February 17, 2002

9:10 AM

Crematory operated for years without burning bodies.Hundreds of decaying corpses found strewn about, and the crematory owners lived next door. Apparently, the furnace broke down, and cost too much to fix. How exactly does one deal with a crime like this? (NYT link)
posted by Ptrin (52 comments total)

Um, ok. So they weren't cremated. Really all that is going on is a public health hazard. They're corpses. They're dead. Frankly I've always thought we had WAY too much preoccupation with the deceased anyhow. Respect memories sure, but to get worked up about the treatment of a corpse as if Grandma herself were actually defiled is more than a little silly.
posted by shagoth at 10:14 AM on February 17, 2002

I think the important thing is that the crematory operates specifically under the assumption that it is treating the corpses with respect. That's sort of the point for its existance, you know? So, the degree to which it was defrauding its customers seems pretty spectacular.
posted by Ptrin at 10:27 AM on February 17, 2002

Yes, but their families paid to have them cremated, and they were not cremated. Fraud, at the very least.

What I don't understand is why, if this has been going on for 20 years, they didn't just save up enough money to fix the furnace, then go back and cremate the bodies to cover up their tracks. How much do you figure a cremation furnace costs? (A Google search turned up nothing, and, would you believe it, eBay has nothing either!)
posted by Hildago at 10:29 AM on February 17, 2002

shagoth, I think that's a bit unreasonable. I don't believe in an afterlife either, but that doesn't mean it doesn't matter what happens to the bodies. A friend of mine was cremated a few years ago in Seattle. Knowing that the body was being disposed of in a specific way helped me to feel a kind of closure with regard to her sudden departure from the world of the living. To imagine that she might actually be stacked in some warehouse somewhere instead...it's just horrifying. Burial and cremation are rituals that, to me, exist more for the living than the dead anyway. Sure, we could all have our older relatives freeze-dried and keep them around the house--no health hazard--but wouldn't the psychological effect on the living be a bit undesirable?

Besides, those people or their families paid to have those bodies disposed of in a specific way. Even if you don't agree with their religious beliefs, don't you think they deserve to get what they paid for?
posted by bingo at 10:31 AM on February 17, 2002

shagoth needs to go in for some sensitivity training.

This is definitely one bizarro story. It goes against all of our notions of respecting the dead. I'm surprised the Marshes didn't get run out of town or mobbed. It's a strange world we live in...
posted by ashbury at 10:55 AM on February 17, 2002

This is fraud, not just from a business perspective but from an emotional perspective as well, and the emotional perspective is an important component of the funeral industry. The crematory betrayed the trust of people who turned to them at a time of personal crisis, and they did so time and again with full intent to defraud.

Barring a truly horrid credit position, a funeral services company would have been able to get financing for a new or repaired oven. These people didn't even try. Not only is this situation ripe for civil judgments out the wazoo, these guys should look forward to being in prison until it's time for someone to do whatever they want to with their corpses.
posted by Dreama at 11:03 AM on February 17, 2002

And what about zombies?
Whatever happens to these people, they're getting off light, because Georgia was a simple toxic waste spill away from Night of the Living Dead.
posted by dong_resin at 11:58 AM on February 17, 2002

Sensitivity training? Because it is totally beyond my comprehension the emotional value that people attach to corpses? I still don't get it. They're, um, dead.

That being neither here nor there, I'll totally buy into the fraud argument. It does strike me as odd that no one noticed that the crematorium just quit smoking a few years back.
posted by shagoth at 12:56 PM on February 17, 2002

Because it is totally beyond my comprehension the emotional value that people attach to corpses? - shagoth

I rest my case.

Anywho, you are completely right in wondering about the non-smoking gun, so to speak. It seems that many people, including the state, turned a blind eye to the goings-on at this place.
posted by ashbury at 1:19 PM on February 17, 2002

Well, consider that the managers of the crematorium still gave the grieving relatives the "ashes"... one woman said she thought now that the so-called ashes she received were in fact concrete mix. And the ashes do matter to the bereaved--my dad's are still in my mother's study. They're a last physical connection to the person you've lost.
posted by jokeefe at 1:21 PM on February 17, 2002

I grew up about 10 minutes from this place and my prom was where they are talking to the relatives of the non-creamated. Here is a link to a story from a local paper. My wife's family live near this place, and say it's swarming with CNN and satellite trucks.
posted by mkelley at 1:27 PM on February 17, 2002

I bet! The human interest factor of this story is huge. Along with the big questions: What the F*** were you thinking? How could you do something like this?

