The assumption these characters do things to reach their goals seems highly questionable to me. West's refusal to liberate "Roquat" for instance makes little or no sense. Everyone else was freed. Nahara was merely too close to death to leave by herself. The notion skinless man was possessed suffers from the problem that possessing a prisoner makes no sense. If you assume the prisoner was the Beast and his ability to at least possess someone from within was suppressed by East, that at least makes sense. The witches didn't hang themselves until East was dead. I suppose you could just say that West just felt like only women were worth freeing and obviously a man would deserve to stay in prison...but that sort of analysis verges on seeing Emerald City as some sort of demented parody of "feminism."
I thought West only released the prisoners who were witches. Leaving the sick and dying was a cover story I'm not sure if the prisoners knew much about each other. Since the man had been in the prison before Nahara got there, she may have assumed that he was a bad guy who deserved to be in the Prison of the Abject. I don't think any of the witches or the prisoners had realized the the flayed man was the Beast Forever. East knew, and the knowledge died with her. (Side note: since witches can kill witches, they can kill themselves. The gun only worked because East shot herself in the head.) Azureowl, thank you! Roquat is one of the names used by the Nome King, who is a recurring major villain in the books. All season I've been hoping to see him pop up. Having the Nome King be the Beast Forever is very satisfying.
