hambone Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 The Darwin awards are issued to people who expire from this world in a fashion that can be ridiculous, inventive or just outrageous. This guy certainly qualified... (21 May 2004, Texas) Michael was an alcoholic. And not an ordinary alcoholic, but an alcoholic who liked to take his liquor... well, rectally. His wife said he was "addicted to enemas" and often used alcohol in this manner. The result was the same: inebriation. The machine shop owner couldn't imbibe alcohol by mouth due to a painful throat ailment, so he elected to receive his favourite beverage via enema. And tonight, Michael was in for one hell of a party. Two 1.5 litre bottles of sherry, more than 100 fluid ounces, right up the old address! When the rest of us have had enough, we either stop drinking or pass out. When Michael had had enough (and subsequently passed out) the alcohol remaining in his rectal cavity continued to be absorbed. The next morning, Michael was dead. The 58-year-old did a pretty good job of embalming himself. According to toxicology reports, his blood alcohol level was 0.47%. In order to qualify for a Darwin Award, a person must remove himself from the gene pool via an "astounding misapplication of judgment." Three litres of sherry up the butt can only be described as astounding. Unsurprisingly, his neighbors said they were surprised to learn of the incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 This version is slightly inaccurate as he didn't give himself an enema. It was his wife who gave him the fatal enema and she was indicted for negligent homicide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hambone Posted January 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 This version is slightly inaccurate as he didn't give himself an enema. It was his wife who gave him the fatal enema and she was indicted for negligent homicide. Is that so? The Darwins were my only point of reference. Where did you gleam your info from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Is that so? The Darwins were my only point of reference. Where did you gleam your info from? Reuters, etc. Police drop charges over 'fatal' sherry enema October 4, 2007 - 7:59AM Charges have been dropped against a Texas woman who was accused of giving her husband a sherry enema that killed him. Tammy Jean Warner had been indicted for negligent homicide in the May 2004 death of Michael Warner, 58, but the Brazoria County District Attorney's office said today the charge was dropped a month ago for lack of evidence. The Houston Chronicle said Warner, 45, had been scheduled to go to court next week for a trial that had been reset six times. At the time of Warner's indictment in 2005, police told the Chronicle the woman had given her husband two large bottles of sherry, which raised his blood alcohol level to 0.47 percent, or nearly six times the level considered legally drunk in Texas. Warner admitted administering the enema but denied she caused the death of her husband, who was a machine shop operator. The incident occurred at their home in Lake Jackson, near Houston. She told the newspaper her husband was addicted to enemas and often used alcohol in that manner. Police said Warner had a throat ailment that left him unable to drink the sherry. REUTERS Woman accused of giving husband lethal sherry enema By RICHARD STEWART HOUSTON CHRONICLE HOUSTON -- Investigators say a woman caused her husband's death by giving him a sherry enema, leading to alcohol poisoning. The enema caused his blood alcohol level to soar to 0.47 percent -- almost six times the legal intoxication limit in Texas, a toxicology report showed. Tammy Jean Warner, 42, was indicted on a charge of negligent homicide. She is also charged with burning the will of her husband, Michael Warner, a month before his death on May 21. Michael Warner, a 58-year-old machine shop owner, had a long history of alcoholism but couldn't ingest alcohol by mouth because of painful medical problems with his throat, said Lake Jackson, Texas, police detective Robert Turner. The enema was a way he could become intoxicated without drinking alcohol, Turner said. "I heard of this kind of thing in mortuary school in 1970, but this is the first time I've ever heard of someone actually doing it," Turner said. Turner said police think Warner gave her husband at least two large bottles of sherry, which is stronger than wine, in the enema. "We're not talking about little bottles here," Turner said, "These were at least 1.5-liter bottles." Turner said police don't know if the victim had ever become intoxicated in that manner before the lethal incident. Tammy Warner told police that she found her husband dead in their bed. Turner said she admitted giving him the sherry enema, but not to causing his death. "A person drinking alcohol will usually pass out before getting a lethal dose," Turner said. "But if you're getting it through an enema, you can pass out and still be ingesting more alcohol." Tammy Warner surrendered to Lake Jackson police Monday and was released on $30,000 bond. She could not be reached for comment Wednesday. Neither Turner nor Brazoria County District Attorney Jeri Yenne would comment on the charge related to the will. The indictment said providing Michael Warner with alcohol and destroying the will constituted a "criminal episode." Although Michael Warner may have agreed initially to the enema as a way to become intoxicated, Yenne said, "he was not a willing participant in something that would cause his death." "He