Ness County Attorney Craig Crosswhite said the mistreatment charge most closely fit the situation. "I looked at the statutes and spoke to the attorney general's office," he said. "This was a very unusual set of circumstances, and this is the law that most closely applied to the situation."
The way I read this, it almost looks like this attorney was searching to find something to charge the boyfriend with. My question is, why does someone have to be "guilty" in this situation? The woman is obviously troubled, she stayed in that bathroom all by herself (meaning, he didn't hold her prisoner), and he took care of her in some way. We may not agree with everything he did and we may have done something different, but are we really in a situation here where someone needs to be charged with a crime?
The boyfriend says that if he's guilty of anything it's not getting help sooner. In extraordinary circumstances people often react outside of "normal." This guy could have done a bunch of things differently, but was his failure to call the police or doctors or someone along those lines criminal?
I agree. While the boyfriend was obviously wrong in what he did, I think he was doing it out of good intentions. If he was actually a jerk, he would've just left when the relationship became too much to handle. Even though he was incredibly stupid both for continuing to enable her by bringing her food and for not calling for help earlier, in the end it was the woman's decision to stay on the toilet as long as she did.
wake wrote:I agree. While the boyfriend was obviously wrong in what he did, I think he was doing it out of good intentions. If he was actually a jerk, he would've just left when the relationship became too much to handle. Even though he was incredibly stupid both for continuing to enable her by bringing her food and for not calling for help earlier, in the end it was the woman's decision to stay on the toilet as long as she did.
you think they uhhhh did stuff while she was sitting there rotting away?
I've heard of people getting bed sores from laying in the same position and not moving, wouldn't that have happened instead of here skin attaching to the seat?
I ain't askin' nobody for nothin, If I can't get it on my own. - Charlie Daniels
markj11 wrote:I've heard of people getting bed sores from laying in the same position and not moving, wouldn't that have happened instead of here skin attaching to the seat?
I don't think her skin actually attached to the seat. Most likely her body eventually shifted or she gained enough weight that the seat couldn't be removed, similar to how a wedding ring can get stuck.
markj11 wrote:I've heard of people getting bed sores from laying in the same position and not moving, wouldn't that have happened instead of here skin attaching to the seat?
That article I linked to essentially said that she had bedsores to such a degree that her legs adhered to the seat. She apparently sat on that toilet for one month straight.
markj11 wrote:I've heard of people getting bed sores from laying in the same position and not moving, wouldn't that have happened instead of here skin attaching to the seat?
That article I linked to essentially said that she had bedsores to such a degree that her legs adhered to the seat. She apparently sat on that toilet for one month straight.
wait, i thought she sat on the toiler for 2 years straight? she was getting up and walking around in the bathroom? doesnt have the same effect on me now.