"The board tries, but God decides, when to kill The Prince of Tides"

Not at all surprisingly to those of us who attended public school in this area, "The Prince of Tides" by Pat Conroy has been banned at Nitro High School in West Virginia, and it appears that Conroy's "Beach Music" is next on the chopping block.

Most are familiar with the book via the movie by the same name, starring Barbra Streisand and Nick Nolte. It is the story of a teacher/football coach who has a twin sister, an extremely troubled yet famous New York poet. When his sister attempts suicide again and becomes so disassociated that she is unable to help in her own treatment, he is forced from his dull, predictable life to assist her psychiatrist in understanding why her patient reacted in that manner. The narrator is thus forced to confront the dysfunction and severe traumas which he, his mother, and his siblings had endured, and which are at the source of his sister's loss of identity. It's an excellent piece of modern literature by any measure.

According to Wikipedia, "Beach Music" is described as follows: "Jack McCall, an American living in Rome with his young daughter, is trying to find peace after the recent trauma of his wife's suicide. But his search for solitude is disturbed by his sister-in-law, and by two schoolfriends who want his help in tracking down another classmate who went underground as a Vietnam protestor and never resurfaced. As Jack begins a journey that encompasses the past and the present in both Europe and the American South, he also begins a quest that will lead him to shocking truths."

Leona Tyree, a parent who pulled her son out of the advanced-placement English Literature class at Nitro High, "“We complained about ‘The Prince of Tides'. I could not read the whole book. I found it very offensive.”

Perhaps if Tyree had actually finished reading it, she would have realized that it was nowhere near as offensive as she originally thought. The so-called "offensive" content is not gratuitious; far from it, in fact. While it describes a rape, that description is necessary to the story.

"The Prince of Tides" is therefore not pornography, despite its sexual content. It is literature, and no intelligent person would think otherwise. If these parents are so ignorant that they can't see the difference, I can't help but marvel that their children ever got into an advanced-placement literature class in the first place. In fact, I'm surprised that their children are interested in real literature at all, with narrow-minded role models like them at home.

At any rate, because the advanced-placement course taught a book that someone's mommy thinks is "very offensive", all the students both now and in the future at Nitro High are being denied a quality education in modern American literature. The class had already read the book, and had already been tested on it. Their grades on that test will not count toward their course final grade unless a "committee" now approves the use of the book.

Huh? Who, exactly, is on this committee? Is it comprised even in part of overreacting parents, rather than professionals in the fields of education and literature? If so, it's a complete waste of time.

High school students are not children, and shouldn't be treated like children. They know what sex is, whether their parents want to believe that or not. They know that pedophilia and rape exist, and all they have to do to find out about those sunjects is read a newspaper, or watch the news. Even watching a few episodes of "Law and Order SVU" will fill them in quite well on the subject of sex crimes. Reading "The Prince of Tides" is not going to turn them into pedophiles or rapists, or make them more likely to fall victim to sexually-based offenses. Instead, it helps them understand what victims of those crimes experience, not only at that time, but as they attempt to make their way through life with the enduring scars of their abuse.

It is especially important for students from the Bible Belt to read books like "The Prince of Tides", because it confronts a lot of the ignorance and familial abuse so common in this area of our country. Indeed, it confronts truths that some of the students may well have experienced in their own lives. Is it possible that's the real reason why parents are opposed to the book? I can't help but wonder.

There is hope, though. About 40 students at Nitro High staged a silent protest on October 5th in opposition to the banning of the book. About 40 students wore white t-shirts bearing the words "The board tries, but God decides, when to kill the Prince of Tides", a play on the book's statement "man wonders, but God decides, when to kill the prince of tides".

I really want one of those t-shirts.

According to Nitro High student Justin Fletcher, he and his classmates want to protest “the censorship of any kind of book for educational purposes.” It's heartening to see that the students understand the stupidity in banning books, even if their parents don't see it. After all, these students actually read the book from beginning to end, so they're better qualified to make the statement than their parents. Furthermore, it is well recognized that banning ideas is not conducive to a free society. According to Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, "Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us."

Books regularly challenged for banning include "Catcher in the Rye" by J.D. Salinger, "Of Mice and Men" by John Steinbeck, and "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" by Mark Twain.

This latest attempt at banning a piece of American literature is particularly interesting because Saturday marked the end of Banned Books Week. Read more about banned books at the American Library Association's Office of Intellectual Freedom website.

Ricky Williams: Did police arrest the killer, or just someone involved in the fight?

Ricky Williams had just moved into his new home at Seager Apartments in Milton the day he was murdered. Three people - one man, two women - attacked him in that apartment, and four days later, he was dead from the injuries incurred in that attack. Police have arrested the male attacker, Danny Vaughn, age 36 of Huntington, but have not arrested the females. Even so, it took them almost a month to arrest anyone, despite it allegedly being common knowledge in the community who had attacked Williams. Williams knew his attackers.

