Jump to content
  • Sky
  • Blueberry
  • Slate
  • Blackcurrant
  • Watermelon
  • Strawberry
  • Orange
  • Banana
  • Apple
  • Emerald
  • Chocolate
  • Charcoal
love2scrap

Negligence Lawsuit Filed Against IBLP

Recommended Posts

love2scrap

It's about time.

 The lawsuit specifically alleges that IBLP was negligent and allowed unlawful conduct to continue by:

  • failing to train and/or supervise their staff and management or have appropriate policies and procedures in place to detect and deter sexual abuse, harassment, or inappropriate touching of young female interns, employees, or participants in IBLP programs;
  • failing to report known allegations of sexual abuse and sexual harassment committed against adult and minor IBLP participants, employees, and interns to the appropriate law enforcement agencies;
  • failing to conduct reasonable investigation into credible allegations of sexual abuse, harassment, and inappropriate touching, despite decades of ongoing conduct;
  • conducting a sham investigation once the IBLP Board did eventually conduct an investigation;
  • concealing allegations of sexual abuse and harassment from law enforcement;
  • conducting an unreasonable investigation into the allegations of sexual abuse and harassment; and
  • engaging in careless or negligent supervision of staff, directors, agents, and employees.

recoveringgrace.org/2015/10/negligence-lawsuit-filed-against-iblp/

 

 

Mods, how do we break links in the new format? Removing the front portion doesnt break the link like it used to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buzzard

Not a mod, but I know there was a discussion that we no longer needed to break links because techno something about the link not tracking back to us. 

 

Perhaps @happy atheist or @destiny31 can make it sound better. 

As for the lawsuit, I'd really love to get a copy of that petition.  I'm curious exactly who they're alleging as the offending/negligent party. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sad
Destiny

 

Mods, how do we break links in the new format? Removing the front portion doesnt break the link like it used to. 

No longer necessary. Please feel free to rejoice. :)

NO MORE BREAKING LINKS EVER!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SamuraiKatz

Just did a quick read through at RG.  Gibbs III is the attorney.  He is also handling Lourdes Torres' case against Doug Phillips is a Tool.  Also noted that the lawsuit named the current members of the IBLP board including Gil Bates. 

I wonder if the sudden move to close ATI/IBLP in Chicago and the subsequent move to Texas  has anything to do with this lawsuit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
apandaaries

Just did a quick read through at RG.  Gibbs III is the attorney.  He is also handling Lourdes Torres' case against Doug Phillips is a Tool.  Also noted that the lawsuit named the current members of the IBLP board including Gil Bates. 

I wonder if the sudden move to close ATI/IBLP in Chicago and the subsequent move to Texas  has anything to do with this lawsuit.

Oh, shit, that could complicate things.  Texas courts would likely swing quite differently than one in Illinois.  

But hallelujah!  Hopefully many days in court for IBLP!  This is a very good area for them to focus on.  

 I hope they are subpoenaing to get their hands on those financial records while they're at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FundieFarmer

YES. This would make me so happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
defraudingjezebel

Wow, this is fantastic. The lawsuit covers some of the most serious allegations that have been floating around for so long! Are there any FJ lawyers hanging around that can chime in about the likelihood that this lawsuit will see a courtroom? I'd be so upset if this lawsuit was thrown out by an overzealous judge. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coldwinterskies

I am glad to see that more lawyers and judges seem to be taking notice of the rampant negligence among these culty religions when it comes to protecting kids from childhood sex abuse. 

I don't know a lot about the IBLP compared to some of you since I don't know anyone who is involved in it, but for years I've been watching this same kind of thing happening in the Jehovah Witness world - where they are in VERY DEEP DENIAL about the problem in their religious community with child sex abuse. Most of the JWs think of child molestation as a "Catholic problem" and are absolutely convinced that the morally upright people they attend religious services with would NEVER do anything inappropriate to a child, so they try to dismiss it as lies when victims do come forward saying they were abused. Yet, thankfully, a few cases have come to trial and led to multi-million dollar verdicts, and many of us expect a lot more to come over the next few years. 

I really think that we should hold churches to the same standard on covering up sex abuse that we would hold them to if it turned out that they were helping to cover up a murder. For generations, innocent people have been hurt by this abuse of trust and power. It needs to stop, and thankfully I do think the justice system is starting to understand the problem. 

Edited by Coldwinterskies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VelociRapture

I am glad to see that more lawyers and judges seem to be taking notice of the rampant negligence among these culty religions when it comes to protecting kids from childhood sex abuse. 

