Jump to content

Bankruptcy, everything but the legalese


Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

There are many times more stories such as yours for every victim.

And so therefore the victims should get nothing? That's the math sheet here? It's ok to abuse 82,500 scouts, so long as 825,000 or 8,250,000 are served?

Sorry you got abused but the BSA has got to keep those campfires glowing.

  • Confused 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 870
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

We're going to split the ch11.x thread in 2. The original will be kept as it was intended, for the legal aspects of the case and everything else will go here. In a nutshell, if the judge is dealing wi

@Gilwell_1919 I want to respond to this, but in the proper thread, which is this one. Let's be clear what Kosnoff has said. 1) He had stated that scouting should continue. He's repeated th

No one here, except members who are claimants, have any part of deciding anything in this bankruptcy. Let's drop the personal criticism of others who express in a scoutlike way their differing op

Posted Images

1 minute ago, CynicalScouter said:

And so therefore the victims should get nothing? That's the math sheet here? It's ok to abuse 82,500 scouts, so long as 825,000 or 8,250,000 are served?

Sorry you got abused but the BSA has got to keep those campfires glowing.

@CynicalScouter  If this was not a Scout forum I would be saying very un-Courteous and un-Kind things to you.  Anytime someone defends the BSA you take it to you do not want to compensate them at all or you wish to deny them of council.  Quit making up garbage!  

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, vol_scouter said:
1 hour ago, CynicalScouter said:

And so therefore the victims should get nothing? That's the math sheet here? It's ok to abuse 82,500 scouts, so long as 825,000 or 8,250,000 are served?

Sorry you got abused but the BSA has got to keep those campfires glowing.

@CynicalScouter  If this was not a Scout forum I would be saying very un-Courteous and un-Kind things to you.  Anytime someone defends the BSA you take it to you do not want to compensate them at all or you wish to deny them of council.  Quit making up garbage!  

This is the sword play I was referring to, CS. I don’t think it’s benefiting the people you are defending or concerned about here. I have to agree it seems to have gotten emotional and reactionary, missing the forest for the trees. You seem to have a hair trigger lately and I don’t think it’s representative of your intellect and ability to remain balanced in the discourse. This is my thinking, anyway.

Edited by ThenNow
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Muttsy said:

You haven’t bothered to study the history. This was a civil conspiracy to conceal the sexual abuse of children that continued for a century.  It was child endangerment on an epic scale. The pedophiles are the wild beasts with uncontrollable obsessions. What generations of executives did in keeping it secret from scouts and the public is indefensible. 

You are free to your opinion.

You are free to disagree with me.

But please do not assume you know what I have and have not studied. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, PeterHopkins said:

I love blood pudding. I was born in Brooklyn and am a dual citizen of the United States and Ireland.

Sorry-mon (mes?), apologies!

(Just too easy.)

 

 

I LOVE blood pudding!

 

As long as it is somebody's else's blood.

 

 

(What is "blood pudding?")

 

Can I get it from Mountain House, freeze-dried?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, SiouxRanger said:

(What is "blood pudding?")

It looks like you want the answer to this question, so I'll oblige.

Blood pudding can describe a variety of sausages. Essentially, they contain animal blood, animal fat and a grain. Commonly, you'll find blood pudding made with pig's blood, pork fat and oats. In Ireland and the UK, this is often called black pudding. It is served as a breakfast food alongside your eggs. The sausage is sliced, and the resulting discs are cooked on a frying pan.

In the past, it was common to make blood pudding from beef or sheep. Instead of oats, barley is sometimes used.

Blood pudding is also sometimes prepared as a snack. The sausage is dipped in batter (similar to what would be used for a fish filet) and deep fried.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a survivor and one of many victims of the same abuser who carried out his deeds across multiple boy scout troops, what gives the BSA, my LC and CO any right to complain about anything. PERIOD!

 I did go to the police and my case was turned over to a unit that specializes in the exploitation of children. And when law enforcement came knocking at BSA's and my LC's doors, they were told nothing to see here detectives. Guess what...24 years later I learned through this bankruptcy, BSA and my LC banned my abuser from scouting 11 years prior to me reporting him to law enforcement. So my path to justice as well as other victims was purposely obstructed and as a result "our" abuser never faced one day in court or served one day in jail for his crimes. Nor will he since he has departed this life as we know it.

It disgusts me to read posts on this forum complaining why aren't abusers being held directly accountable. You can personally shake the hands of BSA and my LC for their purposeful grievous omission which allowed a legitimate pedophile, whose path of destruction was spread far and wide, to escape justice. 

