SultanOfSix;1057381 said:
As far as T.O. is concerned, his media whoreship is a creation of the media itself. T.O. has been partially responsible for the attention, but the fact that the media overemphasizes every aspect of his life, shows that they are becoming more and more responsible for his prostitution. They are his pimp, and they proved their agenda as well as their stupidity yesterday with their own circus creation.
Wonderful post and spot on.
For those that espouse TO is responsible for that circus, you are way off base IMO. I understand why you may feel that way....TO stands on star, creates attention, yada yada yada. I'll give you that. Obviously.
However TO did not ask for hours of almost constant news coverage. You cannot really believe having an adverse reaction to a hypnotic...hydrocodone and likely something for nausea like compazine, etc....is the same as standing on the star. TO did not call 911 nor obviously understand what he was saying much less orchestrate the publicity.
If you want to blame him for taking too many pills I would understand but completely disagree with you. Many people on narcotics and other mind altering medications often forget how many pills they've taken or when they take them. Many patients think if one or two is good then three or four is better as well. They get impaired and it can mushroom from there. It's not uncommon for patients to get impaired.
As far as been critical of his female friend, I can understand if one thinks she created or added to the drama. However, under the circumstances of finding someone close not being themselves while on medication, it's entirely reasonable and even responsible to worry about an overdose whether intentional or not.
One could make a case that she would have been negligent even to a criminal level if the outcome were negative and she did not call 911.
Persons in a situation like that are often going to answer questions impulsively and incorrectly. It's an emotionally charged situation. Interviews change over time and from one interviewer to another. That's normal.
If she stated he were 'depressed', she could have simply meant he was depressed over the situation with his son on top of being injured, on medicine known to be a depressant, and tired of the constant negative 'normal' drauma. It's highly likely someone asked her if he was depressed and/or suicidal rather than her offering that information spontaneously.
A policeman or other official is trained to respond to that trigger. It wouldn't matter to him if he was normally depressed over normal situational problems that day/week or severly clinically depressed for weeks/years.
The officers on the scene are responsible for discerning if the person is a danger to himself and/or others; and has a crime been committed. They are not responsible for conducting a psychological interview. And police notes are often not completely an entirely accurate interpretation of all events.
If they get an answer to the question 'did you try to hurt yourself' in the affirmative they are forced to make sure that person is evaluated by a professional. They cannot make a judgment call under those circumstances that the person may or may not understand what they are responding to. They cannot write it off.
If TO were suidicidal he would have been kept longer even over his objections.
The media took this and ran with it for their gain and at TO's expense.
Periodic updates of news is responsible and fair. TO is newsworthy. But hours of speculation and coverage is just entertainment and not news.
You should email the DMN and correct their ignorance, as this report is labeled "Police Report" on their front page:
