WICHITA, Kan. — Deputies say a woman in western Kansas became stuck on her boyfriend's toilet after sitting on it for two years.
Ness County Sheriff Bryan Whipple said it appeared the 35-year-old Ness City woman's skin had grown around the seat. She initially refused emergency medical services but was finally convinced by responders and her boyfriend that she needed to be checked out at a hospital.
"We pried the toilet seat off with a pry bar and the seat went with her to the hospital," Whipple said. "The hospital removed it."
Whipple said investigators planned to present their report Wednesday to the county attorney, who will determine whether any charges should be filed against the woman's 36-year-old boyfriend.
"She was not glued. She was not tied. She was just physically stuck by her body," Whipple said. "It is hard to imagine. ... I still have a hard time imagining it myself."
He told investigators he brought his girlfriend food and water, and asked her every day to come out of the bathroom.
"And her reply would be, `Maybe tomorrow,"' Whipple said. "According to him, she did not want to leave the bathroom."
The boyfriend called police on Feb. 27 to report that "there was something wrong with his girlfriend," Whipple said, adding that he never explained why it took him two years to call.
Police found the clothed woman sitting on the toilet, her sweat pants down to her mid-thigh. She was "somewhat disoriented," and her legs looked like they had atrophied, Whipple said.
"She said that she didn't need any help, that she was OK and did not want to leave," he said.
She was taken to a hospital in Wichita, about 150 miles southeast of Ness City. Whipple said she has refused to cooperate with medical providers or law enforcement investigators.
Authorities said they did not know if she was mentally or physically disabled.
Police have declined to release the couple's names, but the house where authorities say the incident happened is listed in public records as the residence of Kory McFarren. No one answered his home phone number.
The case has been the buzz Ness City, said James Ellis, a neighbor.
"I don't think anybody can make any sense out of it," he said.
Ellis said he had known the woman since she was a child but that he had not seen her for at least six years.
He said she had a tough childhood after her mother died at a young age and apparently was usually kept inside the house as she grew up. At one time the woman worked for a long-term care facility, he said, but he did not know what kind of work she did there.
"It really doesn't surprise me," Ellis said of the bathroom incident. "What surprises me is somebody wasn't called in a bit earlier."
help: how do sleep on toiletit's actually pretty easy
WICHITA, Kan. - Authorities are considering charges in the bizarre case of a woman who stayed in her boyfriend's bathroom for two years, spending most of her time on the toilet — so that her body was stuck to the seat by the time the man finally called police.
ADVERTISEMENT
It appeared the 35-year-old Ness City woman's skin had grown around the seat, said Ness County Sheriff Bryan Whipple. The woman initially refused emergency medical services but was finally convinced by responders and her boyfriend that she needed to be checked out at a hospital.
"We pried the toilet seat off with a pry bar and the seat went with her to the hospital," Whipple said. "The hospital removed it."
Whipple said investigators planned to present their report Wednesday to the county attorney, who will determine whether any charges should be filed against the boyfriend.
"She was not glued. She was not tied. She was just physically stuck by her body," Whipple said. "It is hard to imagine. ... I still have a hard time imagining it myself."
Police declined to release the couple's names, but the boyfriend, Kory McFarren, agreed to be interviewed Wednesday by The Associated Press. He identified his girlfriend as Pam Babcock.
McFarren, 36, told investigators he took Babcock food and water and asked her every day to come out of the bathroom.
"And her reply would be, 'Maybe tomorrow,'" Whipple said. "According to him, she did not want to leave the bathroom."
McFarren told the AP that he wasn't to blame, and that it was solely Babcock's choice to remain in the bathroom.
"She is an adult; she made her own decision. It was my fault I should have gotten help for her sooner; I admit that. But after a while, you kind of get used to it," McFarren said.
Although authorities said they think Babcock was in the bathroom for two years, McFarren said he wasn't certain how long she stayed there. He said she had a phobia about leaving the room because of childhood beatings.
"It just kind of happened one day. She went in and had been in there a little while, the next time it was a little longer. Then she got it in her head she was going to stay — like it was a safe place for her," McFarren said.
But McFarren said Babcock moved around in the bathroom during that time, bathed and changed into the clothes he brought her. He said they conversed and had an otherwise normal relationship — except that it all happened in the bathroom.
McFarren, who works at an antique store, said he has been taking care of Babcock for the 16 years they have lived together.
McFarren called police on Feb. 27 to report that "there was something wrong with his girlfriend," Whipple said.
Police found Babcock clothed and sitting on the toilet, her sweat pants down to her mid-thigh. She was "somewhat disoriented," and her legs looked as if they had atrophied, Whipple said.
