• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Church offers lower payouts to black abuse victims

MikeDwight

Well-Known Member
Reminds me of stupid Koreans who get people they've never met on the street, to go to forums with no purpose with nobody you know to cover up your at least 10th denial you don't know a single thing about any of their family to make you say you know anything worth cursing and screaming like a rude Korean, you guys know these people?
 

MikeDwight

Well-Known Member
bunch of old ladies that all know each other as old and working and married and hey all that about what anybody could be trying?
 

MikeDwight

Well-Known Member
3 'f yous' 3 'hitting on married woman' 1 'don't know s8 you talk about' 1 'you stalk people' 1 threatening chop over the neck to harm myself in isolation, im not in isolation, everybody knows everybody else, reported official and open every week, he likes his Korean isolation and harm and shame for no reason.
 

Curious George

Veteran Member
Well.... to be honest with you.......

Eventhough I am with you all the way concerning how low and unethical discrimination is (be it based on race or other things), I also feel like people are quite...eum... "tempted" at times to play the race card a bit too quickly at times....

Not every bad thing that happens to a black person, can be traced back to being black.

Like in this case. It seems to me that they themselves settled on the deal. They could have refused, but they didn't. Now, you can come up with all kinds of reasons (valid or otherwise) about them being poor and therefor difficulty of getting quality legal advice etc.... But that's entirely different then "because I am black!"

No. Rather: because you are poor.

Any person or organization that did something wrong and tries to settle for some sum of money, is always going to try to get away with paying less rather then more. If you are happy with 50k, they won't be giving you 100k. If they think you'ld settle for 10k, their offer (or at least their strategy) will reflect that.


Eventhough I haven't read the backstory, I doubt that there are elements in there that will demonstrate that in fact was a race issue. If there was, I'm sure you would have mentioned it in the OP, but you didn't.

The only thing I'm seeing in the OP that points it towards the race issue, is the victim himself saying "because I'm black".


It seems to me that a far more plausible answer here, is "because you're poor". The lawyers in charge of getting him to settle, know this. They know that 15k will sound like a lot of money. They know that the financial status will not be such that the dude will be able to get quality legal advice. So that's what they took advantage off.


I'm not seeing any reasoning or evidence that points it towards "we're not going to pay him much because he's black"
Yet we are discussing litigation strategy. Now the strategy here is that one doesn't have a lawyer and has barriers to accessing lawyers. Sure that is because of poverty. But there is another factor, race, at play.

Now you may disagree with the assessment that a jury would be less sympathetic to a black victim without representation than a white victim without representation, yet you haven't really given any evidence why except that you do not want to believe race played into the decision.

It is this man's perception that he is disadvantaged in part because he is black. Now there is plenty of discussion to be had concerning whether there is racial disparity between jury awarded damages.

If this is true, then you can bet your bottom dollar that this in part plays in litigation strategy and settlement offers. While you are quick to dismiss this man's opinion, is it possible he just has a better understanding of the legal system, even without a lawyer, than you?
 

MikeDwight

Well-Known Member
ya like ive been to 3 defense lawyer websites which must be blocked from sending their replies by litigation with NO discernable lead about Any investigation having made no illegal maneuvers or intents or thoughts of one in my life or any harassment or any changes in how I plan to do things ever, and no police department when asked admitting an investigation to me in my area, with no Habeus Corpus, no understanding of law by any party, no real culpability of Korean parties that aren't bindable for Their actions, and similar impossibility. thanks
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
What circumstances? Fishy in what way?

Why were other victims paid more and not these two? Seems disingenuous that a meeting was held in secret.

All I'm seeing here is assumptions of racist accusation

I'm not the one assuming here this was the headlines, I'm just the observer reading it.

When negotiating a settlement with big filthy rich organizations that don't have just one lawyer, but teams of lawyers, without having lawyer yourself... it's safe to say that they will be walking all over you using all the tricks of the trade.

This is literally what lawyers are for: they get you a better deal.

Seems kind of obvious!

There was no lawyers present, read the article!

If *I* were on the team tasked with settling for the lowest amount possible and I knew I'ld be dealing with a poor person that has no access to quality legal advice

Well then we would question the ethics of this religious organization. It is not enough that these two individuals were violated sexually, but because we know they are poor, we can take advantage of them. Racism and economic status aside, this meeting-in-the-dark was immoral because the monetary compensation did not compare to the damages inflicted upon the individuals.

So, in context of a goal of having to pay the least possible, that makes perfect sense.

If you're a Catholic organization bent on moral teachings it doesn't. This isn't a business transaction where you're selling products, you're compensating the victims of the damages inflicted upon them from your religious organization. The idea here at least monetarily is to make them whole. Giving them $15,000 despite other non-black victims receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars if the idea here is to give them the least amount as much as possible is unethical to say the least.


Again, I see no reason to pull the race card here.

You don't but I do. First off I can relate, not just because of the biases I hold within myself and the experiences of prejudice especially in business practice, but also because of the other victims as the article has indicated that have been paid out. Even if we take away the idea that the other non-black victims of sexual abuse had lawyers present $15,000 doesn't even cover the cost of a year's session of therapy. My issue here is the person telling the victim "if you want more you need your lawyer to talk to our lawyer." There was no regard for their suffering and road to psychological recovery.

Or perhaps better put: nothing you've said tells me that it's about race.

The victim clearly believes it was according to the article, so now are you saying the victim is conjuring up stuff? It clearly shows in post#2 the victim feels that this was about race.

I wasn't uninformed. You informed me in the OP.

