Sunday, January 27, 2013

Serial Baby-Killing Moms

This list is restricted to those female serial killers who focused their homicidal attention on the murdering of their own babies. Many serial killer mothers murdered older children (as well as step-children and child relatives), but these cases are not included here.


1st c BC  Laodice of Cappadocia – Kingdom of Pontus, Anatolia; 5 sons poisoned
1750    (Finland:10 cases, 1750-1896) (names yet to be collected and added)
1816    Susannah Holroyd – England – 5 infants (plus husband) murdered
1819    Ane Nielsdatter – Copenhagen, Denmark;  5 or 6 children
1848    Mary MayColchester, England – 14 children
1849    Rebecca Smith – Devizes, England – 8 newborns
1854    Marie GageyArnay-sous-Vitteaux, France; 2 children (& 3-4 adults)
1861    Ane Cathrine Andersdatter – Rødovre Mark, Denmark – 3
1869    Mrs. Wahle – Jacksonville, Illinois - 3
1871    Ann Burns – Wigan, Lancashire, England –3: step-f & 2 own babies
1875    Marie Bouriant Ainay-le-Vieil, France; 5 babies murdered
1875    Sophie Gautié Bouyon – Cahors, France – 7 murders suspected
1877    Elizabeth Kirkbride – Liverpool, England – 8 own babies
1886    Mary Hart – Philadelphia, Pennsylvania – 13 own babies suspected
1888    Eva Micsik – Csoka, Hungary; 8 own babies
1889    Sophie Von Mesko – “Lipes,” Hungary – 5 children & 1 husband?
1894    Martha Needle – Richmond, Australia, 3 own babies, husband, fiancee’s brother
1906    Bridget Carey – Centralia, Pa.; husband, 2 own babies, 2 boarders
1908    Grete Beyer – Brand, Saxony (Germany), 4: husband & 3 babies
1908    Elizabeth Goehlenau (& husband John) – Friedland, Silesia – 8 babies
1908    Francesca Herrera (& husband Molina) – Seville, Spain – 18 babies
1914    “Edinburgh Serial Baby-Killing Mom” – Edinburgh, Scotland – 3 babies 
1923    Albertina Blomqvist – Stockholm, Sweden – 6 children
1929    Ethel Lewis & Okal Gorham – Eau Claire, Michigan – 7 babies
1932    Camille Tounie – Saint Saveur, France – (unmarried) 7 newborns
1942    Dorothy Hahn – Adelaide, Australia – 3 babies
1943    Bernice Williams – Denver, Co. – 3 newborns
1950    Juanita Louise Carr – Fossil, Oregon, USA – 3 victims
1950    Mrs. Schaub – Baltimore, Md. – 3 babies
1953    Eunice Brillart  – Asmara, Eritrea / USA – 3 children
1954    Elsie RodgersBurton-On-Trent, England – 3 babies
1969    Yvette LelièvreSaint-Pierre-lès-Nemours, France – with husb. André – 7 newborns
1969    Barbara Wilkinson – Wahroonga, Australia – 6 newborns
1969    Martha Woods – Baltimore, Md. – 3 own babies, neph, nce, neighbor’s ch, adopt. son
1980    Stella Williamson – Gallitzin, Pa. – 5 infants
1984    Debra Sue Tuggle – Little Rock, Ark. – 4 victims
1984    Lisa Jane Turner – Christchurch, N. Zealand – 2 babies, 1 other baby, 4 other attempts
1986    Marybeth Tinning – Schenectady, NY – 8 victims suspected
1987    Debbie Fornuto (Deborah Gedzius) – Chicago, Il. – 6 own babies, 3 different fathers
1988    Myriam Marlein – Ostend, Belgium – 8 newborns (including twins)
1992    Diane Spencer – Wayland, Michigan & Clearfield, Pa – 3 babies
1993    Kazuko Hatayama – Honjo, Japan – 8 newborns
1989    Tammy (Eveans) Corbett – Carlinville, Illinois – son (3) & 2 babies
1989    Martha Ann JohnsonClayton County, Ga. – 4 chn (infant, 2 toddlers, 11-yo)
1990    Diane Lumbrera Garden City, Ks. – 6 own babies
1991    Shavonda Charleston – Louisville, Ky. – 4 own babies
1993    Denise Dianna Buchanan – Washoe County, Nevada – 3 own babies
1993    Gail Lynn Savage – Waukegan, Il. – 3 children
1995    Filita Mashilipa – Zambia – cannibal, witchcraft; 7 own babies
1995    Miyko Mikami – Kashiwa, Japan – 10 babies died
1995    Maxine Robinson – Chester-le-Street, England – 3 own babies
1995    Claudette Kibble - Houston, Tx –  3 own babies
1995    Elizabeth K. Shankin – Buffalo, Indiana 3
1996    Waneta Hoyt – Newark Valley, NY – 5 victims
1999    Darcie Jo Baum – Orem, Utah – 4 newborns
1999    Marie Noe – Philadelphia, Pa. – 8 victims
2002    Gloria Jean Greenfield – Warren, Ohio – 3 own babies
2002    “Toda Serial Killer Mother” – Toda, Japan – 6 newborns
2003    Kathleen Folbigg – Mayfield, Australia – 6 victims: 4 own babies
2003    Diane O’Dell – Rome, Pa. & NY – 4 own babies
2006    Chizuko Okamoto – Hiratsuka, Japan – 4 children, 3 infants & daughter (19)
2005    Sabine Hilschenz – trial: Frankfurt an der Oder, Germany – 9 babies, flower pots
2006    Gertraud Arzberger – Graz, Austria – 4 own babies
2006    Jolanta K. – Lublin, Poland – 5 newborns
2007    “Susann F.” – Plauen, Germany – 3 own children
2007    Monika Halbe – Wenden, Germany – 3 babies, freezer
2007    Céline Lesage – Valognes, France – 6 newborns
2007    Shirley Winters – Syracuse, NY – 2 babies + 5 other babies suspected
2009    Veronique Courjault – Tours, France – 3 own babies