"She said that she didn't need any help, that she was OK and did not want to leave," he said.
She was reported in fair condition at a hospital in Wichita, about 150 miles southeast of Ness City. Whipple said she refused to cooperate with medical providers or law enforcement investigators.
McFarren said that his girlfriend has an infection in her legs that has damaged her nerves, and that she has no feeling in her legs. She may wind up in a wheelchair, he said.
Authorities said they did not know whether she was mentally or physically disabled.
The case has been the buzz of Ness City, said James Ellis, a neighbor.
"I don't think anybody can make any sense out of it," he said.
Ellis said he had known the woman since she was a child but that he had not seen her for at least six years.
He said she had a tough childhood after her mother died at a young age and apparently was usually kept inside the house as she grew up. At one time the woman worked for a long-term care facility, he said, but he did not know what kind of work she did there.
"It really doesn't surprise me," Ellis said. "What surprises me is somebody wasn't called in a bit earlier."
But McFarren said Babcock moved around in the bathroom during that time, bathed and changed into the clothes he brought her. He said they conversed and had an otherwise normal relationship — except that it all happened in the bathroom.
This sounds like the premise for a terrible faux-indie film.
filmed in black and white at that
Man. Someone should punch her boyfriend in the gut. What the fuck kind of relationship is that if you don't care enough to do something until 2 fucking years? Imagine that, really, your significant other being pissed and staying in the bathroom for even 12 hours, I would be very concerned.
and it has to use a dozen different camera filters and be as pretentious as possible.
man, i'm thinking the opposite. any man that can put up with their girlfriend for 2 years, feeding her and shit, that's one strong relationship. if that were me, i'd get the bitch out of my house after 30 minutes.
and it has to use a dozen different camera filters and be as pretentious as possible.
man, i'm thinking the opposite. any man that can put up with their girlfriend for 2 years, feeding her and shit, that's one strong relationship. if that were me, i'd get the bitch out of my house after 30 minutes.
McFarren, who works at an antique store, said he has been taking care of Babcock for the 16 years they have lived together.
give her a laptop and a WoW subscription and what seperates her from one of the millions of other players?
EDIT: oh a relationship i guess, ZING
Police have declined to release the couple's names, but the house where authorities say the incident happened is listed in public records as the residence of Kory McFarren. No one answered his home phone number.Are there no laws about publishing names in the press without their knowledge, or without their consent?
Are there no laws about publishing names in the press without their knowledge, or without their consent?That gosh darn first amendment... :fogetshakefist:
Is it wrong that I'm assuming both of them, or at least the woman, are really fucking fat?
That gosh darn first amendment... :fogetshakefist:yeah a country that allows public humiliation of people sure is a healthy democracy 8) wtf???
yeah a country that allows public humiliation of people sure is a healthy democracy 8) wtf???
For non-public figures it's illegal here to publish the names without their consent or before they have been convicted (proven guilty) in a crime, in a matter that would 'cause humiliation on their parts.
filmed in black and white at that
yeah a country that allows public humiliation of people sure is a healthy democracy 8) wtf???
most press people tend to hold off on rape victims and that kind of thing out of respect but I'm not sure if there's a law against it. I don't think there is.
it's actually pretty easy
how would it feel to tell people you lost your legs to a TOILET?!?
Man, tbh, I don't know how many people she'd be able to tell. Sitting on the shitter for two years kinda cuts off contact with most people ;/i doubt she'll be telling many people, considering she's agoraphobic.
You can't have true freedom of the press if you worry about how people might feel after you publish something.Thought experiment: if a the press publicly humiliaties people that stray too far off from the mass without being criminals or doing other people harm, does it sound like a Freedom-loving country?
Besides, it was public record. They didn't print anything that people couldn't look up themselves.
Thought experiment: if a the press publicly humiliaties people that stray too far off from the mass without being criminals or doing other people harm, does it sound like a Freedom-loving country?
Idk, I thought freedom was all about people living their lives as they wanted without being persecuted by anyone (including the press!!) as long as they're not breaking the law?
And there's tons of shit freely available to anyone willing to look it up (and knowing what to look for). 80% of journalism is filtering out what is interesting and suitable for the general population and printing it. Printing the persons name in this case is clearly not a divine "FREEDOM OF THE PRESS"-act (it's not exactly WATERGATE) but rather about lacking press ethics.
Freedom of Press equals the right to humiliate people then? That's what you're saying?
With freedom comes responsibility (hey cliche) and I'd say humiliating people like that is the complete opposite of responsible journalism, and I'm pretty sure the Franklin brothers would roll in their graves if they knew that's what the press is doing these days.