I don't know a lot about the IBLP compared to some of you since I don't know anyone who is involved in it, but for years I've been watching this same kind of thing happening in the Jehovah Witness world - where they are in VERY DEEP DENIAL about the problem in their religious community with child sex abuse. Most of the JWs think of child molestation as a "Catholic problem" and are absolutely convinced that the morally upright people they attend religious services with would NEVER do anything inappropriate to a child, so they try to dismiss it as lies when victims do come forward saying they were abused. Yet, thankfully, a few cases have come to trial and led to multi-million dollar verdicts, and many of us expect a lot more to come over the next few years. 

I really think that we should hold churches to the same standard on covering up sex abuse that we would hold them to if it turned out that they were helping to cover up a murder. For generations, innocent people have been hurt by this abuse of trust and power. It needs to stop, and thankfully I do think the justice system is starting to understand the problem. 

My Great-Uncle was a Catholic Priest for over 50 years and not once did he ever harm a child - he was the type of guy who would go out of his way to cheer up a sad kid or help out a frazzled parent. To know that there are people out there who legitimately think that all Catholic Priests are child molesters, child rapists, or child abusers is really disheartening and sad for me, though not entirely surprising. It's not like the Vatican has done a spectacular job of changing that perception.

I totally agree with your last paragraph. All Churches and Church officials need to start being held accountable for covering up crimes. And people like Gil Bates who are on the IBLP Board, but have no shield of Confession to protect them? Yeah, they should fucking be held responsible and they should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. They knowingly allowed a predator to continue preying on innocent victims - they are no better than the Catholic Church officials who covered for the pedophile Priests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meh
formergothardite

I am so happy about this. It is time that the BoD is held accountable. I hope that this gets more media attention and the connection between Bringing Up Bates and Gil being involved in this sort of a lawsuit is made. The family doesn't look quite as nice when their deep involvement in abuse scandals and cover up are brought to light. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
grandmadugger

Just did a quick read through at RG.  Gibbs III is the attorney.  He is also handling Lourdes Torres' case against Doug Phillips is a Tool.  Also noted that the lawsuit named the current members of the IBLP board including Gil Bates. 

I wonder if the sudden move to close ATI/IBLP in Chicago and the subsequent move to Texas  has anything to do with this lawsuit.

Oh, shit, that could complicate things.  Texas courts would likely swing quite differently than one in Illinois.  

But hallelujah!  Hopefully many days in court for IBLP!  This is a very good area for them to focus on.  

 I hope they are subpoenaing to get their hands on those financial records while they're at it.

The major paper written against IBLP was written by a group of Texas ministers I believe.  I don't think Texas will be as forgiving of them.  Anyone making Jesus look bad will likely piss them off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JenniferJuniper

I hope it gives a fair trial with a conviction at the end

It's a civil suit so there will no convictions and the only damages awarded would be monetary, but it would be sweet if this happened:  "The lawsuit notes that IBLP is attempting to sell the Oak Brook Headquarters property and is planning to relocate to Texas, and it asks the court to impose a constructive trust on IBLP’s assets, preventing IBLP from spending down their resources until the lawsuit is resolved."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
notfundy

I know a little bit about D&O (Directors and Officers) and E&O (Errors & Omissions) insurance coverages for board members designed to protect them (board members) from personal liability in the instance of lawsuits brought against the corporation.  

But what about gross misconduct/negligence on the part of board members who knew or should have known what was going on with dirty ol'man Gothard?  Would they still be covered by this type of insurance?  Aside from that I wonder how much this might hurt Gil Bates' reputation?  Or will most people (who are not so much in the know about IBLP) just shrug it off, or not even realize there is a connection with the Bates patriach?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sad
Palimpsest

So they finally filed.  Yay!

There was some foreshadowing of this by RG a month or so.  I remember mentioning in another thread that Gibbs III had been retained by some of Gothard's victims to look into the IBLP finances.  

I would also appreciate FJ legal input on whether or not this lawsuit has a chance.  Failure to protect seems a rather tricky thing to prove in court, although just reading RG it seems that there are plenty of witnesses who say that the Gothard's behavior was common knowledge.  Also, why wasn't this filed in Federal Court as IBLP is active across state lines? Or is that a stupid question?  So Gibbs III is getting right into Daddy's face again?  I love this bit (my bolding):

The plaintiffs, through Gibbs III’s law firm, allege that Gibbs Jr’s organization had “had no qualification to conduct [the internal] investigation into allegations of sexual abuse and sexual harassment.” Furthermore, it alleges that “the internal investigation and the fee paid resulted in an internal investigation that was pre-ordained and nothing more than a cover-up of the allegations of sexual abuse, sexual harassment, and inappropriate/unauthorized touching that occurred at the Defendant IBLP.”

