Actually, it was better than a good catch.

I received the article in an email and only verified that it acually appeared in a news paper. I guess a clue that I should have seen was that the journalist was reporting on a friend.

PT you did a better job in checking sources than the reporter. That last statement points back to something that I want to get into a bit in the main topic.

Opps, sorry, cancel point number 5.

I am not too sure whether the “Poem club” is or is not around. And there is a dispute at least based on the article and the response.

Little more digging. Nothing much to report except:

The facts that seem to be in agreement between both parties are:
1) Bill(William) Nevins contract not renewed.
2) “Anti-war” poem was read out by a girl Courtney. And there was a complaint.
3) “Pro-war” poem read out by principal.
4) Courtney’s poem was read by the school administrators as a result of the initial incident.
5) The “Poem club” is no longer around.

On a general level, it would seem that if freedom of speech allows for anti-war poem, then pro-war poem should also be allowed. Although some people could find fault with regards to the audience or reach of each poem.

The ‘poem club’ apparently was created or brought back by Bill Nevins and the question is whether does his departure mean that the club have to close down. Was there no suitable replacement?

It would thus seem that the issue falls on the employment of Bill Nevins as Courtney is not a party to the litigation. Some more conspiracy bound minds might of course think that Courtney is made not to complain since her parent works for the school and the way the school treated Bill Nevins was a warning to Courtney’s parent or Courtney herself. One may also claim that even the mere asking of Courtney to show them the poem, however nicely they phrased, is an attempt to warn her. But that seems less credible if you think about it, as the school have to investigate when a complaint is made. And it seems that after the investigation, Courtney was vindicated.

There is a Bill Nevins suing the Rio Rancho school that is for sure. And that the case is now sent to Federal courts. Furthermore, it would seem that the ACLU is not representing Bill Nevins but the website which I posted above is run by the people representing Bill Nevins. That much from the court filling below.
———
NEVINS W VS RIO RANCHO ET AL

—Case Detail—
Case #:  D-202-CV-200306305  
Current Judge:  DIVISION EIGHTEEN
Case Status:  CL FINAL CLOSED Status Date: 10/06/2003
Filing Date:  09/15/2003
Court:  Albuquerque District Court

—Parties to this Case—
DEFENDANT D 1 RIO RANCHO PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Attorney(s):  JERRY A. WALZ
 
DEFENDANT D 2 TRIPP GARY
Attorney(s):  JERRY A. WALZ
 
DEFENDANT D 3 TRIPP GARY
Attorney(s):  JERRY A. WALZ
 
DEFENDANT D 4 PASS ELL SUE
Attorney(s):  JERRY A. WALZ
 
DEFENDANT D 5 PASS ELL SUE
Attorney(s):  JERRY A. WALZ
 
DEFENDANT D 6 CLEVELAND SUE
Attorney(s):  JERRY A. WALZ
 
DEFENDANT D 7 CLEVELAND SUE
Attorney(s):  JERRY A. WALZ
 
PLAINTIFF P 1 NEVINS WILLIAM
Attorney(s):  ERIC SIROTKIN
 

—Register of Actions Activity—
Event Date Event Description P Type P Num Amt
10/06/2003 CLS: REMOVAL TO FED COURT  
FILING NOTICE TO ADVERSE PARTY OF REMOVAL TO FEDERAL COURT
(DFS)
 
10/01/2003 JDG: JUDGE ASSIGN ROTATION  
 
09/15/2003 SUMMONS ISSUED  
 
09/15/2003 OPN: COMPLAINT  
FILING COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
 
09/15/2003 ASM: JURY 6 PERSON P 1 100.00
FILING JURY DEMAND, $100.00 FEE PAID (PL)
 
09/15/2003 ASM: CIVIL FILING W/ ARBITRAT P 1 122.00
 

—Judge Assignment History—
Assign Date Judge Name Sequence # Assignment Event Desc
09/15/2003 SUSAN M CONWAY 1
10/01/2003 DIVISION EIGHTEEN 2 JDG: JUDGE ASSIGN ROTATION

—Civil Complaints—
09/15/2003 1 OPN: COMPLAINT 3 10/06/2003 TRANSFERRED
Parties to this Complaint:
RIO RANCHO PUBLIC SCHOOLS D – 1
TRIPP GARY D – 2
TRIPP GARY D – 3
PASS ELL SUE D – 4
PASS ELL SUE D – 5
CLEVELAND SUE D – 6
CLEVELAND SUE D – 7
NEVINS WILLIAM P – 1
  Causes of Action:
  1 – OTHER DAMAGES

PopTarts, good catch on the poem thing. (posted while I was writing my previous post!)  “Facts in dispute!”  I hereby press the “pause” button on my comments about the New Mexico incident. 