Freedom of Press equals the right to humiliate people then? That's what you're saying?yeah the freedom of press is protected a lot, as well as some types of speech.
With freedom comes responsibility (hey cliche) and I'd say humiliating people like that is the complete opposite of responsible journalism, and I'm pretty sure the Franklin brothers would roll in their graves if they knew that's what the press is doing these days.
Considering the fact that the United States press is under more restrictions than my country I'd say freedom of press is actually pretty INDEPENDENT from whether you are allowed to name people getting negative attention without their consent. The story would be the same if his name was NOT included, wouldn't it? I mean considering 95% of all news stories are anonymous it doesn't really matter for the sake of the story does it!! I mean, fuck, the story is sensationalist bullshit to begin with!
I mean shit, wasn't it long ago some journalist got JAILED for not naming her source in a huge federal case in the US? Wasn't it long ago some blogger got JAILED (again) for not giving up his film from the G8 demonstration? Didn't the US send an Arab journalist to fucking GUANTANAMO over some article that he wrote? Aren't major US corps shitting all over other countries' freedom of press, helping the governments to locate bloggers so they can be jailed/executed?
I mean shit, USA is probably the only western country I can think of that sends people to prison over their journalistic work. Yet, there's no one protecting the privacy of ordinary people from the BEACON OF FIRE THAT IS FREEDOM OF PRESS yet there seems to be a huge fucking glass dome protecting all the politicians. I mean shit, just look at your good-ol' war in Iraq. I remember the papers in Europe read for six months BEFORE the invasion about how US government chose to overlook real, solid information and yet chose to go to war (this was before the news that Bush KNEW there were no nukes tho). And US news sites? All filled up with the nukes in Iraq, I even remembered Norwegian papers had an article on the bullshit articles that ran in the US about how USA HAS FOUND THE NUKES shortly after the invasion which turned out to be a pretty big hoax!!
Now you listen to me, boy, I live in one of the countries that has the farthest-reaching freedom of press of all countries, but we do prize the privacy of our citizens greater than a fucking FUNNY/SCANDAL ARTICLE. Even recently, one of the most notorious criminals in the history of Norway got caught and is being charged (with extremely solid evidence, including 3 DNA traces) about how he sexually abused kids for 30 years, and yet NO NEWS SOURCE SO FAR (3 months since he was caught) has stated his name. Does that stop him from being charged? NO! Does that mean the newspaper won't touch the case and let everyone know what's up with it? NO! Is the information actually readily available for anyone who wants to know? Yes it is, I actually managed to find his identity after 30 minutes of googling and YET WHOA IN A COUNTRY RATED HIGHER WHEN IT COMES TO FREEDOM OF PRESS THAN THE NATION OF FREEDOM USA no public news source has given out his name?
How can that be possible!
American press is a joke. And it becomes an embarrassing joke once people try to stand up for it under the righteous banner of 'freedom'. USA has more skeletons in the closet when it comes to hindering press freedom in modern times than most western countries so... it's like an Iranian blogging on the internet on how his country is tolerant of homosexuals and crying out how RELIGION OF THE PEOPLE is the reason.
edit: I mean shit, consider if press freedom is completely free to survey all people at once and then point out the most ridiculous ones? Isn't that pretty fucking close to a 1984-society? Where the press can do WHATEVER THE FUCK THEY WANT? Is that the American dream?? Shittttttt!!
Yet, there's no one protecting the privacy of ordinary people from the BEACON OF FIRE THAT IS FREEDOM OF PRESS yet there seems to be a huge fucking glass dome protecting all the politicians.
Uh? Lars, sweetie, there's nothing the American Press likes more than a political scandal. It generates all sorts of $$$Explains why the Lewinsky case was kept under lid for as long as it did??
uh.I'm pretty sure that one has been carefully planned to become a major news story at this time considering the election. Most likely has been kept under a lid for quite a while as well I guess until someone figured they could use the press for political reasons????
explains why just this week a story broke on the governor of NY having sex with prostitutes??
I'm pretty sure that one has been carefully planned to become a major news story at this time considering the election. Most likely has been kept under a lid for quite a while as well I guess until someone figured they could use the press for political reasons????
The Eliot Spitzer prostitution scandal erupted on March 10, 2008, when The New York Times reported that Democratic New York Governor Eliot Spitzer had patronized a high class prostitution service called Emperors Club VIP[1] on the evening of February 13, 2008, and met for over two hours with a $1,100-an-hour-plus prostitute in an extra room that Spitzer rented for the purpose at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C..
