I Am Not a Lawyer But I Pretend I'm One in the SCA

[jamesq]

SCA, Inc. has decided to raise the membership fees again. This feels like the beginning of a death spiral to me, though I hope not.

[I've added some statements due to new info on 2012-Feb-04]

Initially this increase was going to be for $5, but they've just revised that to $8. The BoD's stated reason is because of the costs associated with an ongoing lawsuit.

I did a little digging around and quizzed some knowledgeable sources and was able to determine the following:

• The lawsuit in question is related to the Benjamin Schragger molestations that occurred as late as 2003. Basically six of the victims are suing the SCA for not performing due diligence in respect to its youth leaders.
  
• The inital 2007 lawsuit was thrown out after bouncing around the federal/state levels. The 2010 lawsuit involves the same issues, but is a modified refiling with some individuals named as defendants in addition to SCA, Inc.
  
• The victims are asking for considerable damages - $10M each [$7M total, settled for $1.3M].
  
• [one of] The SCA's insurer is not covering this liability.
  
• The SCA's assets (~$900K) are nowhere near large enough to cover that out of pocket. [But the total assets for the North American Kingdoms is much larger - I hadn't factored that in originally.]

I have not confirmed these statements, so don't take them as the gospel truth. In fact, if you know otherwise, I'd appreciate a correction!

My gut feeling, having read the initial complaint is that they have a good chance. The SCA is a fairly hidebound organization and it values personal bonds of fealty over the sort of organizational oversight that would have protected it. I know I wouldn't want to be the guy who has to defend the SCA in front of an actual jury. If even a fraction of the stories I heard online (a lot of blame-the-victim by friends of Mr. Schragger - even after his conviction) are true, it's going to make a jury very sympathetic to the victims and very negative towards the SCA. Plus a lot of the policies that were implemented (basically the Boy Scout's two-unrelated-adults-present-at-all-times rule) were done so after and in response to this all going down, which implies that the SCA was ignoring a potential problem while it was going on.

So I think this lawsuit is not going to turn out well. If it goes to a jury the SCA has a good chance of being clobbered. Even a fractional payout could bankrupt it. If that happens I'm basically cutting up my membership card and keeping an eye out for the auction where they sell off the Barony's assets.

The best outcome would be to ask for the suit to be dropped in return for a sincere apology to the victims, some proof that the policies will prevent a repeat from some other child-rapist, and paying for all the legal fees incurred. Given the number of victims involved and what they went through, I count this outcome as unlikely. That being the case, the next best outcome is a settlement that doesn't bankrupt the SCA.

Finally, they can go to trial and hope for the best. Who knows, maybe they'll win, then they'll just be out several years worth of legal fees.

Comments

[oblivions.livejournal.com]

Grim. More than I found out and more unsettling. I hate that sinking feeling of we're fucked.

OTOH - perhaps there is a possibility of a Phoenix. The Society is NOT going to just dissolve into mist, it will reform, under a different name, or Canada succeeds is ceding from the American Core. I doubt that last one though.

[oblivions.livejournal.com]

In a totally pissy side comment;

Fuck the asshole who's jeopardizing the game of 35,000 people or more for some incredibly fucktard related behaviour.

A little annoyed that each victim is also trying for 10M. WTF is with Americans and these obscene dollar values for 'restitution' they always attached to ANY freakin' lawsuit. It's like asking for the mass of the earth in thimble. Knowing it won't happen, but asking anyway.


Hmmm... so much for not commenting on this post.

[jamesq]

Sadly lawsuits with large punitive damages attached are one of the few ways that the little guy can force needed changes on large institutions. I suspect the BoD would not have made the policy changes it did if not for the lawsuit. If the only course of action the victims had was tearing up their membership cards, then they would have been ignored. Precisely because they would not have recognized that there was a systemic problem - they'd have continued thinking it was just this random guy.

[jamesq]

I'm writing another post to address this very topic!

[slavewench.livejournal.com]

I think you're right, that they are going to win and the SCA will be screwed. I understand why they are going after the corporation for the money - do you know if they are going after the guy as well - or are they going after both at the same time?

[jamesq]

From what I could piece together, there was an attempt to link Mr. Schragger to the SCA in the lawsuit and this was rejected by the court. It would basically have ham-strung the SCA's ability to defend itself since he was already convicted in criminal court. Plus, as a guest of the state, he has no appreciable income.

As to going after him, he's likely to be in jail until at least 2040.

[slavewench.livejournal.com]

Ahhh... so they didn't get any money from him so they are going after the SCA.

[jamesq]

I think that oversimplifies it somewhat. The point was to force the SCA to make changes to it's policy - a policy that was basically "stick your head in the sand" regarding the possibility of sexual predators.

[slavewench.livejournal.com]

I think you can make a point to force a practice change without demanding 10mil (?) per victim and possibly destroy a corporation. But that's just my personal opinion.