big wigs say they cannot say something because of NDAs. I understand being under a LEGAL restriction to not talk.

What I oppose is the culture of secrets that permeates BSA. There are cliques, those “in” and those “out”. Information if not withheld then not shared openly and freely.

I just point this out: BSA as I demonstrated is literally the only large not for profit I know of of one focused on children and youth where you literally cannot figure out from their website who 1) senior leadership is (other than the national key-3) and 2) board members.

I will start to take BSA’s commitment to openness more seriously when they start to open up about ANYTHING.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

Knowledge is power. I don’t mind when council and other big wigs say they cannot say something because of NDAs. I understand being under a LEGAL restriction to not talk.

What I oppose is the culture of secrets that permeates BSA. There are cliques, those “in” and those “out”. Information if not withheld then not shared openly and freely.

I just point this out: BSA as I demonstrated is literally the only large not for profit I know of of one focused on children and youth where you literally cannot figure out from their website who 1) senior leadership is (other than the national key-3) and 2) board members.

I will start to take BSA’s commitment to openness more seriously when they start to open up about ANYTHING.

I agree 100%. Knowledge is power. I was able to estimate my LC contribution within 10% after following this forum. The BSA does not communicate well, and that may be their downfall even if they survive bankruptcy. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, skeptic said:

I continue to find it odd that Mr. K. continues to post on Twitter after being indirectly chastised by the court.  

In 1946, Dr. Louis Slotin, while demonstrating how to assemble two spheres of fissionable material, which together were enough for critical mass, slipped.  He was using screwdrivers on a lab bench to keep the two spheres apart and thereby prevent a sustained nuclear reaction. When he slipped, the spheres connected, and he received a lethal dose..

It is called "tickling the dragon's tail."

Mr. K might read "The Strange Death of Louis Slotin."

Judges have very long memories.

Edited by SiouxRanger
tale is not tail. Love auto obfuscate.
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2021 at 6:58 AM, CynicalScouter said:

According to Kosnoff TCC has “caved” in the RSA and forthcoming plan 5.0

I have now been reading Kosnoff and his Twitter feed and keeping wondering if there was some other Town Hall I missed. He’s convinced himself and victims the TCC has already accepted the “11th hour deal”.

https://twitter.com/nievesenrique68/status/1436459729832878096?s=21

again and I can’t wait for the transcript to come out but I heard absolutely nothing to that effect. Stang indicated, at most, they had no idea what the new plan entrailed. There was absolutely nothing about the TCC accepting anything.

 

 

 

Edited by CynicalScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites

In his defense, I saw and heard things that sounded very much like the RSA/4.0 framework was a done deal. 

The Trust Distribution aspects were affirmed by Lucas and Stang with certitude. 
 

Will I get a vote? Yes

Will I get less if I was abused in a state with a bad statute? Yes

How much less will I get? There are tiers depending on how bad the statute is in you abuse state  

Lots of talk about the 3500 dollar benefits and how quickly those men could get the cash to pay their bills  

The body language was telling as was the gratuitous comments by Chambers and Kennedy.  Paraphrasing …Money isn’t everything, ya know, and wait until you see the non-monetary conditions and safeguards that will be put in place.

She’s a real cream puff AND we will throw in a pair of floor mats.

Personally I’ve seen this movie before.

They are trying to goose up the Hartford settlement a little and get Century to pay some. Some charters will kick in but the remaining assets and insurance coverage not only BSA but all the separate coverage owned by the CO’s will get a pass in exchange for complete immunity.

It will make even the Sacklers blush  

 

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

In his defense, I saw and heard things that sounded very much like the RSA/4.0 framework was a done deal. 

The Trust Distribution aspects were affirmed by Lucas and Stang with certitude. 
 

Will I get a vote? Yes

Will I get less if I was abused in a state with a bad statute? Yes

How much less will I get? There are tiers depending on how bad the statute is in you abuse state  

Lots of talk about the 3500 dollar benefits and how quickly those men could get the cash to pay their bills  

The body language was telling as was the gratuitous comments by Chambers and Kennedy.  Paraphrasing …Money isn’t everything, ya know, and wait until you see the non-monetary conditions and safeguards that will be put in place.

She’s a real cream puff AND we will throw in a pair of floor mats.

Personally I’ve seen this movie before.

They are trying to goose up the Hartford settlement a little and get Century to pay some. Some charters will kick in but the remaining assets and insurance coverage not only BSA but all the separate coverage owned by the CO’s will get a pass in exchange for complete immunity.

It will make even the Sacklers blush  

 

The one positive when 5.0 is announced is that all the RSA promoters and their fellow travelers won’t be able to proclaim that “sure you’lll get pennies now but they’ll be gazillions in insurance later.” 
 

Because there won’t be. You’ll maybe get 20k before attorneys fees and that’s it. 

Best we could do. Take it or leave it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Muttsy said:

Because there won’t be. You’ll maybe get 20k before attorneys fees and that’s it. 

Best we could do. Take it or leave it. 

And mathematically speaking that may be true. Again: there was never a scenerio here where 100% of victims were paid 100% of the abuse values equal to some of these $1+ million abuse settlements. There was not $82.5 BILLION to be had first of all. Second, statutes of limitations, insurance plan limits, BSA and LC assets, etc. were all finite.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please tell us what assets and separate insurance coverage exists for the Methodists, Catholic dioceses, LDS and or the 56000 other chartering organizations. 
 

Until then, what you say is unsubstantiated hooey. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to loop back on something that was said at the last Town Hall and is something that maybe I am over-reading into and maybe I am not.

During the TCC Town Hall video, John Humprey at 52:33 said this

Quote

It is likely that there may be more than one plan. You are going to have to decide 'do I want to go with this plan or do I want to go with this plan?' And you better read it for yourself. Don't take anybody else's word for it.

"more than one plan." Remember, Plan 3.0 was global OR toggle: if global got rejected, then toggle was to come online as the cram down. There was NO provision for voting on multiple plans. It was either/or.

We never got to the point of seeing the ballot statement, but I wonder if this talk of "more than one plan" means that the ballot will read one of two ways:

  1. Vote for either Global Plan (BSA/LC or BSA/LC/CO), Toggle Plan (BSA Only), or neither.
  2. Vote for yes/no for Global Plan. WARNING: A no vote will result in the Toggle Plan being implemented resulting in less payouts to claimants.

Etc.

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