knew that it was very dangerous for him to have any form of alcohol and she knew it was very dangerous for him to have alcohol," Yenne said. The couple's neighbors said they were surprised Wednesday to learn of the indictment. John Criswell, 24, said the widow had mostly been away from the modest brown frame house at the end of the street since her husband died. "She said she was scared to stay there by herself alone," Criswell said. "She said she'd been having trouble with his family." The couple had been married about two years, police said. "She asked me to keep an eye on the place," Criswell said. He said he last saw her about three weeks ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie7s Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 I'm very confused by some of the actions of my fellow man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hambone Posted January 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Anyway you look at it, thats an assful of booze. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodwc Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Anyway you look at it, thats an assful of booze. Some might say a veritable shiPload. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryyannon Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Along with the Darwin Award, this guy deserves an 'Enny'! In the meantime, and while we're on the subject of total asses, more and more evidence is arising pointing to the taunting of the Siberian tiger that attacked (and killed) a boy in the S.F. Zoo: empty vodka bottle in friend's car; slingshots found on other members of group; suspicious objects (stones, tree branch found in tiger's enclosure) and now an eye-witness who watched the group shout at and try to provoke the animal. Unfortunately - and contrary to Darwinian Award rules - it looks like two 'innocents' were killed in this one: the magnificent Siberian tiger, and the boy himself, who according to the eye-witness, was the only one not participating in the verbal taunting at the time that she and her family were still observing the scene. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hambone Posted January 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Along with the Darwin Award, this guy deserves an 'Enny'! In the meantime, and while we're on the subject of total asses, more and more evidence is arising pointing to the taunting of the Siberian tiger that attacked (and killed) a boy in the S.F. Zoo: empty vodka bottle in friend's car; slingshots found on other members of group; suspicious objects (stones, tree branch found in tiger's enclosure) and now an eye-witness who watched the group shout at and try to provoke the animal. Unfortunately - and contrary to Darwinian Award rules - it looks like two 'innocents' were killed in this one: the magnificent Siberian tiger, and the boy himself, who according to the eye-witness, was the only one not participating in the verbal taunting at the time that she and her family were still observing the scene. You are right on that Ryyannon. Just today I spoke to someone with firsthand knowledgeof this incident and the two kids were indeed shooting sling shot objects at the tiger, provoking it to the point where it actually jumped up using the kids legs as a ladder. The boy killed ran in to try and protect his idiot buddies, ( the fatally mauled boy was also at fault) and killed by the angry cat as he attempted to pull the tiger off his brother and friend. Caged animals like the Siberian Tiger are much wiser than people think, and are probably not to thrilled with the life that has been forced upon them. A few stupid a-holes being cruel to such a beautiful animal got just what they deserved. A Darwin award for stupidity is justified, however with the cruelty factor, I'm not so sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryyannon Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Thanks for the confirmation of what I had read.... Pisses me off mightily: idiots are a dime a dozen, but Siberian tigers are an endangered species. And even if they weren't, it's the right payback for tormenting any animal. I've no sympathy for those kids, and nothing but regrets for the tiger. And now the surviving azzhats are trying to slap a huge lawsuit on the zoo for negligence. It makes me want to sue their parents for neglecting to abort them when they had the chance. On more or less the same subject, I learned from a resident in Las Vegas that there was also much more behind the story of the albino tiger that nearly killed Roy (of Sigmund and Roy) during their show at one of the big casinos. In word, the tiger had been frightened by the unexpected movements of a woman in the front row and tried to grab Roy by the head/neck - like it would have done with one of its own cubs - to 'save' him from the perceived danger. That's why the guy was never put down. The story never really made it into print, however - perhaps not as dramatic as the original media spin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hambone Posted January 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 The Siegfried and Roy incident was also partly true. There was an overly obnoxious woman with a beehive hairdoo in the front row very close to the accident who was behaving like only a complete whack job woman can, and frightened/[censored] off the tiger, who tried to get Sigfried the hell away from this lunatic broad. I have had the same reaction myself to certain women. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now