It was claimed by some to be a hate crime, because Williams was gay and his assailants allegedly called him names related to his sexual orientation during the attack; while others said he was not attacked as a result of his sexual orientation, but for other reasons.

Just to be clear, since there seems to be a lot of confusion about this issue .... if he was attacked because he was homosexual, then it's a hate crime under federal statutes (but not under WV statutes, where the hate crime laws do not cover sexual orientation); but if he was attacked for other reasons, then it is not a hate crime even if they did call him slurs during the attack.

To be even more clear ... as a humanist, and as a libertarian, I am opposed to hate crime laws. All crimes are hate crimes, after all, and all crimes of violence should be punished severely. Furthermore, why should the murder of one person be considered more or more or less heinous than the murder of another? We are all equal, or at least we are supposed to be, in the eyes of the law. As long as there are laws setting aside specific classes of people, whether for punishment or protection, equality will never be achieved.

The truth is, though it is admittedly heinous to commit violence against any person due to the color of their skin or the sexual orientation, or any other protected reason, it is quite rare. Almost always there are other even stronger motives, such as revenge or robbery. So even if hate crimes legislation is proper, it is overused when applied to all crimes against protected classes of people.

But, I digress.

As usual, the local Huntington news didn't cover the story very well, much to my chagrin since it was one of those stories which caught my attention; but Gary Harki of the Charleston Gazette wrote a very good article, explaining what happened that night.

According to witnesses, Williams had stated earlier that day that he'd had a "silly argument" with certain people, and that they were not welcome in his apartment. That night, the fight started in his apartment - it is unclear whether he allowed them in, or if they somehow got in without his knowledge and/or consent - and one of the neighbors who heard the fight called the landlord's grandson, Michael Seager, who lives on the property. Seager proceeded quickly to the apartment and confronted the attackers. Witnesses including Seager state that the two men - Williams and an assailant - were fist fighting, with Williams on the floor, when a female assailant literally tore a leg off the kitchen table, and began beating Williams with it. When neighbors intervened to stop the fight, that same woman began hitting a neighbor with the table leg as well.

Police were called and, not at all surprisingly to those familiar with law enforcement in this area, the police basically ignored the fact that a crime had occurred. They did, however, offer to take Williams to a hospital. Williams declined, saying he was okay, and the police left. Seager took Williams with him, and shortly thereafter it became clear that Williams was very seriously injured. He began to sweat profusely and became very confused, at one point saying, in response to a question about what year it was, that it was 1964. His bowels opened involuntarily, and he soiled himself. Clearly, he was very seriously injured, and based upon his symptoms had likely had suffered a severe head injury. An ambulance was called.

The two female paramedics who responded, however, did not react at all the way one would expect and demand. According to Seager, both of them refused to touch Williams, acting like children instead of medical professionals (according to the article, the conversation between the paramedics was "‘I’m not gonna touch him, you gonna touch him.’ The other says, ‘No, I’m not gonna touch him.’”). They demanded that Williams walk to the ambulance. He took a couple of steps, and collapsed onto the floor. They expressed disgust, calling him drunk (it is still unclear whether Williams had, in fact, been drinking, but friends say he did have an alcohol problem from time to time).

It has since come to light that Williams was HIV positive and had been for 10 years, but the paramedics weren't referencing his disease. Even if they had known about his HIV status (and there is no reason to believe they did), they should be prepared and professional enough to handle any emergency medical situation. Instead, they appeared to be disgusted about the fact that he had soiled himself. Seager described the EMTs as "just weird" and "criminally negligent". It certainly would seem so, which is probably why Cabell County EMS refused to comment for the article.

Williams was taken to Cabell Huntington Hospital, then to St. Mary's Medical Center, both in Huntington. It is said that there was a deep gash in his head (that being the case, why didn't paramedics realize he was seriously injured?), and that he lost consciousness; and it is alleged that he was also neglected at the hospital, since one visitor had to get staff to help arrange Williams on the bed (another big lack of surprise from me, given that St. Mary's is a hospital I wouldn't go to myself, due to recent past experience with their incompetence).

Four days later, Ricky Williams died. The gash in his head was covered by a bandage at his funeral.

As stated, police have arrested the male assailant, but have not arrested either of the female assailants. According to the Western Regional Detention Center, the man arrested is only 5'7", and weighs only 136 pounds; in other words, he was not much bigger than the average female, and smaller than many females. No one ever said he was brandishing a weapon during the fight, but several say one of the females was brandishing a table leg, and that she had repeatedly hit Williams with it.

