True Crime

[monkey]

ramonaq said:

Nah, I don't think so. I think there were socio-economic reasons why she kept working, refusing to believe she was the cause of the deaths and illnesses.

Yeah, I'm more inclined to believe that than that she was a cold-hearted, sociopathic villainess. Still, to get a job at a maternity hospital of all places...?

Anyone here read much about the Lindbergh Baby case? I've only read Anne Morrow Lindbergh's biography, but the whole case seems very interesting (and tragic, of course).

[sugaree]

ramonaq said:

Have there been any historical female serial killers? I'm not talking about moms a la Susan Smith (a genre we probably shouldn't talk about here), but real serial killers. I'm thinking something on a larger scale than Lizzie Borden.

There have been a lot of female poisoners, but they usually poisoned their family members or others they cared for (nurses, housekeeper/cooks, etc). I can think of at least one Victorian-era "baby farmer," who advertised that she took in children either to foster or find suitable adoptive homes. She killed the babies but kept the fostering fees. More recently, a middle-aged woman in California killed her elderly male boarders in order to keep cashing their Social Security checks. Heck of a profit margin on that scheme.

Except for that one post-1990 exception, I cannot think of any female serial killers with that classic Ripper/Bundy sexual rage motive. There have been female serial killers who work alongside their men like good little helpmeets, though.

Wait, would Countess Elizabetha Bathory count?

[monkey]

What about Thomas Neill Cream, the strychnine poisoner?

ETA: Obviously, not as a female serial killer to discuss...I've only heard a few details about that case, but it's my favorite kind of true crime. Very Anne Perry-esque.

[Deleted]

ramonaq said:

Have there been any historical female serial killers? I'm not talking about moms a la Susan Smith (a genre we probably shouldn't talk about here), but real serial killers. I'm thinking something on a larger scale than Lizzie Borden.

Yes, there most definitely have. They tend to target (as female murderers generally do) people who rely or depend on them in some way. Landladies killing tenants for some kind of economic gain? Many cases of those over the years. Nurses killing patients? Yup. Then there's famous Belle Gunness, who killed a succession of husbands (and perhaps children as well).

The reason why the press made a particularly big deal about Aileen Wuornos is that she targeted a different sort of victim *and* the method she used (shooting rather than the typical non-confrontational methods favorited by female serial killers - poisoning, suffocation while victim is sleeping. etc).

Because of the methods they have favored and the circumstances under which they killed, female serial killers tended to be harder to detect as well.

[ramonaq]

Because of the methods they have favored and the circumstances under which they killed, female serial killers tended to be harder to detect as well.

Excellent point.

[aims]

I remember reading about a nurse that would make her patients sick so that she could be the 'hero' when she got them healthy again or saved their lives. It was something like an addiction to that kind of attention.

The Black Dahlia story is quite gripping and gruesome too.

[whatever]

monkey said:

ramonaq said:

Nah, I don't think so. I think there were socio-economic reasons why she kept working, refusing to believe she was the cause of the deaths and illnesses.

Yeah, I'm more inclined to believe that than that she was a cold-hearted, sociopathic villainess. Still, to get a job at a maternity hospital of all places...?

Anyone here read much about the Lindbergh Baby case? I've only read Anne Morrow Lindbergh's biography, but the whole case seems very interesting (and tragic, of course).

I don't know, I see a bit of sociopathy about her, in her refusal to listen to any doctors, and faking a new identity to keep working with food. When everyone you are around gets sick and/or dies, and to refuse to believe you had anything to do with it is real arrogance, I think.

I have a bit of a fun family connection to the Lindbergh case. One of my great-aunts married into the Hoffman family (Howard Hoffman was governor at the time of the kidnapping and trial) and my grandmother told me that after the governor died, boxes of documents relating to the case were found in his basement, and these documents indicated a frame up of Bruno Hauptmann, and a cover up. But no one knows where the boxes are now.

[ramonaq]

Oooh, Lilith, sounds like there's overlap with the conspiracy thread now!

[Mugsy]

I read Small Sacrifices this summer for the first time. I saw the movie years ago, but typically, the book is so much more in depth. Farrah Fawcett was perfect for the role. There seems to be a category of women who have this "seem like good people to the casual observer, but bust out as total psychopaths when the right set of circumstances occur" nature. Makes you wonder who around you is one ice pick away from being in an Ann Rule book.

I love Ann Rule's books, very thorough. I have a small collection of true crime books actually. I hope that doesn't mean anything. Many were movies/mini-series in the 80s.

There was one about a woman who had about 5 or 6 babies die of SIDS. One of her biggest supporter was doctor doing SIDS research, and based mostly on her case, he determined that SIDS had a hereditary factor. This sent parents of SIDS babies into a panic if they had another baby, and many of those babies were put on special breathing monitors for their first year (friends of ours included).
Turns out, of course, that this mother was suffocating her children - they were anywhere from a couple months to almost 2 years old - because she liked the attention she got. Apparently the first death was actually SIDS and that's when she got "hooked" on sympathy. Ugh.

[Deleted]

cybercathy said:

The MacDonald story always interested me. I still remember that TV movie from years ago. Fatal Vision I think. Did they ever decide if he was innocent or not?

I became fascinated by the Jeffrey McDonald story after reading that book. Apparently, these days, he's waiting for DNA testing to prove he didn't do it. I think he's going to wait a good, long time for anything to exonerate him. I think he's guilty as sin. Oh, and he's got a new wife who actually seems normal and is quite pretty. (Well, as normal as one can be marrying a lifer.)

whatever said:

I have a bit of a fun family connection to the Lindbergh case. One of my great-aunts married into the Hoffman family (Howard Hoffman was governor at the time of the kidnapping and trial) and my grandmother told me that after the governor died, boxes of documents relating to the case were found in his basement, and these documents indicated a frame up of Bruno Hauptmann, and a cover up. But no one knows where the boxes are now.

Ooo! That's good stuff! I seem to recall some rumors that one of the Lindbergh's actually killed the child? Or am I misremembering this?

I saw a documentary on CourtTV, I think, not too long ago, that had the wood in Hauptman's house (from the attic) tested against the wood used to make the ladder found at the crime scene. The two were identical.