Legal settlements and abuse

[fred8033 1593]

8 hours ago, johnsch322 said:

So with all that has been discussed the statement of survivors wanting to be compensated beyond expenses for pain and suffering does that make us dishonest?

It's not about dishonesty.  It's about applying the standards, knowledge, laws, etc from the time when events occurred.  It's about holding all involved parties involved equally liable.  Instead, this is a deep pocket grab using legal interpretations that did not exist often until decades later where a large amount of the cash will be going to the legal system itself.  

[qwazse 4345]

9 hours ago, johnsch322 said:

So with all that has been discussed the statement of survivors wanting to be compensated beyond expenses for pain and suffering does that make us dishonest?

Far from it. If you wanted such compensation, but wouldn’t admit it. That would be dishonest.

To nod my head in agreement to any side in this, that would be dishonest. To shrug off losses of assets and pretend that that is not affecting the youth who are most at risk for abuse in the home, that would be dishonest. Therefore, to say that monetary payouts are objectively “fair” to victims would be dishonest in two directions: 1) It gives the false illusion that this somehow prevents future victims when in fact it could be making safe havens inaccessible to future victims. Moreover, I’ve seen payouts for pain and suffering help my friends and family who’ve received them, but only after a lot more pain and suffering. It seemed that the payments just served remind them that they were kicked down and should stay down, until some other tragedy jolted them into using what they’ve garnered to slog forward. And 2) Secondly there’s no upper limit on the amount needed to compensate for pain and suffering because money is a terrible vector for transmitting compassion —compassion being the thing I know that helps with pain and suffering. The reason we even bother is that money is the best vector we have to transmit compassion beyond our physical reach.

[Eagle94-A1 2687]

11 hours ago, johnsch322 said:

So with all that has been discussed the statement of survivors wanting to be compensated beyond expenses for pain and suffering does that make us dishonest?

Survivors, no. The frauds who are looking to make a quick buck, absolutely. They are hurting actual victims. Which is why I wanted vetting of all claims.

3 hours ago, fred8033 said:

It's not about dishonesty.  It's about applying the standards, knowledge, laws, etc from the time when events occurred.  It's about holding all involved parties involved equally liable.  Instead, this is a deep pocket grab using legal interpretations that did not exist often until decades later where a large amount of the cash will be going to the legal system itself.  

This is my biggest problem. Standards for the case were based upon today's laws and technology, and not that of the time the crimes occurred. BSA is demonized for having the IVF, which was the best way to prevent know pedophiles at the time. As I stated, someone posted a file where the perp tried to become a professional, and the IVF prevented him from working for the BSA.

And not everyone is being held accountable. What about the perps, will they be going to jail or having to pay their victims? What about the parents who would not press charges on the perps, which allowed them to remain free? Will other victims go after the parents of previous victims because they did nothing?

 

[AwakeEnergyScouter 247]

5 hours ago, fred8033 said:

Instead, this is a deep pocket grab using legal interpretations that did not exist often until decades later

I haven't followed the legal play-by-play - could you give some examples?

Does US law generally require the use of legal philosophy from the time of the crime or infraction?

[skeptic 997]

1 hour ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

I haven't followed the legal play-by-play - could you give some examples?

Does US law generally require the use of legal philosophy from the time of the crime or infraction?

The more legally informed might cast some light, but it surely does not appear so in this issue.  If it did, we would not be watching the levels of skewing we are seeing.  That would include NOT changing SOL's so that a lawyer can shop for the "right" court and state.  Add consistency to my chant of "balance" and sensible and logical responses and not overly  wrought emotion base on hyperbole and vague information.

 

[AwakeEnergyScouter 247]

36 minutes ago, skeptic said:

That would include NOT changing SOL's so that a lawyer can shop for the "right" court and state.

Isn't this a pretty common practice? Sounds like a general legal system problem to me.

I've certainly read more than a few articles that mention that the reason the suit in question was filed in that jurisdiction was some perceived advantage. Perhaps this is me being from a small country where the laws are the same everywhere and no one thinks that's objectionable, but I personally agree that it's a bit distasteful. However, it seems to be the result of having different laws in different bits of the country; either the legal system is exactly the same everywhere or there's going to be incentive to "shop" if you can. Unless you can write an enforceable federal law against it somehow, although that sounds incredibly hard.

[johnsch322 524]

On 8/29/2023 at 6:53 PM, skeptic said:

I have no issue with legitimate suits, only frivolous or over the top ones that want more than is rational just because someone may feel sorry or it is the insurance company paying, or they see someone as having money.  Suing for more than actual expenses, and somehow feeling you are owed an outlandish amount for "pain and suffering" or similar wording is simply dishonest from my view.

56 years ago, I was the victim of 2 BSA personnel who had decided to have unlawful sex with me (yes it was a crime 56 years ago). Over the past couple of days, myself and 10's of thousands of other survivors are being called dishonest for wanting to be paid monetary damages by another person who claims to be in a BSA leadership position. 

 

On 8/30/2023 at 10:00 AM, qwazse said:

From their perspective paying a past victim  puts a number of current kids at risk.

From another BSA leader I get if they pay claimants, we put current kids at risk.

 

On 8/30/2023 at 11:10 AM, Armymutt said:

You can't get blood out of a turnip.  You also shouldn't be squeezing the blood out of a program that is for kids.  So no, I don't think that pain and suffering from an organizational level is appropriate.  It should come from the perpetrator. 