Two of my kids were disciplined from time to time over the years in public schools for saying things the principals didn’t like.  It’s always bothered me that schools have to be “speech free” zones… or do they?

Omigosh, VernR, that New Mexico story is amazing.  How some people can “not get it” on such a scale.  But i’m not sure it’s off-topic.  How can anyone develop critical thinking skills when they risk such a dire outcome?  How can teachers teach it?

I have no qualifications for anything at all, except maybe my preference for thin-crust over deep pan.  I’m the farthest thing in the world from an authority on any other subject. 

I wish classrooms could have discussions like this where they try to figure out which facts are true (often in dispute, and rightly so as the press is never totally unbiased) and which opinions are supported by those facts.  That’s what is missing from education – all the fun! 

Ok, here is the main website for the people representing Bill Nevens.

http://aaf.virtualactivism.net/

Let me try to dig on more stuff on this incident.

PS: I am experiencing something odd. Half the time I hit the submit button, nothing gets submitted.

Hmm, somethings does not look right with regards to that report. So I did a little checking.

According to the ACLU New Mexico site,
http://www.aclu-nm.org/news-press-2003-04-18.htm
there is a similar case that occur in 2003 but it does not involve Bill Nevens or the Rio Rancho High School. Instead the ACLU case relates to Rio Grande High School and incident in question relates to “Carmelita Roybal and Allen Cooper, and APS Guidance Counselor Ken Tabish, in retaliation for posters, artwork, and other materials in their classrooms and offices that expressed opinions about the war on Iraq.”

The ACLU NM site does not mention the Bill Nevens case AT ALL, which would be odd if ACLU does represent Bill Nevens.

Further googling turned up this interesting bit of information, which seems to sort of support some of my suspicion. One may question the truth of it since I could not find the following produced in a main media source. It also has a letter by the student student Courtney. (thought for a moment Les’s daughter was involved, but anywho a whole other point relating to names and there is a thread for it.)

—————————————-
Thank you for your e-mail to the Rio Rancho Public Schools.

Recently, the Daytona Beach News-Journal published an editorial highly critical of Rio Rancho High School and some of its staff members. It was written by Bill Hill, a columnist for the paper and, he states, a
friend of Bill Nevins, an untenured teacher whose contract was not renewed at the end of the 2002-03 school year. Mr. Nevins is currently
engaged in a legal action against the Rio Rancho
Public Schools.

While we recognize the right of newspapers to engage in fair criticism, such criticism should be grounded in the facts. We are disturbed that
neither the writer nor the Daytona Beach News-Journal contacted the school district for information or comment. This editorial, simply
put, is rife with inaccuracies, misinformation, and outright untruths. Its publication constitutes a reckless disregard for the
truth to such a degree that Rio Rancho Public Schools has asked its lawyers to review
and evaluate what legal recourse may be available.

Because Mr. Nevins’ case is in litigation and involves a personnel issue, Rio Rancho Public Schools has been limited in what it can say in
response to the many misrepresentations that have
appeared in the media.

We are unable to discuss the reasons Mr. Nevins was not rehired. However, we can state the reasons have nothing to do with the exercise
of free speech or free expression. This is not a free speech issue.

The original lawsuit included three causes of action. Two of these claims, for breach of his employment contract and for retaliation, have
since been dismissed by the federal court.

We wish to assure the public that the teaching,
reading, and writing of poetry are alive and well at Rio Rancho High School. The editorial’s
contention that the school’s principal ordered an end to the teaching, reading, and writing of poetry is so ludicrous as to be almost
laughable.

While we cannot discuss a case in litigation, we can address some of the inaccuracies in the editorial that are not part of the case. The editorial describes an incident involving art
students and teachers and “un-American” student posters. This incident did not occur at Rio Rancho High School or anywhere in the Rio
Rancho Public Schools. It happened in a neighboring New Mexico school district and was widely reported by the local media. A cursory check of the archives of the Albuquerque papers would have revealed this fact.

Neither the Rio Rancho School Employees, Union(the union representing most district employees) nor the American Civil Liberties Union are parties to the current legal action.

The editorial states that the principal read a
patriotic poem at a flag-raising ceremony and shouted “shut your face,” to those who did
not share his opinion. There was indeed a ceremony held to receive a flag that had been flown in the war theatre and donated to the school. A poem written by a soldier serving in Iraq was read (not shouted), but not by the principal. The “shut your face” reference
is part of this poem.

The editorial states that Mr. Nevins was unable to go to work at another school because the principal wouldn’t forward his credentials.
On September 11, 2003, the Rio Rancho Observer
reported that Mr. Nevins was employed at a public charter school in Albuquerque. Procedurally, requests for credentials must be properly authorized by the employee and
submitted to the Human Resources Department (not the principal). All such requests are promptly processed.