IMHO, they were in the wrong business. They should have been lawyers.
posted by ashbury at 1:33 PM on February 17, 2002

i grew up about fifteen minutes north of there. members of my home church are now wondering if the relatives they sent to the facility were actually cremated.

what were they thinking? easy. the crematorium breaks, it costs dearly to repair or replace, so they continue to accept business/bodies in the hopes that they will have the cash to eventually repair. after a period of time, it becomes easier to just accept and hide the incoming, because who is going to actually question the contents of their received urn? and furthermore, the backlog of work if they did finally repair the furnace would be immense.

yes, it's stupid, but it is representative of the same kind of misfired logic that makes others ignore credit card bills, leaks in the roof, cracks in the windshield -- things that can be ignored for quite awhile, until they just become so huge that they overwhelm. and i am not excusing anyone, just saying that the intent was probably more based in procrastination and apathy than in malevolence.
posted by grabbingsand at 2:29 PM on February 17, 2002

wered they get the faux ashes?
posted by clavdivs at 3:26 PM on February 17, 2002

...97 bodies...perhaps as many as 200....
posted by clavdivs at 3:34 PM on February 17, 2002

the faux ashes were apparently.... quikrete, or something similar.
posted by grabbingsand at 3:47 PM on February 17, 2002

Fraud; disregard for public health; disrespect to the wishes of bereaved families; stupidity; trespassing; misuse of others' property; and just general ickiness. Oh, and complete flouting of deeply felt social taboos.

Apart from that these guys are just like everyone else.
posted by Sidhedevil at 4:19 PM on February 17, 2002

shagoth:

Since you say you don't "get it," let me try. If you tell me that what happens to the corpses of your loved ones doesn't matter to you, that's fine. I probably agree with you. I certainly wouldn't accuse you of a lack of sensitivity.

If, however, I tell you that it matters a great deal to me what happens to the corpse of my loved one, that it's a comfort to me to know that that body has been treated with dignity; and you promise to me that you will treat the body according to my wishes, and then you dump it and let it rot, that's horrible. If you try to say "Who cares what happens to dead people?" that's worse.

In other words: Mistreating the dead is not the sin here. Mistreating the dead when doing so is false and hurtful to those who care about them is the sin.

Get it?

The world does not move on your definitions of what does and does not matter, by the way.
posted by argybarg at 5:19 PM on February 17, 2002

"How exactly does one deal with a crime like this?"

why they should be made to eat their mistakes! duh.
posted by jcterminal at 5:53 PM on February 17, 2002

Methinks that the families should just sue the pants off of these people.
On another note, they said the probably had a large lake, and yet they're only acting archaeologist on land. For all anyone knows, there might even be twice the amount at the bottom of that lake.
posted by GirlFriday at 6:20 PM on February 17, 2002

I live here in Atlanta and all I can say is ick,yuck and gross!!!

How did they stand the smell?!?!

In seeing the interviews with the families that used this place, you can tell that cost was probably a factor (as it is with many families). This place probably offered a lower price sevice and took advantage of these people.

I'm embarassed to live here.
posted by bas67 at 6:33 PM on February 17, 2002

shagoth,

You must have been a great comfort to the relatives of deceased patients.
posted by yerfatma at 6:39 PM on February 17, 2002

yerfatma: ok, I can go from clueless to a little offended pretty quick, but I've seen more than my share of death, counseled the bereaved and even, yes, arranged for funerary services for families. Providing quality and compassionate service doesn't mean that I understand WHY people react the way that they do or attach the kind of emotional value to inanimate objects that humans do.

That said, it also distresses me that we as a society place far more value on the "dignity" of the dead than we do on human life in general. This, I think, is where the disconnect occurs for me. Killing is OK, so long as it's state mandated (by war or execution) but it's wrong to let Grannie's corpse moulder in less than serene surroundings.