And this from one more BSA leader. We are not "squeezing blood out of a turnip".  BSA made a conscious decision to enter bankruptcy and by doing so deprived myself from pursuing my case thru state court where the outcome would have probably been more than I get out of the bankruptcy (my case has been filed in California courts in case the bankruptcy fails).

 

[johnsch322 524]

Dear @skeptic the only SAD about all of this is that you and so many of the entrenched BSA care so little about and try so hard to downplay what transpired within the BSA for so many years. You have tried to divert away what actually happened by blaming lawyers, parents, the police and victims without really acknowledging that survivors deserve every penny that they may get. 

Edited September 1, 2023 by johnsch322

[skeptic 997]

7 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

Dear @skeptic the only SAD about all of this is that you and so many of the entrenched BSA care so little about and try so hard to downplay what transpired within the BSA for so many years. You have tried to divert away what actually happened by blaming lawyers, parents, the police and victims without really acknowledging that survivors deserve every penny that they may get. 

Actually the sad thing is that you are unable to find any peace or relief from your trauma.  And no amount of money will ever cure that, nor accusing others of not caring or having any empathy.  I pray that you may somehow find that relief and peace in the next journey.  

[johnsch322 524]

36 minutes ago, skeptic said:

Actually the sad thing is that you are unable to find any peace or relief from your trauma.  And no amount of money will ever cure that, nor accusing others of not caring or having any empathy.  I pray that you may somehow find that relief and peace in the next journey.  

All of the views you have written over the past few years speaks volumes about the darkness of your heart.

[RememberSchiff 3683]

Lets refrain from personal attacks .

Thanks, RS

Edited September 1, 2023 by RememberSchiff

[ThenNow 1373]

Months away and it seems like only yesterday. The more things change, the more they stay the same. "It's like deja vu all over again." I have some thoughts but want to shamble around in this dream state for a bit.

[AwakeEnergyScouter 247]

On 8/30/2023 at 1:10 PM, Armymutt said:

You also shouldn't be squeezing the blood out of a program that is for kids.

This isn't how cause and effect work, though. In the abstract, this sounds reasonable. But this is because that is, and that is not because this is not, and this ceases to be because that ceases to be. Multiple causes come together to give multiple results, like an infinite net of jewels that reflect in each other.

Telling survivors to not pursue justice with the means the justice system in the abstract provides for them to use just because scouting is for kids is considering just a few jewels in the infinite net. It's also ultimately not moving towards the goal of eliminating this painful situation, because only actions rooted in great compassion for all sentient beings - both current scouts and survivors in this situation - can heal this. Is this really a zero-sum game?

The way to truly moving on involves, as a necessary part, survivors pursuing justice to the fullest extent possible within the legal system. We should be grateful for them doing it. One of the causes of this painful situation is precisely that the survivors' cases haven't already gone through the legal system. And had they, there probably wouldn't have been so many of them in the first place.

Our speech reflects through the net of jewels, too. We actively shape the situation just by talking here. Speech is a kind of action.

 

[Eagle94-A1 2687]

13 minutes ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

...survivors pursuing justice to the fullest extent possible within the legal system....One of the causes of this painful situation is precisely that the survivors' cases haven't already gone through the legal system. And had they, there probably wouldn't have been so many of them in the first place.

And this is where many folks, including some survivors,  believe  the problem is. Many folks, including some survivors, believe justice is not being served as many of the perps are dead, elderly, or will suffer no criminal penalties because of SOL. The folks who committed the crimes are getting away with it. However, because BSA had files of alleged and actual perps that they used to try and protect its members, the BSA is being charged with all of the abuse, despite its attempts to prevent it.

As for the legal system, thankfully our legal system has progressed to have mandatory reporting laws so individuals and organizations can report allegations without fear of potential civil and legal trouble. People forget that mandatory reporting laws started in the late 1960/early 1970s and did not become widespread until the mid-to late 1980s. And even then, mandatory reporters were initially only physicians, then other medical professions, before it came to those of us who work with children. When the bulk of these crimes were committed, if the parents would not press charges, then nothing happened to the perp. You can see that in IVF case files. As I mentioned elsewhere, someone posted a file where because the parents would not press charges, the perp went to a mental institution instead of a prison where he belonged. After getting of the mental institution, he  eventually applied to work for the BSA, and without a criminal record, probably would have been hired. But because he was in the IVF file, and his information was checked against it, he was not hired. And all volunteers had their name crossed checked against the IVF.

[AwakeEnergyScouter 247]

59 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Many folks, including some survivors, believe justice is not being served as many of the perps are dead, elderly, or will suffer no criminal penalties because of SOL. The folks who committed the crimes are getting away with it.

That's absolutely true, 100%.

The question is, what is the next best thing that can actually be done? And if that can't be done, what's the next best thing to the next best thing? And so on. Nowhere in that tree of potential actions do I see "survivors stop pursuing legal claims against tortfeasors" popping up. The argument being given for it isn't to create justice for survivors, it's pitting current scouts against survivors, which is a framing of the situation that I don't think is fruitful.

And then future-looking, like the mandatory reporting laws. That's a start, but undoubtedly sexual abuse still doesn't always get reported and prosecuted, especially when the survivors are men.

So we should ask what else can we do? We can consider the data that it is actually typical for CSA victims to never tell anyone until decades later, perhaps we should consider much longer statutes of limitations. We can remind ourselves that men are also raped, including by women, and that male rape victims deserve 100% of the support we offer female rape victims. We can demand that police believe survivors and really do everything they can to effectively clear rape cases. No years of old rape kits languishing, and so on. But again, in no case is it helpful for survivors to stop what little legal action is still possible.