The editorial describes a poem written by a student named Courtney, and states that her mother (described as being a teacher at
the school) was ordered by the principal to destroy the girl’s poem or face dismissal. Not true. The student’s mother is not a teacher;
however, she was and continues to be employed by the school district.

She was never threatened with being fired, nor was she ordered to destroy the poem.

The district stands behind former RRHS principal Gary Tripp and others who have been unfairly maligned in this editorial and in other media in
the months since Mr. Nevins’ departure. We also
regret that Courtney and her family have been subjected to unwanted public attention. About
a year ago, Courtney wrote a statement that was
published in two local papers as a letter to the editor. She has given us permission to share
this letter with you, and we hope it helps you further understand this situation.

Thank you for your inquiry and for giving us the
opportunity to respond.

We look forward to a resolution of this issue in the legal system.

Kim Vesely
Communications Officer
Rio Rancho Public Schools

Please feel free to share this response.
______

To Whom It May Concern:

This is the first and last time I will discuss
publicly the controversy surrounding my poem, the Slam Poetry Club, and RRHS teacher Bill
Nevins, the club’s sponsor.

During the fall semester at RRHS I wrote a poem
entitled “Revolution X.” I, along with other students, delivered poetry in the
Performing Arts Center at the high school. We
received praise from staff and students in the packed auditorium. Early in the spring term,
I read my poem again on the school announcements.
This poem is a social commentary. It comments on how our society claims to value education,
but in actuality spends energy, time and resources on other things, such as war. A staff member, who has a military background
and military mindset, complained about the poem, saying it was an anti-war speech.

I can only assume that he cannot distinguish between a speech and a poem, or that he did not recognize it as an allegory. Due to the complaint, the administration asked for a
copy of the poem. No one demanded that my parents “search my room” for the poem,
as has been reported. I delivered it to the RRHS
administrators when I got back from Spring Break because they wished to read it.

They read it, looking for two things: profanity and incitement to violence. They found neither. I was not disciplined. My freedom of speech was not violated. It has been suggested that I was not disciplined because my parents are on staff at the high school. Let me assure you that’s not
the case. In my years at Rio Rancho High School, I’ve been tardy to class and been busted for dress code, receiving my fair share of hours
in after-school detention. Staff members’ kids are not given preferential treatment.

When I asked the administration why Mr. Nevins was put on administrative leave, I was told that the reasons would not be discussed with me, but that they had absolutely nothing to do with me or my poem. I accept that. The administration at RRHS has been nothing but supportive of my poetry endeavors and continue to encourage my writing, even in light of all this nonsense. Will the Slam Poetry Club continue to function in the absence of Mr. Nevins? I don’t know. I don’t plan to participate because I simply do not have the time. I’m trying to make a good grade in Chemistry, maintain my GPA, choose a college for next year, and get on with my life.

However, I am angry about two things. My poem has been put on the Internet. I did not give permission for anyone to print it or copy it. What makes it worse is that lines have been changed and added. My poem has been prostituted for the world to see. My freedom of speech has been violated because I chose not to speak, but now my words are under scrutiny despite my attempts otherwise.

My family and I have been bombarded for weeks with questions about all of this by newspapers, TV stations, and even national publications. My family’s well-earned Spring Break was interrupted repeatedly. This has caused undue stress for my family and is not appreciated. I will comment no further on the subject. I will accept neither calls nor visitors wishing to discuss anything pertaining to this issue. Now that curiosity has been satisfied, I can only hope that we will focus on something more important, like bringing home everyone fighting in the war we insist on having.

Sincerely,

Brock, you didn’t hurt anything. That’s error is related to the cache used by EE to keep database access down to a minimum. I’ve seen a couple of references to it on the support forums so it seems like there may be the odd occasion where the cache system trips over itself.

VernR, EE has the option to auto-link URLs entered into comments which I currently have turned on. MovableType had a similar option, but it only worked if you didn’t allow HTML in the comments (for reasons I never understood) whereas in EE it works regardless.

That’s interesting. I copied the URL from an email, where it was an active link. It came in as an active link rather than text.

decrepitoldfool, Thanks for jumping in. Pop Tarts opened up some topics where I don’t feel particularly qualified to make a usefull reply.

This is pretty much off the subject of the thread, but, when someone flagged this to my attention, I felt the need to fling down a post.

http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/Opinion/Editorials/03OpOPN62051504.htm

A high school teacher in New Mexico was coaching a poetry club. One of his students read one of her poems at the local Barne’s & Noble, and then later she read it over the School’s TV system. The principle and a ‘school military liason’ person declared the poem un-American. The teacher was subsequently fired. There’s more.

Presumeably the ‘school military liason’ person has something to do with an ROTC program. If so then this person’s oath of office included the phrase ‘uphold and support the Constitution.’ Way to go there pal.

I do want to get back to the discussion, but I’m falling behind in my job as email curmudgeon (and yard worker).