I'm pretty sure that one has been carefully planned to become a major news story at this time considering the election. Most likely has been kept under a lid for quite a while as well I guess until someone figured they could use the press for political reasons????
the press likes to make money and so they like to catch politicians doing bad things because then people tune in to watch them, this is not hard logic to figure out.But certain political leaders seem to get immunity, as Clinton did for quite a while with his Lewinsky case. I'm not saying american press doesn't thrive on scandals and I never made that assumption at all?? I'm saying the actual groundwork behind a politicians decision (for instance the decision to going to war with iraq) is largely defended by the state. In the time before the Iraq war most european press covered how little reason there was to go to war and how catastrophic it would be for USA and iraq and the oil price yet the US press seemed to only focus on how necessary it was and how evil Saddam was?????
also I don't see why you don't understand how a country at war and with a far denser population that experiences a massive amount more crime and court cases than probably all of Europe put together might have more cases where journalists were told to stop leaking federal info (WHOOPS sorry I thought freedom of press meant I could fuck over the process of justice for others IN SCANDANAVIA THEY WON'T LEAK YOUR NAME BUT THEY SURE WILL RUIN YOUR CHANCE AT A FAIR TRIAL ITS YOUR CHOICE) but I'm also not completely nuts. the US did drop according to Reporters Without Borders and it is because more people leaked shit from federal trials here than they did in Northern Europe, because there are more people and more court cases.The press and legal system is proportional to the population and the number of court cases, although the USA has proportionally more ugly criminal cases than we do, and more crime per citizen. And I do understand the war thing, but I do find it pretty funny that AMERICANS of all people bring up FREEDOM OF THE PRESS when I'm sayin privacy of normal people (as in, non-public people as politicians) is far more important than having absolute press freedom (which seems to be an illusion over there anyway).
Ok but when was the first time he had sex with her? When was the first time someone found out and chose to not reveal the information? When was it that someone figured out saving the information would be smart considering the election? If it was a month ago he had sex with her for the first time, then that would make a lot of sense but say it's been going on for 5 years?
LARS HERE IS SOMETHING I WANT YOU TO REFUTE:
WATERGATE
wow you really have no idea what you are talking about at all.
you realize eliot spitzer would not have been up for reelection until 2010? do you really think him being caught fucking prostitutes would really hurt Hillary Clinton all that much? Not to mention the Lt. Gov. is also a Clinton supporter so it's not like they're OUSTING A CLINTON SUPPORTER FOR AN OBAMA GUY or some shit. and he certainly isn't a big enough name to harm the DNC nationally, so i don't get what you're trying to say!In an already pretty marginal primary between the two candidates, minor shit like this might reduce her chances of a comeback?? It's a minor case but doesn't need much bigger to increase the gap does it?
He said that nonpublic figures got the shit end of the stick and politicians are protected by the press in the United States.This is a valid interpretation but I am not talking about Politicians being protected from PERSONAL SCANDAL STORIES, I am talking about being protected when it comes to politics.
ok steel to be fair: I already pointed out several times that most of my opinions is formed on post9/11 press. The US press back in the 70s was fantastic and there's no way around saying that. I'm pretty sure you'd explode if I ever compared Watergate to sex scandals so...
the press doesn't protect politicians.Please explain post 9/11 pre Iraq-officially-failed US press then?
1. press likes to make money
Man, remember when they hauled away Jon Stewart and his writers and put 'em in front of the firing squad? Tough times man, tough times.Not talking about censorship from the justice system, but talking about the press doing self-censorship (or censorship from political forces driving the media), which isn't comparable. And I already posted stories about journalists in the US getting JAILTIME for what they would be applauded for doing here (correctly protecting their freedom of the press as opposed to what this topic seems to be about; disclosing non-public figures).
Please explain post 9/11 pre Iraq-officially-failed US press then?
politicians can stay out of the news because they can throw money/favours at it as can any ordinary joe if he has money/favours to throw!
the american media is probably the most powerful organization in the country if not the world. if they want to publish news, they'll do it regardless and if someone tries to bribe them then they'll just bring that fact out to light and screw over the person in question more. the media got so bad after 9/11 that the military upgraded their operation security measures by teaching sailors/soldiers/marines to watch out for undercover press because you never know when that hot woman at the bar could be a freelance writer looking to submit the next hot story.
every single press organization in every capitalist country has tried to represent what the audience wants.Wrong.
you're arguing that this selective bias only exists in America, not in any other country.Wrong. I'm saying people in here that react to my opinion that the press should not disclose non-public figured in a humiliating way, like the one in this case, by raving about the US superior freedom of the press as the basis for such a disclosure to be necessary are full of shit. That's always been my point, but then you're once again trying to put the other part (me) in as bad as a light as possible while bringing up unrelated shit (fuck, I even stated why this isn't comparable to Watergate in one of my first posts by this being sensational bullshit and yet you try to drag it in here anyway) and I have to reply to your shit and thus you're dragging me further away from what this is really about.
