Man who finds Finger in Yogurt should be force to give his

Man who finds Finger in Yogurt should be force to give his

RALEIGH, North Carolina (AP) -- To a dessert shop customer, the severed fingertip found in a pint of frozen custard could be worth big dollars in a potential lawsuit. To the shop worker who lost it, the value is far more than monetary.

But Clarence Stowers still has the digit, refusing to return the evidence so it could be reattached. And now it's too late for doctors to do anything for 23-year-old Brandon Fizer.

"I'm not saying who has it, but somebody has it," Stowers said this week in a telephone interview, refusing to let on where the fingertip is now.

Soon after Stowers found the finger in a mouthful of chocolate soft-serve he bought Sunday at Kohl's Frozen Custard in Wilmington, he put it in his freezer at home, taking it out only occasionally to show to television cameras.

He refused to give it to the shop's owner, and refused to give it to a doctor who was treating Fizer, who accidentally stuck his hand in a mixing machine and had his right index finger lopped off at the first knuckle.

Medical experts say an attempt to reattach a severed finger can generally be made within six hours.

But according to the shop's management, Stowers wouldn't give it back when he was in the store 30 minutes after the accident.

"The general manager attempted to retrieve it and rush it to the hospital," reads a statement posted Thursday on Kohl's Web site. "Unfortunately, the customer refused to give it to her and declared that he would be calling the TV stations and an attorney as he exited the store."

Officials at Cape Fear Hospital said their efforts to retrieve the finger also failed.

Dr. James Larson, director of emergency medicine for UNC Hospitals, who was not involved in the case, said once Stowers took the finger home and froze it, it was too late to even try for reattachment.

"You can't freeze it. It kills the cells," Larson said.

The doctor said the best way to preserve a severed limb is to wrap it in saline-soaked gauze, place it in a plastic bag and store that in ice water.

Stowers' attorney, Lee Andrews of Greensboro, wouldn't say if a lawsuit against Kohl's is planned, saying he needed "to get some more facts."

But Andrews said his client is concerned about possible disease in the fingertip and kept it because he wanted someone to test it for "all the diseases that are out here now."

"He's upset to the point that he's been debilitated to some degree," Andrews said. "Emotionally, it's been very upsetting to him."

Even if Stowers decides to sue, an expert in medical law said the fingertip could easily have been returned while preserving the evidence.

"The man who lost the finger has the superior claim," said Paul Lombardo, who teaches at the University of Virginia's law school. "It's his finger and he might be able to use it."

Lombardo said Stowers could have photographed the fingertip, taken a bit of flesh for DNA analysis or gotten an affidavit from the surgeon who would have reattached the digit.

"There is nothing that would prevent preserving the chain of evidence," Lombardo said.

Fizer is dealing with his loss in private. The Carolina Beach resident's mother, Sheri Fizer, said the family had been instructed by an attorney not to talk about the case.

Public opinion seemed to be running against Stowers.

"It's a mystery how that customer can live with himself after he refused to return the finger so that doctors might try to reattach it," said an editorial Thursday by the Star-News of Wilmington.

"Unless he offers a better explanation for that decision, people will assume that customer Clarence Stowers cared less about another person's loss of a body part than about his chance to squeeze some bucks out of the custard stand."

The case came not long after a Las Vegas woman made headlines with a claim that she found a finger tip in a bowl of chili at a Wendy's restaurant in San Jose, Calif. Investigators have called her claim a hoax and charged her in connection with millions of dollars in losses to Wendy's in northern California. The woman denies it was a hoax.

For Kohl's, Sunday's fingertip amputation was the second time in less than a year that a worker lost a finger on the same frozen custard machine. The worker was found by investigators to have been negligent in the July 2004 incident, and the state Labor Department cleared the company of wrongdoing.


This prick who found the finger and refused to give it back in time to the kid to have it reattached should be force to cut off his own
The nerve of this guy! Now this poor guy who was making 5.50 an hour is missing part of his finger cause some dumbass wouldn't give it back.
7,156 views 36 replies
Reply #1 Top
Yeah, as I mentioned in another thread on this same story the guy really should face criminal charges over this stupidity.
Reply #2 Top

Agreed!
Reply #3 Top
What a completely stupid non-issue!!

First of all, if the guy who lost the fingertip and his manager had have shown as much interest in where the severed flesh was after the accident (as is what they should have done), none of this ever would have happened.