I really don't know what to think about Gibbs III.  Some of his previous cases where he defended churches/organizations protecting abusers (like the Old Schoolhouse and Tina Anderson cases) left a very bad taste in my mouth.  Can we really trust that he has finally seen the light and is really now devoted to working for victims?  And is going right up against Daddy in the process.  Or is he just seeing $$ signs and ambulance chasing victims.  Yes, I'm a cynic.

This bit from the comments on RG is fascinating too.  Beloved Sister seems to be  furious with BG but is a true IBLP believer otherwise, but  Gothard filed an injunction?   Say what?  Can someone with better google-fu than I find that?

Beloved Sister October 21, 2015 

You know as well as I do that Mr. Gothard is the culprit here and know one else.. Why is the lawsuit not aimed at him?? The board members were chosen by Mr.G to suit his desires, sorta like "yes men". I wonder if Mr.G is not the one behind some of this lawsuit itself since he was putting an injunction against the current board, from selling any Oak Brook or Hinsdale property?? After all he thinks it still belongs to him and not the board. [snipped rest of comment]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JenniferJuniper

So they finally filed.  Yay!

There was some foreshadowing of this by RG a month or so.  I remember mentioning in another thread that Gibbs III had been retained by some of Gothard's victims to look into the IBLP finances.  

I would also appreciate FJ legal input on whether or not this lawsuit has a chance.  Failure to protect seems a rather tricky thing to prove in court, although just reading RG it seems that there are plenty of witnesses who say that the Gothard's behavior was common knowledge.  Also, why wasn't this filed in Federal Court as IBLP is active across state lines? Or is that a stupid question?  So Gibbs III is getting right into Daddy's face again?  I love this bit (my bolding):

The plaintiffs, through Gibbs III’s law firm, allege that Gibbs Jr’s organization had “had no qualification to conduct [the internal] investigation into allegations of sexual abuse and sexual harassment.” Furthermore, it alleges that “the internal investigation and the fee paid resulted in an internal investigation that was pre-ordained and nothing more than a cover-up of the allegations of sexual abuse, sexual harassment, and inappropriate/unauthorized touching that occurred at the Defendant IBLP.”

I really don't know what to think about Gibbs III.  Some of his previous cases where he defended churches/organizations protecting abusers (like the Old Schoolhouse and Tina Anderson cases) left a very bad taste in my mouth.  Can we really trust that he has finally seen the light and is really now devoted to working for victims?  And is going right up against Daddy in the process.  Or is he just seeing $$ signs and ambulance chasing victims.  Yes, I'm a cynic.

This bit from the comments on RG is fascinating too.  Beloved Sister seems to be  furious with BG but is a true IBLP believer otherwise, but  Gothard filed an injunction?   Say what?  Can someone with better google-fu than I find that?

Beloved Sister October 21, 2015 

You know as well as I do that Mr. Gothard is the culprit here and know one else.. Why is the lawsuit not aimed at him?? The board members were chosen by Mr.G to suit his desires, sorta like "yes men". I wonder if Mr.G is not the one behind some of this lawsuit itself since he was putting an injunction against the current board, from selling any Oak Brook or Hinsdale property?? After all he thinks it still belongs to him and not the board. [snipped rest of comment]

 

One big reason to go after the board is that they may be covered under a liability insurance policy for negligent infliction of emotional distress for acts within the course and scope of their board duties.  Insurance as a  general rule is not available for any intentional acts.  It's more complicated than this, but that's the gist.

I don't see anything wrong with this as a strategy and of course, a big objective here is always going to be money.  No plaintiff law firm is going to take a case unless they see a payout no matter how noble the cause and a plaintiff is more likely to recoup damages if there is an insurance company paying for an expensive defense.  There is a cap on the amount of monetary damages any company would pay on behalf of the board, but probably not on legal expenses and costs.

I don't get Beloved Sister's comment about Gothard owning the property.  He wouldn't be putting an injunction on the sale of his own property.  He could try other ways to shelter it, but the board couldn't sell his property. The plaintiffs here are asking the court to put an injunction on the sale of any IBLP assets to prevent their liquidation prior to a judgement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sad
Palimpsest

So they finally filed.  Yay!

