THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, June 12, 1996 TAG: 9606110158
SECTION: ISLE OF WIGHT CITIZEN PAGE: 02 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: Linda McNatt
LENGTH: 90 lines
The letter my editor received recently was about an article I had written for The Virginian-Pilot on April 17.
It had just found its way to him, although it had been mailed earlier by a Windsor resident. It seemed a little late to use, the editor wrote in a note attached to the forwarded letter. He was reluctant ``after such a lapse,'' but said we should discuss it.
It wasn't complimentary to either me or to the story I wrote about the death of Windsor grocer Calvin Tuck and his son, Brad. But it was obviously filled with heartache. The letter writer, I knew, had lost somebody she loved deeply.
``Regarding the article titled, `Kindly grocer, 66, kills his son, then himself in Windsor,' written by Linda McNatt: Who Did What to Whom?'' Cassandra Hummel asked.
``It is generally believed that journalists have a duty to fairly report - NOT TO CONTORT - that which occurred. In this instance, Ms. McNatt chose to put an unfair slant on her article. She uses her pen in an irresponsible manner, defaming the honor and memory of an innocent young man while singing the praises of the father who shot him. Her lack of sensitivity towards those of us who loved Brad has caused immeasurable anguish.''
The things Hummel had to say were, in a way, shocking. Most comments about that story had been complimentary, several people remarking that I had made every effort to handle the story in a way that wouldn't hurt anybody - especially the family, who obviously was going through enough.
Writing such an article has never come easy for me. It was more difficult because I knew the Tucks. I agonized over every word.
I called Hummel to tell her that, and I wanted to hear her side of the story.
She was most upset, I think, because I had included the fact that Brad had a criminal record, information straight from investigating law enforcement officials.
She felt that Brad had been misrepresented as a troublemaker, a misfit of sorts.
Here's what she wrote:
``Anyone who knew Brad also knew that he was `different,' childlike in his innocence, not responsible for many of his actions. He was endearing, the first to offer a helping hand, talkative and inquisitive, quick to laugh, with a keen interest in music, but shy around strangers.''
She said, ``Brad tried desperately to fit in. Unfortunately, much of his life away from our family, of which he had become an integral part, was filled with pain. Brad had few friends and fewer pleasures. His past mistakes, referred to by Ms. McNatt, were similar to the mistakes of a child - free of malice.''
Brad was a gentle young man who never hurt anyone intentionally, Hummel told me on the phone. And it wasn't her intention to criticize his father either, she said in her letter.
``Calvin Tuck was a good man, under much stress, and I believe he acted without malice. Although it is impossible to understand the reasons for such a tragedy to occur, we feel only compassion for the Tuck family and for Calvin himself.''
Hummel said she had no ill will toward Calvin Tuck. She simply feels that the news story was ``a pitiful epitaph'' for the boy she had come to love.
Brad's biggest mistake in life, she said, was only that he was often gullible, very easily led. Others took advantage of that. And that's when he ended up in trouble.
``All of us have to learn to be more accepting of others who are different,'' Hummel said in our telephone conversation.
I couldn't agree more.
Then, she said in the letter: ``Ms. McNatt seems to have appointed herself judge and jury, content to condemn Brad for that which he had no control.''
I told her I wish she knew me better. If there is one thing I pride myself for - both personally and professionally - it's that I try so hard in this life never to judge others.
Over the years, I've often told my children: What's on the outside of people doesn't matter. Look for heart and guts. That's what is important.
Whether a person is a Democrat or a Republican, black or white, gay or straight, a Methodist or a Catholic or a Jew, it is, and always will be, most important, in my opinion, that we are all alike on the inside, where it counts.
And don't ever say, I've told my offspring, that you'd never do anything like that when you think somebody else has made a mistake. I don't know - and neither does anyone else - what any of us is capable of under the right - or the wrong - circumstances.
I wish I had known the wonderful boy named Brad that Hummel introduced to me. Considering the rest of his family, I don't know how - inside - he couldn't have been a bascially good human being caught in the throes of life, in circumstances beyond his control.
Now, thanks to Hummel, Brad Tuck has gotten a more appropriate epitaph.
``We grieve his passing; he will always be sorely missed,'' she said. ``May they, forever, rest in peace!''
And may we all learn to be a little more tolerant of those who are different. by CNB