Sunday, September 6, 2009

Media Didn’t Tell Whole Story about “Settlement”

The spin by much of the mainstream media was that the Mount Vernon school board had really accomplished something. In reality, the “settlement” reached with the “Doe” family states that the school is still liable for the teacher at the center of their lawsuit.

The settlement also creates a couple of unusual obligations for the board even if this November election changes the makeup of the board. At the end of the administration hearing for teacher John Freshwater, the board is to make a public statement using wording contained in the settlement. The board also is to have an individual, who is named in the settlement, speak to Mount Vernon City School administrators and staff about church and state issues. (Click here to view copy of the settlement.)

The speaker is Melissa Rogers who is to give a presentation to school administration and staff on “1st Amendment, Religion, and Public Education.” Rogers is director of the Center for Religion and Public Affairs at Wake Forest University Divinity School. She was appointed by President Obama to the President’s Advisory Council for the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.

The settlement states that if Rogers is not available to speak then a “nationally recognized speaker” with “similar credentials” is to give the presentation.

The second unusual obligation the board has entered into is the public statement they have to make regardless of the outcome of the administration hearing:

“Throughout this process, the Mount Vernon City School District Board of Education has been concerned about elements in this community who decided to attack the student and family who reported concerns about John Freshwater. It is critical for our students to be able to come forward with concerns or issues so they can be addressed. The Board applauds [name redacted on document] for the courage he had in coming forward.”

After the referee makes his recommendation at the completion of the hearing, the board is responsible for deciding if Freshwater keeps his job. Board members have not been attending the hearing.

Although the name of the student was redacted on the copy of the settlement provided by the school, his name was released last October. He is Zachary Dennis; his parents are Stephen and Jennifer.

Only $5,500 for the student, plus one dollar for each parent, is being given directly to the Doe family. The rest—$115,500—is going to their legal costs. The attorney representing Freshwater in the administrative hearing, R. Kelly Hamilton, described the low amount the family is receiving as telling. “The merits of the allegations are reflected in the nuisance value of the settlement,” Hamilton stated. “John Freshwater counterclaimed against the Doe family because the allegations were false and defamatory"

The settlement has to be approved by the Knox County Probate Court. Due to one of the claims made in their lawsuit being that of an injury, the settlement may fall under the court’s “Rule 68.4” regarding an injury settlement with a minor. If the court finds that the settlement does involve an injury claim and the dollar amount of the settlement is $10,000 or less, the injury will have to be examined by a physician. “The application shall be accompanied by a current statement of the examining physician in respect to the injuries sustained, the extent of recovery thereto, and the physician’s prognosis,” court rules state.

During the time that the burn injury was alleged to exist on the arm of the student, no physician examined the area. Presumably, any examination now will result in the prognosis that he has no injury.

Only the Doe family has claimed to have seen the burn—no classmates, neighbors, or teachers have stepped forward during the hearing and claimed to have seen it. The student’s mother said she spoke with Superintendent Steve Short the day after the alleged incident happened but at the time did not want a big deal to be made out of the incident.

The middle school principal, Bill White, testified last October that he was asked by Short to investigate Freshwater’s side of the story. White, however, was not permitted to look at the student’s arm. “At the point when Mr. Short gave me the pictures, he said the parents didn’t want anybody to know who they were,” White testified. “And other than going through a thousand arms at school, I wouldn’t have.”

The alleged burn was the most sensational part of the statements made by the Doe family. They also claimed the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment was violated within the school district.

Attempts to get a response from legal representation for the school, in regards to why Freshwater was not included in the settlement, have been unsuccessful. Attorney Sarah Moore did not respond to a request for comment. Attorney David Millstone stated that he was not involved in the settlement.

Hamilton, attorney for Freshwater in the administrative hearing, did state that Freshwater was not asked to be a part of the recent settlement. “The last time John Freshwater was offered a settlement was in March 2009,” Hamilton stated. “John Freshwater wants the TRUTH to be revealed. John Freshwater is not looking for a settlement that simply gets him out of the legal action - he wants TRUTH which will vindicate him.”

Thursday, August 27, 2009

School Board Votes To Give Teacher’s Accusers $121,000

Editorial

In a strange move—but perhaps one that should not come as any surprise—the Mount Vernon City School Board voted Wednesday to give the Dennis family $121,000. Had this been any other school board, you might expect that they had reached a settlement. Not so for this board.

The lawsuit will continue in spite of giving thousands of dollars—through the board’s insurance company—to the suing family. The headline in the Mount Vernon News would have you believe that the lawsuit has been settled—the News went so far as to title their article “School board resolves federal lawsuit.”

In return for the money, the Dennis family is supposed to drop as defendants: the board, superintendent and middle school principal. The lawsuit will continue but with the pretense of only including the teacher, John Freshwater.

The News quotes the board as making a statement that implies the payment to the Dennis family will help the school district focus on educating the students. “Being in the business of educating children, the board recognizes the need to remain focused on what is best for the students of this district,” the board stated, according to the News.

The payment, when it is made, will in effect help fund the family's continued lawsuit against the teacher. Does this help the district focus on educating the students? Would the students, and tax payers, been better served if the board had only agreed on a payment—if there really was a need to pay the suing family—on the condition that the lawsuit IN ITS ENTIRITY be dropped?

Tuesday, August 11, 2009

A Questionable Science: New Book Takes On Evolution

Book review.

Supporters of prohibiting evolution from being questioned in the classroom like to evade the problems with the theory by turning the debate’s focus onto creationism. Author Lisa A. Shiel takes evolutionists to task for this type of evasiveness in her new book The Evolution Conspiracy: Vol. 1 Exposing Life’s Inexplicable Origins & The Cult of Darwin.

Shiel approaches the evolution controversy from a secular viewpoint. She points out that it is not just those trying to promote creationism that have serious doubts about evolution as legitimate science.

In confronting the status quo, Shiel will undoubtedly receive rebuttals that go no deeper than name calling. Some critics will probably point to the subject matter of her previous book Backyard Bigfoot: The True Story of Stick Signs, UFOs, & the Sasquatch as reason to dismiss what she has to say. This book is not for them. Shiel has written for a lay audience that is willing to listen to the facts about the “science” of evolution.

In this book, Shiel delves into the ambiguity surrounding definitions of the scientific terms involved in the study of evolution and other disagreements in the science community. (Topics include punctuated equilibrium and gradualism.) The consensus among scientists is that evolution took place—somehow.

Scientists offer the “explanation” that evolution works by gradual change through mutations and natural selection—somehow this led a single cell over billions of years to produce humans. Try testing that in the laboratory. Shiel says that scientists have skipped over the scientific method in their hast to conclude that evolution is true.

Let’s not forget the fossil record. Darwin even recognized in his day that the absence of numerous links posed the biggest challenge to his idea. Punctuated equilibrium—which Shiel abbreviates to “punk eek”—attempts to sidestep the problem by stating that evolution occurs in occasional spurts that don’t make it into the fossil record. (Would anyone like a miracle with that explanation?)

Paleoanthropologists, for their part, sift through the fossil record looking for any evidence they can find of the missing links. Shiel says that their finds often consist of just a few bones or a partial skeleton reconstructed from bits of bones that were scattered across a wide area. As an example, Shiel points to the famous “Lucy” skeleton. Only 40% of the skeleton was recovered but it is still sometimes referred to as “almost complete.”

The 132 page book cuts through the confusion in the science community and offers readers explanations that get as close as possible to what scientists are thinking. Readers, however, will be left with one big question: Why would anyone think evolution is a fact?

The book, to be released September 1, is available for pre-order at Amazon.com.