



The names of the two participants are not important, so I will not publicly repeat them here. The press has already been responsible for outing the initial story and the names of the two involved. It's probably not the first or last time an event like this has or will occur, nor will it likely be the last that the press will pick something like this to report as noteworthy news. And the fact that I am writing about it only demonstrates that some things are just too good to pass up.
The Metrodome in Minneapolis became the focus of attention this past week, when a couple of Iowa fans, during last weekend's Iowa-Minnesota game, were discovered in a men's handicapped restroom stall engaged in a rite of passion.
Minneapolis is my second home, and my first thought when I read the headlines, was that it was another one of those incidents involving a Larry Craig scenario. So at first glance, it wasn't a story that I was interested in reading. Then today, I saw that there was a followup story in the Des Moines Register, with the headline that included the words "scandal", and "ruined my life." Okay...I was curious now.
It turns out that the two people involved in what happened at the Metrodome were indeed Iowa fans, and they were both Iowa residents as well. At this point, the rest of the story starts down a path that departs far from the norm, and the story actually becomes quite bizarre.
The two were of the opposite gender. The man involved was 26 years old, and was from Linden, Iowa. The woman was 38 years old, and from Carrol, Iowa. 60 miles separate the two towns where they lived, and the claim is that the two had never met each other prior to the incident in the men's room. That much seems plausable.
The incident, as it was occurring, caught the attention of about a dozen others who had meandered into the restroom, and a session of laughs and cheers ensued. Getting back to watching the game took a second seat to what was obviously a more enjoyable form of live action to witness. The entertainment was forcibly broken up when a security guard called in the University of Minnesota police after he made his own observation to what the ruckus was all about. The two were cited for a misdemeanor offense of indecent conduct.
You have to imagine that a certain amount of embarrassment comes with having to face an officer of the law under such circumstances, and a person's state of mind is very important. Keep in mind that when asked by the officer, the woman attempted to give him a false name. The officer also described both of them as being "upset, drunk, and uncooperative." Other University officers were asked to track down the woman's husband, still in the stands. He identified her as his wife and gave them her correct name. She was released to his custody. The man involved in the tryst was attending the game with his girlfriend, but was not involved at the scene. Neither of the two cited individuals were subjected to any measure of their alcohol levels, but the officer was quoted as saying in response to the woman's claim of being too drunk to remember the incident, that it was "probably an accurate statement."
In the Des Moines Register news item published today, the woman was quoted as saying that "she'd had so much wine before kickoff, that she doesn't remember walking into the restroom, the man she had sex with in a stall, or when the police opened the door." She does however, claim to remember the humiliation she was subjected to afterward. One minute she remembers being in the stands, and the next, "being slammed around by a cop and screaming."
She claims to remember "running away" from her husband while still at the Metrodome, but did not explain where she was for the three and a half hours after being cited, then took up another woman's offer to give her a ride home. She gave that woman her husband's cell phone number, who then gave the kind woman driving directions to the hotel where the couple had been staying while in town.An Attorney has been hired by the woman involved in the incident, and is encouraging her to fight the ticket. "He feels I was taken advantage of in my state of mind," she is quoted as saying. "This is not me. We are a very good family. This should not happen." In response to the plan to contest the citation, the officer who cited the two was quoted as saying that, "it's clear in the law in Minnesota that intoxication is not a defense to any crime."
Again, I'm not going to mention names on my page, because it serves no purpose to do so, but the story going public has resulted in this woman being targeted with internet jokes, prank phone calls, and even having been fired from her job as an administrator of an assisted living center. "It’s ruined my life," she's been quoted as saying. "Not just the incident but the press."
I don't like stomping on people when they are obviously down and out. I also don't like people who do. But there are nagging details in all of this that pester me. It's hard for me to swallow that a woman claiming to be too drunk to remember the more relevant set of events leading up to what happened, would somehow meet a perfect stranger on the way to the restroom while on her own two feet, be led by that perfect stranger into a restroom stall for a moment of passion, and yet would have the presence of mind to attempt to shield her identity, be verbally combative towards an officer and make no claim of not understanding at all what happened and why she was there at the moment, and then purposely and again while on her own two feet, avoid her husbands inquiries by running away from him.
She would have to have been falling down drunk, and at the point of being passed out. Then that would have lead to inquiries of the male participant to explain his actions a bit more clearly. And the problem with her claim is that there was no hint anywhere in all of this, that she was anything other than a willing participant.
I'm sure that we have not heard the last of this case. It has potential to become too interesting to not desire to keep up with the outcome. Then again, the two parties participants have already faced having to explain what happened to more important people in their lives than those of the public, or any judge for that matter. An officer offered what was probably the most honest and prophetic statement ever uttered.
"I'm sure that it was a very long ride back to Iowa for both of them."
Indeed it was.











































