Wednesday, May 6, 2009

ADHD Does NOT Cause Tattooed Genitalia

When a story comes from The Local, Sweden's News in English, you know it's going to be good. No exception here with this headline: "Boyfriend blames ADHD for genital tattoo abuse." God, I love the Swedish press.

Apparently what we have here is a 25-year old guy from Umea (that's in northern Sweden, in case you're reading this today without your globe or atlas) who has been charged with aggravated assault of his girlfriend which included, among other things, "...tattooing his name and ID number on her sexual organs." Well, that's a little murky, how about some details?

He doesn't just have the one assault charge. No, he has 17 assault charges. And he took his time to rack them up also, as they took place over a period of five years. Why it hadn't been dealt with before then is anyone's guess and it wasn't explained in the article. But that's OK because there's better stuff to get into! Hoo-boy, is there.

The man is accused of "...punching his girlfriend on several occasions between 2004 until February 2009 when the woman left him." (Maybe she was busy, we don't know.) It would seem that it really takes something fairly extreme for this woman to leave such a relationship. And I'm not talking fairly extreme by my standards or by your standards. I'm talking fairly extreme for a person who is not quite right.

Aside from the five years with all of the punching, he is also accused of "...assaulting her with a fork and re-opening the head wound as it began to heal." No word on whether or not the same utensil was used in the re-opening as was used in the initial opening of said head. He is also accused of "...forcing her to consume his medicine to ensure that she kept him company during the time that he was awake." (Translation of "his medicine": Meth. I'm guessing.)

Well, see, THAT explains it! She knew how LONELY he was, so she stayed. Or, perhaps, she's just a little fuzzy on what a healthy relationship entails. (Here's a hint: No forks in the head. Ever.) But I don't know how she'd be able to explain staying, yes staying, staying with hm after he allegedly "forced her to submit to a tattoo on her sexual organs - of his name and personal identification number." All rightee then. I don't rightly know what to say about that, other than OW!OW!OW!OW!OOWWW!!!!

Personal identification number? Like his Social Security Number? Not that it matters, mind you, I'm just curious. Was he planning on spending the rest of his life with her and went to that extreme measure to ensure that just in case he forgot his wallet, if she was with him (and remember, he sounded lonely, so she would probably drugged up and by his side at all times in his little fantasy world) he'd always have that ID number. It'd be a little awkward on days she was wearing pants, I suppose. Oh, but I'm sure he thought this thing through enough. I'm sure he had a way around that!
Since something like that is pretty hard to deny when you're on trial, he seems to have taken to just defending his actions with the most likely rationale that he could come up with. That being that he was "...suffering from the condition ADHD - attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder - and it resulted in him becoming angry at minor incidents which in turn caused him to turn violent." I see.

The problem with that defense, other than it's pathetic, is that it's kind, what's the word I want? Oh, I've got it! Wrong. It's wrong. It seems to me that in order to, well, do anything, really, with a woman's genitalia requires a bit of effort and concentration. But in order to be able to TATTOO your name AND your personal identification number, um, down there, well that would seem to require a great deal, an IMMENSE deal of concentration in order to get the task at hand finished. (Good Lord, how painful must that have been? Tattooing. THAT. ON her. Yikes. Too bad she wasn't some sort of body builder because then she could have just crushed his skull between her knees like a vice. What an A-hole.)

And what, pray tell, what would be the "minor incident" that provoked Mr. ADHD there into grabbing the tattoo gun and going to town with it on her nether regions? Dinner not ready on time? Tattoo your girlfriends genitalia! Long day at the office? Blow off some steam by tattooing your girlfriend's genitalia! Can't get the bloody lawnmower to start? No worries! Just tattoo your girlfriend's genitalia and feel your problems just fade away! Are we really supposed to believe that a "minor incident" would result in a "major tattoo upon ones sexual organs"? I don't we are. I know that we can't!

So after all of that, after the cranium stabbed with fork incident...TWICE, after the five years of punching, after all of the staying awake to stave off loneliness, after all of that, none of it was enough to cause her to think to herself, "I wonder if there's something more for me out there." So what finally did it? What was the final straw? Ironically (in a way), "The woman finally decided to leave the man in mid-February 2009 when she suffered nerve and muscle damage in her legs after having been attacked with an axe."

So when he finally grabs the AXE and begins using it ON HER in an axe-like manner, that's when she begins to see the light and decides it's time to walk away from their fairy tale life together? When she's at the point where she literally CANNOT walk away, she decides to walk away? Interesting.

There are only two items in this sordid tale of 'Boy meets girl' that are encouraging. The first, obviously, is that she finally left. She might have limped away, she might have crawled away, but regardless as to how, she left. Excellent. The second is that this guy, having admitted to these actions and deciding to go with the "It was the ADHD" defense, is a pathetic moron who, I'm assuming, will likely be convicted. I mean, I know nothing is ever guaranteed or anything, especially in a legal system, but this seems like a pretty done deal in the arena of him being convicted. The only way it could be more of a lock would be if, say for instance, they found his blood with matching DNA at the crime scene and bloody gloves used in the attack behind his house and then he led police on a low-speed chase down an LA freeway. And I see this as being similar to a scenario like that, where the jury would have to be stocked full of fools in order for someone like the one in my example in order to not be convicted.

Oh. Whoops.

OK, the jury would have to be stocked full of fools in my "hypothetical" example in order to not be convicted. (Wow. Unfortunate choice to use for the sake of comparison there.)

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

1 comment:

grannyann said...

I hate tattoos anyway. There is nothing more tacky than a girl in a wedding dress looking beautiful and there on her arm or neck is a tattoo. Just ruins everything. I also hate to see men with tats all over their arms. Am I just old fashioned?