Isn't it ironic, 24 years later I get to watch BSA, my LC and CO squabble and squawk about not getting a fair deal under this re-organization plan. I keep hearing phrases like, "we're going to run out of money," or "there will be never be enough money," or the line "what about the future of scouting."  Yet, aren't these the same sentiments the BSA and my LC used to justify their actions to not share adverse information with law enforcement about my abuser. WAKE UP! As far as I am concerned, BSA, my LC and CO are just as guilty as my abuser. They might not have physically penetrated me but they sure did pierce my soul with their lack of humanity and callousness. And now, they are trying to do it again...

Edited by BadChannel70
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, PeterHopkins said:

I love blood pudding. I was born in Brooklyn and am a dual citizen of the United States and Ireland.

Confession: I’ve never had it. It just went with my “proof of the pudding” and dark prose of the moment. For those who didn’t know what it is, I knew it would be very dramatic. I’m thinking I will really like it because I love all manner of sausage. I’m Austrian and Irish so it’s in my blood. ;) 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BadChannel70 said:

It disgusts me to read posts on this forum complaining why aren't abusers being held directly accountable. 

This sentiment, which permeates many of the BSA defenders in this forum, disgusts me as well. As if a victims to justify or defend themselves or why they are seeking restitution from BSA?

The argument seems to be that victims are not "real" victims or really seeking "justice" unless they go after EVERYONE involved in the sexual abuse, starting with the perpetrators.

I am so happy that BSA-defenders get to sit in judgement of VICTIMS and decide whether the VICTIMS are doing enough.

You know what folks? You do NOT get to decide whether VICTIMS are or are not doing enough to YOUR satisfaction. They have every legal right to pursue BSA (and the LCs and COs) in civil court/bankruptcy court.

To sit there in smug condescension and say that you are not a "real" victim or that victims are only seeking "vengeance" unless they also try to seek out the perpetrators?

I got news for you: the perpetrators did not file for bankruptcy protection to protect their assets from child sexual abuse claims. BSA did.

The perpetrators did not spend millions on an ad campaign asking for victims to come forward. BSA did (as part of the bankruptcy claims bar date).

How DARE the BSA-defenders sit there and judge whether or not the VICTIMS have done enough. The VICTIMS have SUFFERED ENOUGH. As far as I am concerned, they do not have to justify a THING to you from a moral standpoint and from a LEGAL standpoint they will have to provide evidence of their claim, but no judge is going to say "You cannot recover damages from BSA because you did not find the perpetrator".

I'm going to give you all a little lesson in civil procedure: it is called an impleader. If BSA wants to make the claim that it is not liable for the abuse because the perpetrator was at least partially responsible, then BSA (let me repeat this) BSA can go file a third-party-impleader complaint against the perpetrator. The BSA can then get damages recovered/back from the third-party/abuser.

The classic example is Mary files a lawsuit against John for rear-ending her car at a stoplight. John then impleads Susan who rear-ended HIS car into Mary for his own damage (John's car) and the damage that happened to Mary's car. Susan is now co-defendant (in the case of Mary vs. John and Susan) and third party defendant (John v. Susan).

In the case of BSA: Scout is abused by Scoutmaster BUT the BSA and the LC are negligent for allowing the abuse to occur.

Scout sues BSA and LC (Scout vs. BSA and LC). Then BSA and the LC sue Scoutmaster for recovery (BSA and LC vs. Scoutmaster).

The case caption would read

Scout, Plaintiff vs.

BSA and LC, Defendant/Third-Party Plaintffs

vs. Scoutmaster, Third Party Defendant

If BSA-defenders absolutely insist that the victims are only seeking "vengeance" unless they also sue everyone else, keep in mind that at this point that shifts the legal burden. The burden NOW is on BSA if it fees that the "real defendant" should be the perpetrator to find that person and file a third-party-complaint or impleader and make the abuser a co-defendant.

In closing, BACK OFF THE VICTIMS and start asking BSA more questions.

Edited by CynicalScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, HelpfulTracks said:

No it is not. But the current scouts are absolutely part of the equation in terms of how the final settlements are made.

For me that is absolutely part of the equation. 

When I think on this, I can honestly say we don't really need our local council.  Everything they provide us could be done (and in most cases, actually already is being provided) through National functions (policy, materials (books and uniforms), standardized training) and local volunteers (local training courses and events).

Could anyone else here live without their local council?  With the technologies we have now, could they go away without a great deal of impact to Scouting?  I think so....and so, BSA toggle?

 

Edited by InquisitiveScouter
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BadChannel70 said:

Yet, aren't these the same sentiments the BSA and my LC used to justify their actions to not share adverse information with law enforcement about my abuser.

Yep. More concern about the program and less about the scouts/victims.

Look the other way.

Don't talk about it.

Maybe it will just go away.

Focus on the positive, don't worry about the victims.

Got to keep those campfires burning. No matter what.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...