There was some foreshadowing of this by RG a month or so.  I remember mentioning in another thread that Gibbs III had been retained by some of Gothard's victims to look into the IBLP finances.  

I would also appreciate FJ legal input on whether or not this lawsuit has a chance.  Failure to protect seems a rather tricky thing to prove in court, although just reading RG it seems that there are plenty of witnesses who say that the Gothard's behavior was common knowledge.  Also, why wasn't this filed in Federal Court as IBLP is active across state lines? Or is that a stupid question?  So Gibbs III is getting right into Daddy's face again?  I love this bit (my bolding):

The plaintiffs, through Gibbs III’s law firm, allege that Gibbs Jr’s organization had “had no qualification to conduct [the internal] investigation into allegations of sexual abuse and sexual harassment.” Furthermore, it alleges that “the internal investigation and the fee paid resulted in an internal investigation that was pre-ordained and nothing more than a cover-up of the allegations of sexual abuse, sexual harassment, and inappropriate/unauthorized touching that occurred at the Defendant IBLP.”

I really don't know what to think about Gibbs III.  Some of his previous cases where he defended churches/organizations protecting abusers (like the Old Schoolhouse and Tina Anderson cases) left a very bad taste in my mouth.  Can we really trust that he has finally seen the light and is really now devoted to working for victims?  And is going right up against Daddy in the process.  Or is he just seeing $$ signs and ambulance chasing victims.  Yes, I'm a cynic.

This bit from the comments on RG is fascinating too.  Beloved Sister seems to be  furious with BG but is a true IBLP believer otherwise, but  Gothard filed an injunction?   Say what?  Can someone with better google-fu than I find that?

Beloved Sister October 21, 2015 

You know as well as I do that Mr. Gothard is the culprit here and know one else.. Why is the lawsuit not aimed at him?? The board members were chosen by Mr.G to suit his desires, sorta like "yes men". I wonder if Mr.G is not the one behind some of this lawsuit itself since he was putting an injunction against the current board, from selling any Oak Brook or Hinsdale property?? After all he thinks it still belongs to him and not the board. [snipped rest of comment]

 

One big reason to go after the board is that they may be covered under a liability insurance policy for negligent infliction of emotional distress for acts within the course and scope of their board duties.  Insurance as a  general rule is not available for any intentional acts.  It's more complicated than this, but that's the gist.

I don't see anything wrong with this as a strategy and of course, a big objective here is always going to be money.  No plaintiff law firm is going to take a case unless they see a payout no matter how noble the cause and a plaintiff is more likely to recoup damages if there is an insurance company paying for an expensive defense.  There is a cap on the amount of monetary damages any company would pay on behalf of the board, but probably not on legal expenses and costs.

I don't get Beloved Sister's comment about Gothard owning the property.  He wouldn't be putting an injunction on the sale of his own property.  He could try other ways to shelter it, but the board couldn't sell his property. The plaintiffs here are asking the court to put an injunction on the sale of any IBLP assets to prevent their liquidation prior to a judgement. 

OK, and thanks.  I agree that it makes complete sense to go after the board for the liability insurance.  It's hard to tell from the synopsis on RG whether the Plaintiffs are  claiming Failure to Protect solely because of the inadequate (if not fixed in advance) investigation by Gibbs, Jr. or because of a pattern of ignoring numerous incidents of sexual abuse and harassment over many years.  I'd assume that the individual board members had personal indemnification clauses, and that leaves the responsibility with IBLP, the institution, which was obviously insured.  So the Plaintiffs are going after the insurance money.

I was more asking what chances this sort of F to P suit would have in court, and why it is being filed in IL not in Federal court.

Beloved Sister doesn't strike me as one of the sharpest tools in the box, but I read her comment as claiming that Gothard, who resigned as president in 2014, has filed an injunction against the present board selling IBLP property.  IBLP was incorporated as a 501(c)3 back in the 60s so none of the property (with the possible exception of Gothard's childhood home) ever belonged to BG personally.  It all belonged to the corporation.

So if BG has filed an injunction against IBLP selling property it would mean that  BG is directly opposed to the BoD decisions to sell.  He is not still pulling IBLP strings from behind the scenes as we have suspected.  Some of us never really believed his resignation was real, so BG opposing the board would actually be good news.  It would indicate that he has been truly ousted but is fighting against "his" organization being taken apart by others.  BG has an enormous ego and no shame.

As to the timing of the lawsuit, I think it has been in train for a long time.  It's not clear to me if IBLP is just trying to downsize and more to TX because it has been running at a loss for years now.  Or is it trying to liquidate assets, move out of state, and hide the cash because the BoD knew the suit was about to be filed?

