Sonoma County CA separates elderly gay couple and sells all of their worldly possessions

Story here.

Gee, we were just talking about this sort of thing in this thread.

There is (maybe) another side to the story.

I guess we’ll see how it plays out. It’s a shame the story hasn’t made it into any larger newspapers.

Thanks for reporting that may be another side to the sotry.

However, for a relationship of this length (20 years), surely there must be other police reports or calls, neighbors witnessing, or hospital visits that indicate the likelihood of truth to the abuse allegation in this case, or even during another relationship Greene was involved in. No 77-year-old becomes an abuser just like that.

At that age though, somebody who has always been nice can turn nasty due to the ravages of age on mind and body. A small percentage of people get downright nasty and violent with age. Couple that with the stress of taking care of an even older partner who is probably getting on your last nerve, wearing you out, and the old age problem of a lower bullshit tolerance and it sounds like a totally possible explanation.

Sure, it’s possible, but I’d like to see those police reports.

From reading both stories, there is no evidence offered at all, just one county official’s allegation, that there was domestic abuse. It is clearly in the interests of the defendants in the lawsuit to make a charge like that.

If there was any evidence of abuse, why was not the other man charged with a crime? Instead he apparently was shut up in a nursing home without due process.

This gives rise to so many questions. How was he not able to make a phone call to a lawyer while he was in the nursing home? Was he forcibly medicated while he was there? One of the stories says the county determined he was not able to take care of himself. Based on what?

There are too many unanswered questions here, but the way the OP is presented leads one to think that “the other side of the story” is the final side of the story. It is not. So far, there is just one allegation of domestic abuse, and no evidence of that offered in the story.

I will be following this case with interest. I wonder if the writers at Independent Gay Forum have anything to say about it?
Roddy

Well, if by “OP” you mean me, I included the other possible side of the story because it would be biased not to. I would kinda expect the county’s lawyer to claim “lies, all lies!” but it’s still pretty suspicious, and I’m disappointed that at the very least, the San Francisco Examiner hasn’t sent some snoopy fact checkers to Sonoma. It’s right up the street, and shouldn’t be that difficult.

I haven’t seen anything in the Chronicle about this, and I’m wondering why. I saw this on Reddit, where I first heard about the case.

http://www.salon.com/books/writing/index.html?story=/books/2010/04/21/kaufman

And I just saw this, a report from KRON in which the reporter notes that the partner in the hospital had reported being assaulted by the other guy in 2008.

http://www.salon.com/books/writing/index.html?story=/books/2010/04/21/kaufman

Are those the links you intended?

A little more info.

When I first read about this story earlier this week, it definitely seemed like a lot of information was missing.

The Press Demo article you linked to had been revised since yesterday morning. In one of the first drafts, it was clear that the county’s lawyer had a possibly incriminating police report and was planning on using that in its defense. Apparently the report has since been released. The fact remains that a lot of what happened to these men could have possibly been avoided had they had a more legally binding connection. It will be an interesting case to watch.

If he’s suffering from dementia, the DA may have determined that there’s no basis for pursuing criminal charges because he’s not mentally responsible for his actions.

As for confining him in a home, maybe that could be done on an emergency basis, but I would think that some representative would have to be consulted on his behalf at some point. Maybe the county is taking the position that he has no family and therefore no legal representative, so the county steps in as his guardian and makes those decisions. That would mean either they’re ignoring his partner because they’re not legally married, or they think that the partner is also not mentally in shape to make those decisions.

Why no, no they are not. Sorry about that.