Secondly, as cold as frozen custard needs to be to stay frozen, a bare piece of flesh won't have more than a few minutes of viability.

Yes, the guy should have returned the flesh, but to argue that it could have been reattached is obsurd. To argue that the guy who ended up with the piece of finger in his mouth owes anything to the completely negligent manager or employee who lost the flesh is just a joke.

The only reason any of this happened was that the manager and employees of Kohl's did not follow health department guidelines for such a situation. They are completely at fault and have no excuses for their actions.
Reply #4 Top

I'm no doctor and i'm guessing you are not either Ted
But the guy still should have relinquished the finger in hopes that it could have been reattached.

There should have been a strong enough chain of evidence that the guy who scooped the digit up to his mouth could have still proceeded with his bs lawsuit and the poor guy who lost his finger could have had it reattached.

Yes the manager / owner are at fault, but not the poor guy running the squishy machine.
I hope the employee counter sues the hell out of the guy who hung on to his finger so he could make a fast buck.
Reply #5 Top
"I hope the employee counter sues the hell out of the guy who hung on to his finger so he could make a fast buck."


You guys are soooooo, slow. Have you even considered the fact that the guy who lost the finger continued to sell ice cream from a batch that had a severed finger in it? You don't think they might have, say, NOT FED SEVERED FINGER ICE CREAM TO PEOPLE?

No offense, but if a feck lost a finger in a vat, fed it to me, and then whined when i wouldn't give it back, i think i'd cut off another of his fingers. They should have drained whatever he was working on, and retrieved the finger themselves. There's no excuse for just keeping right on selling out of the same ice cream after you know that it is a BIOHAZARD.


not only should the ice cream shop people be sued, they ought to be criminally responsible for that kind of negiligence.
Reply #6 Top
Other than the manager, the guy running the squishy machine is the MOST at fault. What kind of idiot cuts a chunk out of his finger, then doesn't know which pint his finger ended up in? How many more pints were drawn during the incident? How much blood ended up in how many pints? The fact is, every pint that could conceivably have been contaminated should have been thrown out. How many people ate frozen custard contaminated with this idiot's blood?

The manager should be fined and fired. The guy who lost his finger should be reprimanded, and everyone in that works in food services should go through training on what to do in these kinds of situations.

As for the lawsuit, I think the guy who ended up with the finger in his mouth has a case. The Kohl's staff definitely showed a huge about of negligence in this case. I don't know if I would sue, that depends on what Kohl's did to make amends.

Nope SushhiK, I'm not a doctor. However, I have several years as a Paramedic and have brought in more than a few body parts that were lying around an accident scene. I can't say I'm good enough to reattach a limb (far from it), but I know the procedures for securing a severed part, and why we do what we do to preserve them. The fact is, even if you follow the protocols to the letter, very few (relatively speaking) can be reattached. However, if I was the medic on this particular call, I would have had the guy give me the finger part.
Reply #7 Top
not only should the ice cream shop people be sued, they ought to be criminally responsible for that kind of negiligence.


Agreed.

But Baker, your other speculations that the shop "went back to business as usual" after the incident are unfounded.
The guy who lost his finger cannot be blamed on any of this.

Chop of the finger of the guy who found it and refused to give it back in return
Reply #8 Top
read up on the situation before blowing a lot of hot air around SushiK:

In the words of the manager:

We are still trying to ascertain what exactly happened," Thomas said. "But in the seconds that it took for the accident to happen, and for (the employee) to tell the manager that it happened, a pint was being scooped out.


So, they didn't stop serving the custard, just because of the small fact that a kid just cut his finger while making it. Anyone who had any knowledge of the accident, that still allowed the custard to be served is partially at fault for this.

Quit being as big an idiot as the manager proved himself to be. Of course, you're the one who thinks every problem needs to be handled with a ban, so maybe you're just being you.
http://www.wral.com/news/4440972/detail.htm
Reply #9 Top
First of all, if the guy who lost the fingertip and his manager had have shown as much interest in where the severed flesh was after the accident (as is what they should have done), none of this ever would have happened.

Secondly, as cold as frozen custard needs to be to stay frozen, a bare piece of flesh won't have more than a few minutes of viability.