The plot thickens. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CloakNDagger

Not Gibbs. Ugh. Just get a competent lawyer instead of a high profile "Christian" lawyer that's probably been chasing you down. I wish one of these groups would just get a secular female lawyer who has done a good job with a track record in other cases. Those gals probably feel like he was sent to them by God and it's so wonderful and providential - which it isn't.

Edited by CloakNDagger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sad
Palimpsest

Not Gibbs. Ugh. Just get a competent lawyer instead of a high profile "Christian" lawyer that's probably been chasing you down. I wish one of these groups would just get a secular female lawyer who has done a good job with a track record in other cases. Those gals probably feel like he was sent to them by God and it's so wonderful and providential - which it isn't.

Yes.  Exactly what I was thinking - but stated much more succinctly.  Surely Gibbs III isn't the only lawyer out there who will take these cases?  I think he is ambulance chasing victims.  I just hope he does a half-way decent job representing them, if only for the money.  I do not like Gibbs III.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ladymissdiva

The lawsuit was filed against the Institute in Basic Life Principles (IBLP) and its current board members, John Stancil, Anthony Burrus, Gil Bates, Timothy Levendusky, Stephen Paine, and David York. It “seeks redress and damages for personal injuries based on the negligent and willful and wanton acts and omissions of the defendants with regard to sexual abuse and sexual harassment and similar allegations of malfeasance suffered by the plaintiffs.”

The suit also alleges that the move to Big Sandy, TX  is so the organization can “liquidate assets” totaling more than $100 million “in an attempt to flee the jurisdiction (State of Illinois) where this wrongful conduct occurred.”


recoveringgrace.org/2015/10/negligence-lawsuit-filed-against-iblp/

wnd.com/2015/10/stunning-lawsuit-alleges-sex-scandal-at-christian-ministry/

inquisitr.com/2505953/duggar-family-homeschool-program-sued-for-sexual-abuse/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hoipolloi

Glad to see the lawsuit but Gibbs? Ugh.

Re: board liability. They are a 501(c)(3) making significant money; latest IRS 990 from Guidestar is 2013: http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2013/366/108/2013-366108515-0a8c5604-9.pdf. The 990 lists insurance as an expense ($119k). Although it doesn't itemize it much, and it's likely that there a significant insurance costs associated with ILBP's real & physical property, it's hard to believe that the board did not insure the non-profit & themselves for the usual reasons this done. 

FYI: At that time, BG claimed to be working 105 hours a week for compensation of $25,000, while two other directors, Robert Barth (Asst Secretary) and Dwight Fredericksen (Treasurer) drew higher remunerations at $70,450 (45 hours a week) and $61,330 (50 hours a week).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PartriarchydefyinValkarie

As I listen (and Snark) to Kev Swanson's radio show,  they are bitching about American Girl dolls and no, not how rediculously expensive they are, but a gay family featured. Before he squawks, there is always this dumb 'Worldview in five minutes' hosted by the amazing Adam McManus *sarcasm* They said the lawsuit is why ATI in Chicago is going buhbye. They are liquidating to GTFO so they can't get sued, fleeing to Texas. :evil-laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sad
Palimpsest

@Buzzard here is the link to the court docket:  https://www.dupagecase.com/Clerk/allsearch.do
Case # 2015L 000980

You need to plonk down $15 to see the petition and I'm hoping a media outlet will spend that money for me and publish the whole thing soon. ;)

Thanks, @Ladymissdiva.  The WND artlcle is very good and @Formergothardite gets her wish as the Inquisitr, although focused on the Duggars, makes a really solid identification of the Bates family connections to IBLP and Gothard.  Sometime even the tabloids get things right.

I think the reasoning is correct that Gill III thinks IBLP may be trying to flee the IL jurisdiction, but allegations in a law suit are just that.  Allegations =/=  truth.  I still wonder why this was not filed in federal court.

Guidestar is very useful and there was a lot of money flowing in and out of IBLP.  However, if you look at the 990s more money has been flowing out than in over the last few years.  It also makes sense that they are trying to downsize.  Perhaps they are fleeing the lawsuit but using downsizing as an excuse.  It is going to be really interesting to watch this play out.

Edited by Palimpsest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
apple1

I agree with everything Palimpsest has said about this - and particularly with the comments about Gibbs III. Still trying to make sense of what is the actual motivation and intent. I take nothing at face value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.