Forums

Posted: 30-05-2002 13:28 Post subject: Ronald McDonald Hanged in a Tree

I'm not sureits funny, bearing in mind where RMcD was taken from , but the picture is worth a look...

Main Story

Images

Full text of first story

McDonald House statue stolen from front porch
By GREG TUTTLE
Of The Gazette Staff
A tearful 3-year-old was the first to notice Wednesday morning. The beloved clown bedecked in a bright yellow jumpsuit and big red boots on the front porch of the Ronald McDonald House was missing.

“He was really upset,” said Connie Grammens, executive director of the non-profit organization that offers children and their families a safe place to stay while getting medical care in Billings.

Thieves whisked away the statue of Ronald McDonald sometime in the early morning, leaving an empty bench instead of a familiar and friendly face to greet visitors.

It could not have been an easy task, Grammens said. The 5-foot statue made of solid PVC was secured to the bench with four large bolts. It was also heavy, she said, and would have presented quite a challenge to whoever stole the figure from the house at 1144 N. 30th St.

The theft has left Grammens both perturbed and perplexed. The statue cost more than $2,000, and while it is likely Ronald is insured, it could take months before a new one can be ordered and delivered.

Grammens reported the theft to Billings police, but said she was not given much encouragement that Ronald could be found and returned. Based on the value of the statue, the theft is a felony.

Beyond the financial loss, Grammens said, the children who stay at the home – children whose families already are facing the stress of their medical needs – are the most hurt by the theft.

“Kids have a special relationship with Ronald and we want them to feel this is a very safe and friendly home,” Grammens said. “He’s the symbol of our home that’s named after him.”

The statue was purchased last year as part of an extensive remodeling project at the home, where as many as 12 out-of-town families can stay at one time. The statue was ordered in June from a company in Fond du Lac, Wis., but not delivered until September. The cost of the statue and delivery was more than $3,000.

“We had to go on a waiting list to get him,” Grammens said.

Although Grammens is not sure how much the statue weighs, she said the man who delivered it had a hard time working alone to unload and set it up.

A mother staying at the home remember seeing the statue at 1:30 a.m., Grammens said. It was 10 a.m. when the 3-year-old boy at the home for hearing tests became upset when he noticed Ronald was gone.

“Ronald is something that all kids identify with,” Grammens said. “I’d just love to have him returned undamaged.”

Original text of Second Story
Ronald McDonald statue recovered

Gazette Photos/JAMES WOODCOCK

Billings police officer Gary Crockett, left, and St. Vincent Hospital security guard Kevin Maddox haul a Ronald McDonald statue up a hill after he was found hanging from a tree in Pioneer Park Thursday morning. The statue was stolen yesterday from the Ronald McDonald House where it had been bolted to a bench in front of the house.

Ronald in Tree Image

Posted: 30-05-2002 13:53 Post subject: Re: Ronald McDonald Hanged in a Tree

Posted: 30-05-2002 13:58 Post subject:

I think they were. I think that the house gets their money from McD. I know McD has some charity for children. I presume this is it.

Posted: 30-05-2002 14:20 Post subject:

Its a respite home for chronically and terminally ill children. Mac's do them all over the world

Posted: 30-05-2002 15:25 Post subject:

Further proof that there are some very sick individuals in the world. Not that we needed more proof, mind you.

Posted: 30-05-2002 15:47 Post subject:

One thing is if they had stolen it from some burger place. But stealing it from a childrens home seems a bit much.

Posted: 30-05-2002 16:07 Post subject:

Remind me of the time my nephew and his mates drunkenly stole a statue of Jesus from outside a church.

When the police tracked them down they found Him relaxing on the sofa watching Match Of The Day with a roll-up and a couple of cans.

Posted: 30-05-2002 16:13 Post subject:

Posted: 30-05-2002 16:15 Post subject:

I think it's sick that McDonalds run homes for terminally sick children whilst simultaneously shamelessly advertising their overpriced nutritionally-suspect lard, artificial additive and suger-filled junk to little kids and destroying the health, palates, celebration of regional variation etc etc of people across the entire globe, not to mention their sub-reasonable-standard-of-living employment pay and conditions etc.

or maybe it's just me that's sick?

(edit) - sorry Annasdottir - I think we posted almost simultaneously there!

Posted: 30-05-2002 16:19 Post subject:

True that McDonalds will shamelessly use childrens homes like this as an example of their 'altruism' and 'community spirit' when it is all just an obviously cynical effort at self-promotion. But, as long as sick kids are being helped I have a lot of difficulty arguing with it.
No-one forces anyone to eat McDonalds, people do it out of choice. They couldn't sell it if there wasn't a market for it.

Posted: 30-05-2002 16:36 Post subject:

So I guess I'm the only one who finds it funny then?

Plus - for the same reasons Anna and lizard do - I find Makky D's "generous" contributions to such causes on the verge of sickening, do they in all seriousness think a sinister looking 5ft tall solid plastic Ronald McDonald will make these childrens lives any better? Why not give them money and be done with it?

"Look how nice we are! Stuff your face full of our burgers and save these kids from dying horrible and painful deaths!" pffft Neutral

Posted: 30-05-2002 16:41 Post subject:

Posted: 30-05-2002 16:49 Post subject:

Posted: 30-05-2002 17:47 Post subject:

Posted: 30-05-2002 17:48 Post subject:

A bit off thread, but on a similar subject...

Radio 4 had an item today about Slimfast wanting to be allowed to advertise their products to under-18 year-olds. I don't think they were considering targeting kids younger than 16, though.
They had two nutrition experts and a woman from Slimfast on. One of the nutrition experts was arguing that obesity was more common among children nowadays because of bad diet and lack of exercice, and that we should educate the kids rather than giving them diet shakes.
But the other pretty much agreed with the Slimfast woman. His argument was that some children don't respond to diets and exercice, and that this might help them. And that 16-year olds were allowed to do so many things nowadays, like have sex, that surely aiming ads for diet shakes at them couldn't be so bad.
I just found the whole debate very weird. I couldn't understand that a so-called 'nutrition expert' would go with this. Surely, if a child had a severe weight problem, their doctor wouldn't prescribe Slimfast. Or is it just me being naive?