H'uh? True, I do wonder about the time lapse between the cut and the cstumer finding the finger, BUT the sad truth is that the customer is not a doctor. When asked to return the finger to the person who obviously just lost it, he should have returned it. He was too busy trying to sue. Life and limb first and he did owe it to the guy because it was his finger. He grew it himself!!!


As far as him sueing, the store did its best (at the very least) by doing something about the situation so most likely they will not be sued out of existance. As for the guy, don't be suprised that after he finishes sueing the store, the guy who lost his finger sues him. NOW THAT IS AN ACTUAL CASE!!!
Reply #10 Top

Quit being as big an idiot as the manager proved himself to be.


Agreed if you stop being as big a prick as the finger finder proved himself to be
Reply #11 Top
You guys are soooooo, slow. Have you even considered the fact that the guy who lost the finger continued to sell ice cream from a batch that had a severed finger in it?



Yes.


But we don't know if that happened or not but it could definaitly happen. I am sure the store owner and even the person who handed the custard over would have stopped if they heard screeams of pain and anguish.


The bottom line is that even after being contacted by doctors from the hostpial, the guy refused to return the finger. (I can imagine the scene such that the person finding the finger feeling like the owner was just making up the story about the person cutting off his finger and needing it back). Still, he had plenty of opertunity to return the finger to the owner and he didn't.
Reply #12 Top

Quit being as big an idiot as the manager proved himself to be.


Agreed if you stop being as big a prick as the finger finder proved himself to be


Ted, I appologize, I should not have called you a prick

But seriously what happened? You run out of ideas?
We are arguing over the actrions in this article not how I or you have thought in the past on other articles. Com'on ted give me better
Reply #13 Top
Whip,
I cannot argue that funny business took place while the accident was taking place.

But the customer who found the fin'gy still should have given the finger back to the poor sob who lost it.
The customer should be ashamed of himself for putting a fast buck over a man's right and dignity for 10 full fingers.

It should have been up to the doctors to say too late so sad on your finger, that is all I am arguing here.
Reply #14 Top
Quit being as big an idiot as the manager proved himself to be.


Agreed if you stop being as big a prick as the finger finder proved himself to be


Ted, I appologize, I should not have called you a prick

But seriously what happened? You run out of ideas? We are arguing over the actrions in this article not how I or you have thought in the past on other articles. Com'on ted give me better


Ok, we're even. ;~D

One sincere apology deserves another, so yes, I too apologize. I didn't run out of ideas, I just let a personal shot out there at the end. It is a weakness of mine.
----------------------------------------

As far as what should have happened, once there was exposed blood, the contaminated area should have been decontaminated and all food in that area should have been disposed of properly.

As far as lawsuits, because the Kohl's manager broke the law by not decontanating the area before resuming business, Kohl's is seriously open to lawsuits by everyone who was served during that time.

Apparently the health department was called and certified the machine for use again, but what braindead health department inspector ignored the fact that food was served in a contaminated area?

___________________________________

Yes, the guy should have returned the finger part. In fact, as I said before, if I was the medic onscene, I would have insisted he turn the part over to me. Come to think of it, if I was the medic, I could conceivably be subpeonad by the lawyers of either party.
Reply #15 Top
Thanks Ted,


Yes, the guy should have returned the finger part. In fact, as I said before, if I was the medic onscene, I would have insisted he turn the part over to me. Come to think of it, if I was the medic, I could conceivably be subpeonad by the lawyers of either party.


Now that makes sense, I can't understand how the customer was not forced to give up the finger by the police or medics. I would think the guy who lost the finger may make out better in the end than the guy who kept it.
Reply #17 Top
I'm going to sue you for stealing my article


You can have it, I'm not even sure What we are arguing at this point here
Reply #18 Top
As none of us were actually there at the time all of these statements about "woulda coulda shoulda" are only speculation. If the store was really busy it's possible that the product in question could have been sold/served before anyone other than the injured guy knew what had happened.

It's also possible that the injured employee didn't have the presence of mind to do anything but rush away from the station to find the manager and seek treatment.

Truth is, none of us knows what REALLY happened in the time between the injury and the serving of the product (which could have been mere seconds) so this silly bickering about it is just, well, silly.
Reply #19 Top
Man works machine.

Man loses fingertip.

Man say "Yeeeowwwww".

Man thinks, "Drat, my fingertip is in that ice cream. I want my finger back."

Store ignores the fact the ice cream he is working on is now a BIOHAZARD.

