Thomas Condon

[onest2.0]

New "revelations" in case:

Cincinnati Enquirer (http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2003/04/30/loc_morgue30.html)

Nadel needs to be impeached.

[BigSugar]

let's not be ignorant here.....clearly the letter was describing actions of a coroner in videotaping/photographing a corpse for the purpose of court/investigation/training, not "art" photo's by a non-employee/non-coroner....

if the letter said that it was not a crime for the coroner to touch the genetalia of a corpse in the scope of his work, it sure as hell doesn't give you, i or any other "joe citizen" the right to go groping dead people at the morgue, even if necropheliacs would love the opportunity.....(ok, sick example, but fitting...)

the real issue is evidentiary....was the letter disclosed by prosecutors during discovery and prior to trial? if not, why not? if so, what was the specific reasoning it was kept out? if the letter wasn't disclosed, the real person in trouble here is Allen....his bar license might be on the line....if it wasn't disclosed, Nadel likely didn't know about it either....

[postfeminist]

I have been following Thomas Condon's case from the get-go; some good friends of mine are friends of Thomas', and as an artist, I found it profoundly interesting and disturbing that the law could be bent and abused in order to make someone like Mike Allen look tough on crime. I think that this letter should be the catalyst for dropping all charges against Andrew Tobias & Thomas Condon, and their records should be immediately expunged. If Nadel didn't know about it, he didn't know-- but that doesn't change what Mike Allen did to Tobias & Condon with the full knowledge of the implications of the letter he had written only a year earlier. I wish the best of luck to Thomas & Andrew in the upcoming legal precedings.

[Duemellon]

from the letter: including "a literary work, dramatic work, fictional work, historical work, audiovisual work or musical work." vs. BigSuglet's not be ignorant here.....clearly the letter was describing actions of a coroner in videotaping/photographing a corpse for the purpose of court/investigation/training, not "art" photo's by a non-employee/non-coronerThe letter's inclusion sounds amazingly open, "fictional, dramatic, musical"

musical?

and u'r talking about someone taking photos? he included MUSiCAL?

[onest2.0]

Not sure about when it was introduced, but Nadels ruling seems odd.
.;
I'm not sure if they had to make the letter public for appeal purposes, but it now looks like the county is going to have three very hard civil suits on their hands. One, a class action suit, by members of the morgue residents' families and the others by Condon and Tobias.

Lets see what Ohio office Allen suddenly decides to run for so he can get outta dodge.

[blue_kitten]

Talk about eating your own words.... How can you twist "permission is not needed" into "permission is needed"? Still, I would say that if my loved one were being autopsied and having pics taken with dollhouse furniture- I would want a say in it. My feelings do not change Allen's hypocritical statements, I must admit. He has made a fool of himself. To add to my feelings (as if anyone cares) I would want to know if my deceased loved one were being videotaped or photographed in an instructional setting as well. It goes w/out saying that your right to privacy should extend to your body when you're dead. Even if you're dead, it's your loved ones who have to deal with the aftermath of photographs and lawsuits floating around. They are the one's you'd want to protect from such embarrassing uncomfortableness. (is that a word?) Isn't it really the surviving family and friends' dignity that we'd want to conserve if we died tomorrow?

[mwng]

I've always thought this was complete crap. Andres Serrano has photograhed worse in his Suicide series and he has it hanging in the Contemporary Art Museum in Chicago. I walked around the corner into a blown up photograph of a slit bloody wrist. It ranks in the top 5 shocks of my life. I won't argue that these things are uncomfortable and inappropriate to many people.

However, there is a difference between the country coronor and a funeral home. Ever read the Hamilton Country Coroner's website? http://www.hamilton-co.org/coroner/Default.asp

It's a bit complicated but what it boils down to is that they have control over what happens to the body. Ohio law does not require permission for an autopsy. If the family objects to the autopsy because of religious beliefs, and the Coroner deems it necessary, the family must ask for intervention by the court.

I've searched several coroner's websites from across the country. The attitudes flucuate depending upon the location. Several coroner websites in Ohio state they operate with respect for the body and families. Conversely, The Los Angeles County Coroner has a website where you can buy t-shirts. http://lacstores.co.la.ca.us/coroner/

Throughout this, people have voiced concerns over respect for the dead. The people who perform autopsies are doctors. They want facts. Why the person died. What legal issues are there with the death? Was the person sick and is it infectious?

They then release the body for burial. They aren't funeral homes. They don't provide solice for the living.

I'm not going to impose my views on death and religion. I just think that as a government agency, if a death needs to be investigated, they have the right to do whatever is legally allowed in the state code.

It seems that in Hamilton County, what the code allows for clashed with a large number of local attitudes on death. Everyone involved kicked into damage control mode.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that instead of monetary payment for photographing the bodies for instructional material for the morgue, Condon was allowed to photograph for his personal project?

He just shouldn't be in jail.

[BigSugar]

Originally posted by Duemellon
from the letter: vs. BigSugThe letter's inclusion sounds amazingly open, "fictional, dramatic, musical"

musical?

and u'r talking about someone taking photos? he included MUSiCAL?

way to take the statements out of context.....again.....and again....and again.....

here is the portion of the letter you have chosen to chop up....

"If the videotapes are to be used in conjunction with a course of instruction or are given away to others for such use ... no consent is required," Allen wrote. "All autopsies may be videotaped and those tapes may be maintained as public records." The letter also outlined other types of work that would not require consent, including "a literary work, dramatic work, fictional work, historical work, audiovisual work or musical work."

the key words to focus on are "other types of work" wherein Allen is describing other matters where consents are usually either required or not required, but in no way dealing with "autopsies" and the coroners office.....he was comparing the coroners office use of video/photographs of autopsies for training/instruction/court to other "consent" situations.....he was NOT saying that the coroner has the right to put on Deadside Story with dancing corpses and Andrew Lloyd Webber songs and then sell it on the internet......

[asshole mode] so.....again, i'm right....Due is wrong....any other questions?[/asshole mode]

the issue for those that missed it is not whether the coroner needs consent, but whether "joe citizen" who is taking commercial photographs and posing the bodies for "art" sake needs permission and whether that amounts to abuse of a corpse.....personally i could give a rat's ass, as cincy has much more pressing issues to deal with....but he was found guilty...his appeal is ongoing...he is out of jail pending....that's the system folks, like it or not...

btw...i'm so going to buy an LA Coroner tshirt! sweet! then i'm going to play "Quincy M.E." and be all cool and sh*t.....

J. Klugman Jr.

[Duemellon]

[asshole mode] so.....again, i'm right....Due is wrong....any other questions?[/asshole mode] I wish you'd put me back on ignore. You're assertations are snipes to attempt to belittle me, but honestly... what Allen intended is not what Condon did with it... err,... because he got busted, but that's not my point...

If you wanted to make a Memorial Music Video, a respectful piece about a tragedy, then you have permission. It's an artistic work.

Well, because Condon wanted to do his mortuary work, grim and such, Allen got upset.

But never mind, you'd rather find some reason to nix me rather than realize Allen gave him a broad inclusive guideline, even though it wasn't Allen's intent that Condon produce the works he did, it still gave him the right to do it....

until he did it.

okay, go back to "hate Due" mode, asshole.*

yeah, I called you asshole. I made the whole post through without name calling, venom, and such, and then... damn.. at the end I couldn't help it.