Think about it for a moment. He died of head injuries, and there was a deep gash in his head. Is it likely that a man, using only his bare hands, caused that kind of injury? Or is it more likely that a female, wielding a table leg as a weapon, inflicted Williams' injuries?

The question then becomes, why haven't police arrested the females who attacked Williams? According to witness statements, clearly, at least one of the females was every bit as violent and out of control as the male assailant, if not more so. After all, it would never occur to the average person to tear off a table leg and attack someone with it, except perhaps in self-defense. However, the witnesses said Williams was on the floor being beaten by the male, so this was not a case of self-defense. It was a vicious, animalistic attack on a human being, over a "silly argument". So why is the woman who attacked him still walking the streets?

The community is not safe until the women who attacked Williams are behind bars, along with their male counterpart. If these women would attack a man in such a vicious manner, there is no reason to believe they wouldn't attack you, or me.

Logan Shane Goodall Alleged Abuser's Trial Repeatedly Delayed

At long last, the trial of Michael Kent Merrifield, the 31-year-old boyfriend of Logan Shane Goodall's mother Pepper Dawn Eren, has been set for January 7, 2008.

Merrifield has been charged with first-degree murder, first-degree sexual assault, sexual abuse by a parent or guardian and child neglect by a guardian or parent resulting in death.

That doesn't really give a thorough picture of what happened in this case, though.

Logan Shane Goodall was two years old in 2005, when he was murdered after having been systematically tortured and raped. According to the Medical Examiner, little Logan's buttocks and feet had been burned by someone dipping him into either boiling water or chemicals. He had also been sexually assaulted by pinching of his penis. His rectum had been sexually violated, and his scrotum had been either cut, bitten, or torn. Eventually little Logan was either kicked, punched or beaten so severely that his liver ruptured. He also suffered head injuries from that severe beating, and both injuries were serious enough to cause his death.

As if that's not shocking enough, Merrifield's parents John and Diane - John Merrifield is a Dunbar physician and one-time "Doctor of the Year", no less - have been indicted for gross negligence resulting in death. Dr. Merrifield was additionally indicted on two counts of treating Logan for serious wounds resulting from abuse (the burns and scrotum injury), and failing to report the abuse to authorities.

Diane Merrifield was charged because she allegedly lied to authorities when asked about the case. She allegedly claimed that she did not know Logan or his mother, and that her son lived out of state.

The trials of Dr. John Merrifield and his wife, Diane, are currently scheduled for November 5, 2007 in Kanawha County.

Pepper Dawn Eren, Logan's mother, stated that she believed Michael Merrifield when he told her Logan’s injuries - including bruises, burns, and a severe wound on his scrotum - were the result of accidents. She said she also relied on information from her longtime family doctor, none other than Dr. Merrifield, when he told her Logan’s injuries were accidental and not serious. Eren pleaded guilty and is serving one to ten years in prison for child neglect causing injury. Her first parole bid was denied. Additionally other members of the Eren family were allegedly told by Dr. Merrifield that the injuries were accidental and not the result of abuse, which is why none of them reported suspected abuse to authorities.

Don't hold your breath for a January trial in the Michael Merrifield case, though. Merrifield, who was arrested in September 2005, has been awaiting trial for years, with delay after delay. He has repeatedly fired his attorneys, he has claimed unfair treatment and moved the court to transfer him to the jail in Charleston, among other things. At present, the delay is due to the unavailability of an expert witness for the defense, and Merrifield's attorney made a motion for change of venue, arguing that pretrial publicity will make it impossible for Merrifield to get a fair trial in Putnam County.

Merrifield might actually have a point this time, given that Putnam County is a tight-knit community and there is an active "Justice For Logan" contingent in that community. Another problem is that the case is now known statewide (and, in some cases, nationwide) since Logan's Law, formally known as the WV Child Protection Act of 2006, was enacted as a result of what happened to little Logan.

However, it is not the fault of the state of West Virginia that Merrifield repeatedly delayed his own trial for two years. Had he gone to trial within a normal timeframe, most potential jurors would be generally unfamiliar with the case. Of course, on the other hand this is a complicated case, complicated even further since one of Logan's grandparents is a registered sex offender, and like all defendants Merrifield should be permitted to defend himself to the best of his ability against the charges.

However, it is said that justice delayed is justice denied, and Michael Merrifield has had two years to prepare his defense. The judge should transfer the case to another county, in an abundance of caution, and it should proceed to trial quickly. It is far better to err on the side of caution in this case, given that if he is convicted, an appellate court may decide that pretrial publicity did indeed cause Merrifield to not get a fair trial. If that happens the trial will have to be held yet again, at great additional and unnecessary expense to taxpayers.

In the meantime, Michael Kent Merrifield remains held without bond at the Western Regional Detention Center in Barboursville. He is of course assumed innocent until proven guilty, as are all accused.