the press follows controversy, but it leans to what the people who watch the press lean to. you seem to think that the US press failed in regards to Iraq, despite like I said every press organization being found free of bias, but they didn't fail to report the sketchiness of the Iraq issue; people just didn't want to hear it. so pro-Iraq voices became more common on talk shows.Bullshit. Your media doesn't cover what people want them to cover, they cover what they want people to want them to cover!
it's not POLITICAL forces that shape the press, it's capitalist.Capitalist forces and political forces in the USA are distinguishable now?
claiming a certain unpopular political view was underrepresented doesn't mean the "wrong people" were paying them off, it's because the American people were scared and coerced by the government into believing Iraq was a threat, and the press ECHOING that. granted, you'll get a recursive loop eventually but obviously no one likes Bush now so the loop is broken, usually by...the press.Calling major US press post-9/11 pre-Iraq war anything but a major showcase of camouflaged propaganda is bullshit.
and once again, you're ignoring what these cases of journalists being put on trial are about; they're leaking TRIAL INFO 90% of the time.What cases? The ones I posted? About the cameraman going to Guantanamo and the blogger going to jail? Stop trying to distract.
Fuck what is this topic about? Why did this massive derail even start?
you can't do that, because then you fuck up the justice system and someone else's life gets ruined.
Since Northern European countries almost NEVER see this kind of infringement, they never have the case go to court, and so they have a ratio of zero percent, putting them all at the top. since the US has more journalists, more trials, more federal cases, and more people, having even ten cases like this skyrockets them past all those Northern Europe countries.Everything is proportional.
I'm not sure if you're talking about solitary examples of press people being punished or the press protecting the political system??
you can't take a few solitary examples and call them indicative of a political agenda to put the press against the wall.
this is true EVERYWHERE there is a capitalist system.The American mentality is extremely grounded in capitalist ideals. That is not true for all capitalist system, especially not in the Scandinavian ones, that are also considered extremely successful capitalist states. If you were to live here for a couple of years I'm pretty sure you'd be shocked how different our mentalities are. But even in the USA, with capitalism driving the media, there are owners that control them. Money and fear of losing jobs are closely related in this aspect and I don't exactly think highly of US corps to say the least (altho Microsoft likes to buy me food) (as these often have shares and/or ownership of various media sources??).
...what? i don't understand this sentence at all.Please explain post 9/11 pre Iraq-officially-failed US press then?
Bullshit. Your media doesn't cover what people want them to cover, they cover what they want people to want them to cover!
uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. britney spears? CELEBRITY GOSSIP? come on man.Yeah good point I guess but then again I tabloid != press... =/
Yeah good point I guess but then again I tabloid != press... =/
But I was more talking about especially the Iraq war, where the press pretty much convinced the US public about how right it was to go to war, how many nukes Saddam had, how Saddam was a terrible terrible dictator etc all to make them flamed up and ready for wartime.
edit: and the same for Obama really since steel brought him up. It seems more the press are trying to make him a phenomena than Obama himself does thus making him a case that sells rather than something he has been.
Uh this new argument aside, printing this woman's name in the paper isn't going to matter at all. Printing the majority of non-public figures names isn't going to make a difference. This is because anyone reading it now is not going to remember the name (can anyone post her name without referring back to the article?) or do anything with the name, and anyone that lives in her town and would know her are definitely aware that she has been on the toilet for this long. The only people that would want this name is the press who might go hound her for an interview, and they already have the name, or would have gotten it from public record.Yeah I'm not really thinking of people remembering the name for a long while after, more that everyone who already knew the person will know what she's been up to for the past two years (sitting on a toilet) which can be pretty damn humiliating if she ever runs into anyone who has ever known her and knows of this story imo. 8(
Yeah I'm not really thinking of people remembering the name for a long while after, more that everyone who already knew the person will know what she's been up to for the past two years (sitting on a toilet) which can be pretty damn humiliating if she ever runs into anyone who has ever known her and knows of this story imo. 8(
I mean if someone you went to school with/someone you worked with etc had this story about them I'd be pretty damn sure you'd be like "whoa! hahahah!" and tell everyone you know that know her about this story :(
Police declined to release the couple's names, but the boyfriend, Kory McFarren, agreed to be interviewed Wednesday by The Associated Press. He identified his girlfriend as Pam Babcock.Not that you guys probably care at this point in the g8 debate.