We were silent on the Balkans for far too long, we continue to ignore Sierra Leone, people are suffering on the streets of our very nation and this crowd is happy to chastise me for thinking that caring for the dignity of a corpse is absurd. I stand by my position, next time you step over a homeless person on the way to get your latte think about yours.
posted by shagoth at 7:02 PM on February 17, 2002

bas67, I think the smell isn't too bad because the bodies are embalmed before cremation.
posted by bingo at 7:29 PM on February 17, 2002

Sometimes I'll offer the bum a sip of my latté, just before I whip it away and go "psyche!"
I do this, of course, because I'm not shagoth.

I'm kidding. I drink espresso, lattés are for sissies.
posted by dong_resin at 7:30 PM on February 17, 2002

bingo,

I thought about that but if they didn't go to the trouble of doing the cremation, would they have done the embalming? I'm not even sure you get embalmed if you are cremated. What would be the point unless you were having an open casket funeral?
posted by bas67 at 9:13 PM on February 17, 2002

Shagoth - Are you saying that we should add one more thing to be silent about? Frankly, you're position on this is just as bewildering to me as the lack of respect the Marshes have displayed to not only the dead, but the living.

I realize that death is about as personal as it can get for people. If it makes you feel better by taking this attitude, then by all means, continue. Whatever works for you. Just be sure to remember that many people not only don't share your thoughts and feelings, but don't want to hear them.
posted by ashbury at 9:22 PM on February 17, 2002

I'm surprised the Marshes didn't get run out of town or mobbed.

Or at the very least, captured and burnt at the stake.

<ducks>
posted by geneablogy at 9:25 PM on February 17, 2002

I have to admit that as I was typing out that line, I had visions of Frankenstein running thru my head.
posted by ashbury at 9:47 PM on February 17, 2002

eewww stinky
posted by doodlebug at 9:52 PM on February 17, 2002

many people not only don't share your thoughts and feelings, but don't want to hear them.

ashbury, I hope you weren't saying this in a "shut up" kind of way, because I kind of agree with Shagoth. I understand that in this culture great attachment is placed upon the physical, and treating the dead with dignity is important in the way we process death and grief. That said, I want to be cremated (and geez, I hope my relatives get what they pay for) becuase I'd like to think that ultimately what makes me me is not my body. At any rate, every culture deals with death in their own way, and some of these ways seem downright undignified to us here in North America. For instance, the Parsis of India leave their dead on shelves in a stadium like enclosure to be eaten by vultures, a sacred bird. (Sorry, the link is mostly about the vultures.)

For more on cremation and the American death culture, here's a fascinating article.

bas67, embalming is only required if there'a viewing, or it's going to be awhile before the cremation.

Someone else wondered how much a crematory cost...I couldn't find a link that gave a pirce, but they sure look expensive. That's no excuse for what happened here, though.

Phew! My teenage goth years finally pay off!
posted by kittyloop at 10:59 PM on February 17, 2002

thanks, shagoth, for hijacking a thread that could've turned out to be an interesting read. keep it up, champ.
posted by chrisege at 12:49 AM on February 18, 2002

I agree with shagoth; our inexplicable attachment to dead bodies has more to do with our own fear of death than actual concern for the deceased. Why else do we box up our remains to keep the worms away?

For those looking to do something considerably more productive post-mortem, consider donating your body to medical science.
posted by johnnyace at 1:28 AM on February 18, 2002

I too am mostly with shagoth: I find lots of things about my fellow human beings inexplicable. Our burial customs really are kind of bizarre if you actually stop to think about them rationally. But few people ever do, since most of us avoid thinking about death as much as possible, and so when we are forced to deal with the matter it is usually in the context of having lost someone close to us or our own impending demise, which makes it impossible to react coolly and logically.

Not to say that there is any excuse for this kind of conduct. When people pay for funeral services, there is an unspoken agreement that the matter will be handled compassionately and professionally, in a way that refrains from further aggravating the pain of those left behind. This would seem to preclude stacking bodies like firewood and leaving them to rot, to later be discovered by the authorities and thereby re-open the wells of grief.