I made a synopsis, but I supplied the video which I assume you didn't watch. I also posted the New York Times article which provided additional details of the account. It helps to look at the video and read the article. I'd assume you'd have a critique on the victim's assumption that race played an issue. If you're going to critique the idea that race was involved, perhaps the victim's point of view and discuss that.
 

Curious George

Veteran Member
The victim clearly believes it was according to the article, so now are you saying the victim is conjuring up stuff? It clearly shows in post#2 the victim feels that this was about race.
Might be interesting for some in this thread:

Google Scholar

I would suggest there has been a history of racial inequality in our litigation history. I do not think that the assumption that they were less likely to receive the same compensation as a white victim was unwarranted.

Granted, cases play out individually. But while discussing pretrial settlement and strategy noting history is wise.
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
As long as I live I will always bring up the subject of race until America acknowledges that we still have a continuing problem regarding race relations. Now, the current video here focuses on a Catholic religious order in the state of Mississippi that settled with two survivors of sexual abuse paying them $15,000 each which is significantly lower than what other victims have been paid.


So did all the others get the exact same higher amount, and did all black people recieve a lower payout than all other races, or was every one paid according to the amount of damage caused, or what. ? Give the context.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
So did all the others get the exact same higher amount, and did all black people recieve a lower payout than all other races, or was every one paid according to the amount of damage caused, or what. ? Give the context.

In case you missed it this was post#2

"He said if I wanted more, I would have to get a lawyer and have my lawyer call his lawyer," La Jarvis Love, 36, told the Associated Press. "Well, we don't have lawyers. We felt like we had to take what we could."

La Jarvis's cousin, Joshua K. Love, 36, also settled his abuse claim for $15,000 — something he now regrets.

"They felt they could treat us that way because we're poor and we're black," Joshua Love said of the settlements he and La Jarvis received.

Across the United States, settlements have ranged much higher. In 2006, the Catholic Diocese of Jackson, which includes Greenwood, settled lawsuits involving 19 victims— 17 of whom were white— for $5 million, with an average payment of more than $250,000 per victim.

In 2018, the St. Paul-Minneapolis archdiocese agreed to pay an average of nearly $500,000 each to clergy abuse survivors.

Across the United States, settlements have ranged much higher. In 2006, the Catholic Diocese of Jackson, which includes Greenwood, settled lawsuits involving 19 victims— 17 of whom were white— for $5 million, with an average payment of more than $250,000 per victim.

In 2018, the St. Paul-Minneapolis archdiocese agreed to pay an average of nearly $500,000 each to clergy abuse survivors.

Source: In Mississippi Delta, Catholic Abuse Cases Settled on Cheap
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
In case you missed it this was post#2

I did miss the post, thanks!
So, in 2006, the Diocese paid two people of color at least $250,000 each

The person should have gotten a lawyer. They would have taken such a case on contingency because of the large potential settlement.
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Where did you see people of color in that?

Here:
Across the United States, settlements have ranged much higher. In 2006, the Catholic Diocese of Jackson, which includes Greenwood, settled lawsuits involving 19 victims— 17 of whom were white— for $5 million, with an average payment of more than $250,000 per victim.

Would not the two who were not white be people of color?

To be clear...I think they got the shaft and they need to lawyer up and kick some butt.
 
Last edited:

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
Here:
Across the United States, settlements have ranged much higher. In 2006, the Catholic Diocese of Jackson, which includes Greenwood, settled lawsuits involving 19 victims— 17 of whom were white— for $5 million, with an average payment of more than $250,000 per victim.

Would not the two who were not white be people of color?

To be clear...I think they got the shaft and they need to lawyer up and kick some butt.

Perhaps they could have been of Latino origin....

As far as the lawyer thing I'm more concerned about the secret meeting it really resonates with me that $15k is supposed to make everything whole and complete. I'm sure they signed something in addition to receiving the money.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
Reminds me of stupid Koreans who get people they've never met on the street, to go to forums with no purpose with nobody you know to cover up your at least 10th denial you don't know a single thing about any of their family to make you say you know anything worth cursing and screaming like a rude Korean, you guys know these people?

You alright man? Why are you referring to them as "stupid Koreans?"
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Perhaps they could have been of Latino origin....

As far as the lawyer thing I'm more concerned about the secret meeting it really resonates with me that $15k is supposed to make everything whole and complete. I'm sure they signed something in addition to receiving the money.

We are on the same page about the $15000 payout. I believe a lawyer can have whatever they signed nullified without much effort. They did not have a lawyer and the Vatican has tons of lawyers and deep pockets.
It's just that I don't think they were short changed because they were black. They failed to get legal advice. Frankly, the church should have advised them to get legal representation. I think they should take that organization for all they can. It needs to hurt.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
It's just that I don't think they were short changed because they were black.

So you are essentially dismissing the victim's perception then? If not, then what are they not seeing that you do? You weren't victimized nor were you there so how can you insinuate what really is?
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
The victim believes that, yes.

I have yet to see any evidence that this belief is accurate.

It's a news article but the reality is we all aren't there so we can speculate, but I admit my own personal bias due to my own experiences dealing with discriminatory practices of like kind and so I'm therefore inclined to believe the victims.
 

NewGuyOnTheBlock

Cult Survivor/Fundamentalist Pentecostal Apostate
True, which is why I supplied both the video and the New York Times report. Why were other non-black victims paid much more? Why was these victims met in secret? These are questions I have.

These are valid questions. But a they are questions, there are no answers to them; or they wouldn't be questions anymore. So until we have answers to those questions, the answer "I don't know why other non-black victims paid much more, or why was these victims met in secret"; not inserting a convenient answer.

How legitimate were the claims? Why was it not reported to law enforcement? What evidence, besides the claims of abuse, were presented bu the accusers?

These are other questions I have.
 
Top