Debris crushes hoarder in Connecticut home
CHESHIRE, Conn. — A 66-year-old woman described by police as an apparent hoarder was found dead under a pile of debris when the first floor of her Connecticut home collapsed into the basement under the weight of all the clutter, authorities said.
Police in Cheshire identified the woman as Beverly Mitchell. Her body was found in her home on Saturday, two days after a postal carrier called police to request a welfare check because her mail had been piling up for at least a week.
Police Sgt. Kevin O'Donnell said officers went to the house on Thursday but didn't find anyone and thought Mitchell was not home.
The first floor had stacks of clutter to the ceilings along the walls and waist-high piles in other areas, and officials didn't realize until Friday that the floor had collapsed, O'Donnell said.
After making sure the building was safe to enter, officials cut a hole in the side of the house and began removing debris with a backhoe.
Police had been to Mitchell's house many times over the years responding to requests for welfare checks by neighbors and other people, O'Donnell said.
Officers had offered her help from local social service experts, but she refused each time, he said.
“It's unfortunate, because ... we've tried all along to get her assistance, but she was a very private and solitary lady,” O'Donnell said Sunday.
O'Donnell said officials did not realize the extent of the clutter in the home until they went inside.
Police were still trying to find relatives of Mitchell.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.