The W
Views: 98460709
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
27.8.14 0614
The W - Current Events & Politics - Boston Church Settlement Offer Rejected
This thread has 2 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1(1897 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (5 total)
Bizzle Izzle
Bockwurst








Since: 26.6.02
From: New Jersey, USA

Since last post: 25 days
Last activity: 25 days
#1 Posted on
Click Here (cnn.com)

Exerpts (emphasis mine):
BOSTON, Massachusetts (AP) -- Plaintiffs in the Boston Archdiocese sex abuse scandal blasted the church's $55 million settlement offer, saying an average of $60,000 per victim is "woefully inadequate" compensation for their shattered lives.

"As we all struggle to figure out what moral leadership here is, we realize that $60,000 per victim as an average after legal fees is probably woefully inadequate just to pay for their direct out-of-pocket costs in their lifetimes for dealing with the tragedy," said Paul Baier, president of Survivors First.



I think this is both some shoddy reporting and a bit of whining from the victim's group. By my math, and I am no math teacher, $55 million divided by 542 victims is around $100K per person. That means that there are $40,000 dollars worth of legal fees per person? First of all, the press should report that it's $100K and not $60K (but $60K makes the church look worse, and we all know how the leftist press loves the Catholic church). Second, if your lawyers are taking over $20 million of your $55 million settlement, maybe you should find new lawyers. I wonder how much of that money goes to these 'victim's advocacy groups' and not the real victims themselves. A lot of these people got molested by their priests, now they are getting raped by their lawyers. They just can't win.



'But if one is struck by me only a little, that is far different, the stroke is a sharp thing and suddenly lays him lifeless, and that man's wife goes with cheeks torn in lamentation, and his children are fatherless, while he, staining the soil with his red blood, rots away, and there are more birds than women swarming about him.' Diomedes, The Iliad of Homer

Maiden RULES!!!
Promote this thread!
vsp
Andouille








Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 2976 days
Last activity: 190 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
Contingency fees of one-third (33.3%) are not unusual in such litigation. Some lawyers and firms will charge more, some less, often more when appeals are involved or when a case is likely to go to trial.

Add in out-of-pocket expenses (which are often the client's responsibility), and a mean figure around 40% doesn't sound unrealistic.


    Originally posted by Bizzle Izzle
    First of all, the press should report that it's $100K and not $60K (but $60K makes the church look worse, and we all know how the leftist press loves the Catholic church).


$100K before legal fees, $60K after. There's no contradiction or Catholic-bashing here; the $60K figure is the net that the average plaintiff can expect to walk away with.



    Second, if your lawyers are taking over $20 million of your $55 million settlement, maybe you should find new lawyers.


That's a different can of worms entirely, and may well be an accurate statement. Unfortunately, it's the rules by which today's lawyers play the game.




"I'm a little dyslexic......earlier, I freed my ass, and I'm hoping that my mind will follow." -- Moon Zappa
Corajudo
Frankfurter








Since: 7.11.02
From: Dallas, TX

Since last post: 49 days
Last activity: 13 hours
#3 Posted on
$100K before legal fees, $60K after. There's no contradiction or Catholic-bashing here; the $60K figure is the net that the average plaintiff can expect to walk away with.

I don't agree with that. It seems to me that with the other class action lawsuits (asbestos, cigarette litigation, credit card lender abuses, etc.) the press generally covered the total dollar amount of the judgement/settlement, including the lawyer fees and did not give any type of per victim amount. And, the stress was on how these companies did bad things and now they're going to pay. Instead, with the Boston diocese, the focus is on how this isn't enough of a punishment because each victim will only net $60k. Maybe it's not shoddy reporting per se, but it's certainly inconsistent with the coverage of other high profile class action lawsuits.

Furthermore, this does not even include the way the press covered the DA's decision not to pursue criminal charges (which was extremely biased as well).
spf
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 28 days
Last activity: 2 days
AIM:  
#4 Posted on
How exactly should it have been covered? From what I can see the whole point of the story is explaining why the settlement offer was rejected. The reason it was rejected, as explained in the article, was that they felt the settlement did not break down to enough per person. Considering that was the point that was the crux of the argument that was being made, I fail to see what could have been said to minimize that point.



She was worth 800 miles driving to see her play - Brenda Weiler

blogforamerica.com
Corajudo
Frankfurter








Since: 7.11.02
From: Dallas, TX

Since last post: 49 days
Last activity: 13 hours
#5 Posted on

    Originally posted by spf2119
    How exactly should it have been covered? From what I can see the whole point of the story is explaining why the settlement offer was rejected. The reason it was rejected, as explained in the article, was that they felt the settlement did not break down to enough per person. Considering that was the point that was the crux of the argument that was being made, I fail to see what could have been said to minimize that point.


Aside from what I mentioned before about the quantification of the settlement offer, the first reason that the story is biased is because the settlement has not been rejected, in spite of what the headline says. The victims have not voted whether or not to accept the offer.

Also, a grand total of one victim opined that the settlement is not sufficient. There were also quotes from a couple of victims' groups. Their quotes basically pointed out that they want to soak the church for more money, as evidenced by the following direct quote: "I'd like to see the archdiocese reach into their pockets, make it hurt a little bit." Furthermore, they feel that wealthy, influential Catholics (who had nothing to do with the sexual abuse) should help foot the bill (never mind that they are already doing so through their previous donations).

Furthermore, they did not make a serious attempt to contact the diocese to present an even remotely balanced view. Again, from the article: "Phone calls to the Rev. Christopher Coyne, spokesman for the Boston archdiocese, were not answered Sunday" (bolded by me). How strange, the diocese did not answer phone calls on Sunday. Surely there must be a reasonable explanation why a church official is not in the office on a Sunday.
Pages: 1Thread ahead: Judge Orders Sex Predator Released
Next thread: Just a question
Previous thread: Fox News vs. Al Franken
(1897 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
As one of those "intelligent people" it all depends on what the candidates do from here on out and what brushfires come up. The only way I see this not being a Bush rout(and we're talking McGovern '72 and Mondale '84 numbers) at this point is:...
The W - Current Events & Politics - Boston Church Settlement Offer RejectedRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.121 seconds.