Idaho abuse charge

[Gretchen]

Ok, I read this article, and it made me mad. Real mad.

In the lawsuit, Doe alleges that the leader of his Nampa, Idaho, Boy Scout troop sexually abused him for about three years in Oregon and Idaho starting in 1967, and that the abuse left him with debilitating physical, emotional and mental injuries.

First of all, look at the date. While I am against abuse of any kind, waiting forty-odd years to report something just isn't right. Second, why are they sueing the whole church, and not just the stake.

[pam]

Sometimes things of a traumatic nature are so deeply hidden in their psyche they don't realize it's there or it's forgotten for a time.

Why sue the Church? A stake doesn't have money per se but the Church does.

[crazypotato]

I really don't see how John Doe can prove that the church is liable in this case. He would have to prove that the church knew about the abuse and did nothing about it, and would have to prove the abuse, wouldn't he? Plus, I bet whoever the alleged abuser is, is a really old man now if he is still alive.

How would they sue the stake? It's stake leaders are long, long, long gone. The stake boundaries have probably changed vastly over the years.

[Just_A_Guy]

MOE may correct me on this, but as far as I know a stake is not, generally speaking, a legal entity. The Church is.

[UrbanFool]

I hate to even know what to make of something like this riding on the coattails of the Catholic thing. I'd say how would anyone know about widespread abuse, but it was evidently well known among the Catholic clergy.

[MarginOfError]

MOE may correct me on this, but as far as I know a stake is not, generally speaking, a legal entity. The Church is.

I'm not really sure about this one, actually. I know that stakes hold non-profit status and if you need a tax exempt ID number, you get it from your stake. I don't really understand how all the legalities work out though.

I hate to even know what to make of something like this riding on the coattails of the Catholic thing. I'd say how would anyone know about widespread abuse, but it was evidently well known among the Catholic clergy.

While it is a little frightening to think about this, they would have to show that the Church knew about and and either did nothing or covered it up. There's been very little evidence to support either of these conclusions.

What the Church could get hit for, and the BSA, is that they apparently weren't following the two-deep leadership principle. Memo to all scout leaders: follow the BSA's youth protection policies and things like this won't happen much.

[hrrc]

I heard this morning on the radio that the judge hearing the case was throwing out most of the charges. It sounds like the only charge that he would allow to proceed was the fraud claim.

[UrbanFool]

They still have to figure out what the fraud is exactly.

[beckysoup61]

Ok, I read this article, and it made me mad. Real mad.

First of all, look at the date. While I am against abuse of any kind, waiting forty-odd years to report something just isn't right. Second, why are they sueing the whole church, and not just the stake.

Waiting 40 years isn't right? Of course it isn't, it should have come to light years ago and the offending parties punished, but life isn't perfect and like other have mentioned, sometimes people have blocked out the abuse, or been so afraid to say anything at all.

At least they've finally come forward, there are so many people that can never name their abusers.