Which brings us to what to me is the most interesting question about this case, leaving aside public health issues for the moment. Had the bodies been disposed of in some other way, and the fraud never been discovered, could anyone really say that any harm had been done? After all, clients would have received urns that contained what they thought were the ashes of their loved one. This is, again, not to say that such a breach would be ethical; when you accept a contract to do a job, you should fulfill it as promised. But if the point of receiving the ashes is to have a focus for achieving closure, then as long as you believe what you have recieved are in fact the ashes of the deceased, it wouldn't matter whether they actually are. It would be a distinction without a difference and therefore immaterial.
posted by kindall at 3:04 AM on February 18, 2002

from the incineratorspecialists link that kittyloop shared earlier:

"Hot Hearth" design helps prevent liquid leakage.

ewww.....
posted by grabbingsand at 5:06 AM on February 18, 2002

After all, clients would have received urns that contained what they thought were the ashes of their loved one.

Excuse me, kindall, but let's say I go to a hamburger stand and order a burger and fries.

"I go to a hamburger stand and order a burger and fries."

Thank you. Now, I am expecting to get something that is predominantly beef-based between two slices of what ought to be bread with perhaps some assumed pickles and an identifiable amount of ketchup. I eat this suspected burger with nary a doubt to its contents. If, however, I find out the next day that this burger stand was really selling burger-flavored cardboard slapped between two chunks of bread-like styrofoam, it doesn't matter that I was duped at the time of purchase into believing in what I bought. What matters is that I thought I was getting a beef burger, I paid for a beef burger and I got ... faux burger. Ethics have been breached.
posted by grabbingsand at 5:15 AM on February 18, 2002

We passed through the area on the way back from Chattanooga last week.

Of course, we had to visit Rock City while we were there. It's a classic roadside attraction. Maybe the owners of Rock City can purchase the crematory land and reopen it as Rot City?
posted by groundhog at 6:32 AM on February 18, 2002

I hope you weren't saying this in a "shut up" kind of way - kittyloop

Of course not. Last I checked, we're all welcome to have a viewpoint and to share that viewpoint. Shagoth can say whatever he wants.

thanks, shagoth, for hijacking a thread that could've turned out to be an interesting read. keep it up, champ. - chrisege

I don't think the thread was hijacked at all. Shagoth shares a viewpoint with many people. Frankly, aside from the usual remarks along the lines of "how terrible/stupid", there isn't much else to talk about.
posted by ashbury at 7:34 AM on February 18, 2002

grabbingsand: Yes, you're repeating more or less exactly what I said. It would be unethical?

But if the burger you bought tasted just like a real burger, and was just as nourishing, and you never found out it was cardboard and styrofoam -- are you harmed?

And if you are one of those who measure the morality of an action by the harm it causes, where does that leave you?
posted by kindall at 1:30 PM on February 18, 2002

For "It would be unethical?" read "It would be unethical."
posted by kindall at 1:31 PM on February 18, 2002

Shagoth:

I think that lavishing attention on, say, a pet cricket would be fairly ridiculous. I may also argue that spending money on a pet cricket home, little special cricket foods, etc., is absurd and perhaps even objectionable while others starve.

If, however, I throw your beloved pet cricket in a blender and laugh at you, I'm a repulsive person.

I still think you don't see that distinction.
posted by argybarg at 1:39 PM on February 18, 2002

Yahoo news update. Georgia crematory operator arrested again, charged with 11 counts of theft by deception for allegedly taking payment for cremations that were never performed.

Body count now 118.
posted by bjgeiger at 1:43 PM on February 18, 2002

Kindall - your argument is in the "if I don't get caught it's okay" category.

But if the burger you bought tasted just like a real burger, and was just as nourishing, and you never found out it was cardboard and styrofoam -- are you harmed? - kindall

The harm comes in the form of lack of respect and distrust for the ideals and institutions that we have faith in. If they get caught. Anarchy ensues.
posted by ashbury at 1:54 PM on February 18, 2002

But if the burger you bought tasted just like a real burger, and was just as nourishing, and you never found out it was cardboard and styrofoam -- are you harmed?

