[Ansteorra] Lawsuit, Children, Liability

[Bill Tait]

Ahh, but they were after 7M. That is punitive dollars.


William


On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 8:43 PM, L T <ldeerslayer at yahoo.com> wrote:

> If it were really about money...they would have gone for punitive
> damages...
> 25,000 each sounds more like legal and counseling costs to me...
>
>
> L
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>  From: Paul DeLisle <ferretpd at gmail.com>
> To: 'Rose' <rose_welch at yahoo.com>; "'Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc.'" <
> ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2012 6:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Lawsuit, Children, Liability
>
> I disagree, Rose. This *IS* about money.
> If it *weren't* about money, the settlement would be a Court-approved
> modification to the SCA By-Laws.
> I'm sorry to disillusion you, hun...but sadly...it *IS* about money (even
> more sadly....mostly for the Lawyers.)
>
> Alden
> (Disillusioned himself, more than a decade-and-a-half ago.)
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ansteorra-bounces at lists.ansteorra.org [mailto:ansteorra-
> > bounces at lists.ansteorra.org] On Behalf Of Rose
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 5:36 PM
> > To: Ansteorra
> > Subject: [Ansteorra] Lawsuit, Children, Liability
> >
> > Let's be clear about this:
> >
> > This case does not revolve around an isolated incident.
> >
> > This case does not revolve around a single perpetrator.
> >
> > This case was not brought by a single plaintiff.
> >
> > This case was brought by a group of plaintiffs, with their parents, who
> > discovered that the SCA has a long history of abusers in leadership
> roles.
> > We're not alone; this problem is familiar to every organization that
> deals
> with
> > a vulnerable populace.
> >
> > Unlike those organizations, we chose to do nothing. We didn't run
> > background checks, we didn't require a two-deep rule, we rarely revoked
> > memberships until a conviction was secure. We didn't even bother to send
> > out Society announcements when these revocations occurred, a measure
> > that may have served to keep us on our toes and would have cost us
> > NOTHING. Long after the Boy Scouts and similar organization developed
> best
> > practices to safeguard their children, we did nothing.
> >
> > Even after the Schragger case, where twelve children came forward to
> report
> > abuse, we made NO changes. We didn't update our policies until AFTER we
> > were sued by six of children that Lord Ben the Steward, AKA the 'Innocent
> > Oak', had molested. That was the point of the suit.
> >
> > Do you still think that this lawsuit is about money?
> >
> > This lawsuit was about forcing the SCA to adopt standard best practices,
> > which we have done. Now that we have done so, we no longer carry the
> > same amount of liability that we did before 2007. (And our liability
> insurance
> > already went up. Some of you folks are really behind the times.)
> >
> > The Innocent Oak. That is what the local populace called him and the
> symbol
> > that they crafted onto items that they sold to raise funds for his
> defense.
> > Even after his conviction, a reported thirty Scadians showed up to his
> 'Going
> > To Prison' party to wish him farewell. Since then, there have been
> twenty-
> > nine revocation and denial of membership decisions rendered by the Board
> > of Directors for conviction of predatory crimes. Twenty-four of these
> have
> > been with regard to abuse of minors.
> >
> > Again, let me ask. Are you still thinking about the money?
> >
> > I'm not. I'm thinking about a culture of abuse that we allowed to fester
> in our
> > Society, that contributed to the molestation of at least a dozen
> children.
> > Eighteen percent doesn't seem like a very large payment to rid ourselves
> of
> > that particular ailment, and it is worth noting that it would have been
> > significantly cheaper - in gold and in blood - had we simply seen to the
> issue
> > when the first symptoms erupted.
> >
> > Blaming the children for a lawsuit that centered around the non-actions
> of
> > adults is stupid. Working to punish children in the future for an issue
> that was
> > corrected in the past is even more stupid.
> >
> > And that's my tuppence.
> >
> >
> >
> > Lady Rose the Obnoxious
> >
> >
> >
> > *               *               *               *
> *               *               *               *               *
> >    *               *               *               *
> >
> > Ars longa, vita brevis, occasio praeceps, experimentum periculosum,
> iudicium
> > difficile. ~Hippocrates
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ansteorra mailing list
> > Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
> > In order to make changes and manage your account please go to:
> > http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ansteorra mailing list
> Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
> In order to make changes and manage your account please go to:
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org
> _______________________________________________
> Ansteorra mailing list
> Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
> In order to make changes and manage your account please go to:
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org
>