Store doesn't bother with finger, packs icecream, and sells it anyway.

Man blames person who finds finger in a mouthful of ice cream.

*boggle*

I repeat, not only would I not give him back his finger, I would probably see to it that a fingertip is the least of his worries. Priorities, folks. The store sold bloody ice cream, and man #2 ATE bloody ice cream. Where should your sympathy lie here??? There's no way they'd get the evidence of their CRIME back...
Reply #20 Top

Wahh?

What crime did the guy who lost a finger commit? Name it?

Yes - Did the Place became a BioHazard?
Yes - Will The Man who found the finger in his ice Cream or whatever sue?
Yes - Does The manager of the place have full culpability?
No - Did The guy whos finger it was commit a crime?
Yes - Should the finger finder have given back the finger?
Yes - Should the finger finder now face a suit?

Your sympathy lies with a person who thought it was more important to keep evidence to prove their case when suing to make money over giving the finger back to the rightful owner who did nothing more wrong then extend his finger a little too far into a squishy machine.

Apu says shame on this man.
Reply #21 Top

Man works machine.

Man loses fingertip.

Man say "Yeeeowwwww".

Man thinks, "Drat, my fingertip is in that ice cream. I want my finger back."
******** You are assuming he knew it was in the icecream, maybe he thought he had just cut it **************


Store ignores the fact the ice cream he is working on is now a BIOHAZARD.
******** Bingo, store is at fault, not the finger loser *******


Store doesn't bother with finger, packs icecream, and sells it anyway.
******** We really don;t know what transpired after **************

Man blames person who finds finger in a mouthful of ice cream.
********* He wanted his finger put back on his body, this really should have been first priority ****************

*boggle* - indeed



Finger loser say - "Please give me back my finger so I can attach it"
Finger finder says - "F Off, i need this to make money"

** Double Boggle **
Reply #22 Top
We know EXACTLY what transpired. WHY it happened isn't the least bit important.

Once an employee contaminates your product, you don't sell it. You do, you screw the employee, you screw yourself. Either the store didn't want to lose the money, or they were too stupid to wonder what happened to it. Instead of trashing the product and finding the guy's finger, they had to make a few bucks off the ice cream.

Either way, the employee should be pissed at his store, not the victim of their negligence. If he lost enough finger to re-attach, (FIRST KNUCKLE??!!?!) then you can be damn sure he knew it was gone before he left the store. I have ZERO sympathy. If it was in ice cream for more than a few minutes it was frozen, anyway.

Rightful owner? Heck, if I pay for ice cream with a finger in it, the finger is mine. I might have it made into a paper weight. Or maybe stuffed to hang on the wall. Regardless, the guy wouldn't get it back, whether I sued or not.
Reply #23 Top
Maybe make it into a back scratcher... Yeah. Regardless, I think you are dead on with the "F*ck Off" thing. Would probably be my exact words.
Reply #24 Top
but why punish the guy who lost it?

If you went to Benny Hana's and the guy at the grill chopping, slicing and shooting freshly cooked shrimp into people's mouths accidentally shot his own chopped-off-finger into your mouth instead of a juicy shrimp.

You would stand there in front of the Chef and say "ummm no, i need this..."

By the way I am sitting here at work laughing my ass off at where this conversation has turned!
Reply #25 Top
"If you went to Benny Hana's and the guy at the grill chopping, slicing and shooting freshly cooked shrimp into people's mouths accidentally shot his own chopped off finger into your mouth instead of a shrimp.

You would stand there in front of the Chef and say "ummm no, i need this..."


Are we talking teriyaki? Tough one...

" but why punish the guy who lost it?"


Maybe this comes from actually witnessing someone lose a finger and knowing other people who have. If you lose a finger at the first knuckle, you KNOW you lost the finger. The guy in my case was pretty hurt and sick, sure, but he was damned insistant on taking it with him.

In the end it was too mangled to re-attach. There weren't like paramedics there, and it took us about 5 minutes to get it wrapped and in ice water for him. His life wouldn't have been threatened had it taken even longer.

People have cut their own arm off with a pocket knife in the wilderness and made it back. There's no reason they couldn't have torn down the machine and gotten this guy his finger before he left.

By the time someone gets it home and takes a bite of it, the negligence on either side is already decided. I'll grant you two victims here, but the guy who lost a finger handed the responsibility of re-attachment over to the store when he left, and they let him down.