The act of "burger fraud" has lots of potential negative consequences beyond the dining experience of the burger purchaser. Someone knows the act took place, which means it's possible that it will eventually be exposed, which means the company would probably go out of business and people would lose their jobs, etc. It sets a bad example for others, who may become more likely to carry out potentially more harmful acts of fraud in the future. It erodes the level of trust in the society, which is harmful to everyone.

I'm surprised that so many people find burial rituals bizarre. Even if you discount all spiritual or religious significance, they make sense as a technique for optimizing the mental health of the bereaved. It helps people emotionally to have some kind of ceremony where the person's life is discussed and respects are paid. Disposing of the body in some respectful manner is a natural part of the process.

If you can honestly say that you could watch a closed loved one die, and then have their body thrown in a dumpster, and that wouldn't bother you, you have a psychological makeup I find it extremely difficult to relate to.
posted by mcguirk at 4:00 PM on February 18, 2002

I understand that burial rituals help people (they wouldn't persist if they didn't). I just don't understand the kind of person they help.

I don't know that I'd be emotionally unaffected by seeing a recently-deceased loved one tossed out in a dumpster, but I'm not sure that putting them into the ground to be eaten by worms or sending them off to be consumed by flames in a vision of Hell would really be any better.
posted by kindall at 5:39 PM on February 18, 2002

it is a simple matter of did i get what i paid for. understanding of burial rituals or even a common respect for the dead and their survivors needn't even enter into it, though i believe it would for most people. i pay someone to do something, they don't do it and deceive me (no matter how effectively) into believing that they did, then i become the chump and they become the grinning thief.

i like my burger fraud idea, but lets look at it another way. say i buy a music cd.

i buy a music cd.

i pay my $14 thinking that i am buying something manufactured by a record company. instead, somebody has sold me a passably decent cd-r of the album i want. while i would recognize the counterfeit, most of the buying public might not. they spent $14 for 50 cents worth of recording media. they are unknowing chumps and the seller is an opportunistic hound.
posted by grabbingsand at 9:29 PM on February 18, 2002

I'm not saying it's not wrong. I'm asking, are you harmed if you don't get exactly what you paid for, but think you did, and never find out differently? The answer, of course, is no.

Since many people's moral systems are based on the amount of harm or good an action causes, this must leave them in a conundrum.
posted by kindall at 7:55 AM on February 19, 2002

Kindall, I disagree with you. What if you're significant other is having an affair and you don't know? Are you being harmed? The answer, of course, is yes.
posted by ashbury at 8:23 AM on February 19, 2002

Boy, that human crematory in the link Kittyloop posted looks awfully familiar.

It looks like every single comercially built ceramic kiln I've ever used. It didn't give a cubit foot measurement but looked to be in 75-100 cubic foot range. To buy a ceramic kiln in this range will easily set you back ten thousand dollars or more just for the kiln itself. That 10g's doesn't include the space needed for a piece of machinery this big or the gas/electric systems needed.

I'd hazard that human crematories may cost even more.

That's probably quite a lot of money to a small town businessman. I hear that they've got these new fangled things called banks. Sometimes they'll loan you money so you don't have to end up in jail for fraud.

Back in grad school(MFA Ceramics) we used to joke that we could easily fit 6 adults inside our 150 cubic foot updraft kiln. Sure enough they did fit, and we never got caught either...

Mwuahahahaha!
posted by hotmud at 11:58 AM on February 19, 2002

Kindall, I disagree with you. What if you're significant other is having an affair and you don't know? Are you being harmed? The answer, of course, is yes.

If I never find out? No, of course I'm not being harmed. Not by any definition of "harm" I know of, anyway.
posted by kindall at 1:16 PM on February 19, 2002

It does strike me as odd that no one noticed that the crematorium just quit smoking a few years back.

If it was anything like this one, it didn't smoke in the first place.

-Mars
posted by Mars Saxman at 1:43 PM on February 19, 2002

Kittlyloop & that someone else who couldn't find a creamation furnace on Google: I want one!
posted by Modem Ovary at 1:54 PM on March 1, 2002