2009    Harsimrat “Simmi” Kahlon – Calgary, Canada – 3 babies
2009    “Ota Ward Tokyo Serial Killer Mother” – Ota Ward, Tokyo, Japan –  4 babies
2010    Meredith Katharine Borowiec – Calgary, Canada; 3 newborns, 1 survived
2010    Dominique Cottrez – Villers-au-Tertre, France – 8 own babies
2010    “Geleen Serial Killer Mother” – Geleen, Netherlands – 3 newborns
2010    Michele Kalina – Reading, Pa. – 5 newborns
2010    Sietske Hoekstra – Nij Beets, Friesland, Netherlands – 4 newborns
2010    Bernadette Quirk – St. Helens, Merseyside, Eng. – 4 babies, claimed “stillborn”
2012    Annika H. – Husum (greater Flensburg), Germany – 5 babies
2012    Beata Z. – Hipolitowo, Poland – 5 own babies

2012    Veeramma – Rajendra Nagar, Delhi, India – 4 babies
2013    Audrey C. – Ain, Lyon, Ambérieu, France – 3 newborns
2013    Lucyna D. – Lubawa, Poland – 3 newborns
2013    Chiemi Tonuma – Ota Ward, Tokyo, Japan – 3 babies

2013    “Vlasatice Mother” – Vlasatice, Czech Rep. – 3 newborns (twins +1)
2014    Andrea Giesbrecht – Winnipeg, Canada – 6 babies
2014    Megan Huntsman – Pleasant Grove, Utah – 6 newborns

2014    Angeline Mabhiza – Zimbabwe – 4 babies
2014    Erika Murray – Blackstone, Ma. – 3 newborns
2014   “Oulu Serial Killer Mother” – Oulu, Finland – 5 newborns


Disposal of the Murdered Babies’ Corpses

Arsenic – Rebecca Smith
Attic – Sietske Hoekstra
Buckets filled with Concrete – Gertraud Arzberger
Bury in garden – Yvette Lelièvre
Cardboard Boxes – Chizuko Okamoto (with plastic bags)
Cooler – Michele Kalina (storage closet)
“Containers” – Michele Kalina (storage closet; plastic bags, one encased in concrete)
Dumpster – Meredith Katharine Borowiec
Fireplace – Mrs. Schaub
Flower pots – Sabine Hilschenz
Freezer – Monika Halbe; Veronique Courjault; Gertraud Arzberger, Lucyna D., Audrey C.
Incinerate – Yvette Lelièvre
Paper packages – Elizabeth Kirkbride
Plastic Bags – Céline Lesage (stored in basement); Dominique Cottrez (black trash bags); “Toda Serial Killer Mother (5 in plastic bag and one in a plastic case); Myiam Marlein (dispose of bags at supermarket)
Plastic case – “Toda Serial Killer Mother”
Shed – “Geleen Serial Killer Mother”
Shoe Boxes  – Megan Huntsman
Steamer trunk – Stella Williamson
Storage Boxes – “Husum Baby-Killing Mother”
Storage shed – Diane O’Dell
Stable, cellar & attic – Beata Z.
Suitcases – “Geleen Serial Killer Mother” (in attic); Susann F. (in attic)
Wardrobe (with air freshener) – Bernadette Quirk


Classification: (“SIDS” (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome), “Crib Death”)

1969    Martha Woods (Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy)
1984    Debra Sue Tuggle
1984    Lisa Jane Turner
1986    Marybeth Tinning
1987    Debbie Fornuto
1989    Martha Ann Johnson
1991    Shavonda Charleston
1993    Denise Dianna Buchanan
1993    Gail Lynn Savage
1996    Waneta Hoyt (Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy)
1999    Marie Noe
2002    Gloria Jean Greenfield
2003    Kathleen Folbigg (Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy)
2007    Shirley Winters

Classification: Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy

1969    Martha Woods (Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy)
1990    Diane Lumbrera – Garden City, Ks. – 6 own babies
1996    Waneta Hoyt (Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy)
2003    Kathleen Folbigg (Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy)


Accused but Cleared of Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy

1998    Sally Clark – Manchester, England – conviction overturned; 2 children died
2002 – Trupti Patel – Berkshire, England – acquitted in 2003; 3 children died
2002 – Angela Cannings – England – conviction overturned 2003; 3 children died

Kept Diary Describing the Murders

1889    Sophie Von Mesko – “Lipes,” Hungary – 5 children & 1 husband?
2003    Kathleen Folbigg – Mayfield, Australia – 6 victims: 4 own babies


Friday, January 25, 2013

Early Men’s Rights Writings by C. M. Castellazzo – 1927

FULL TEXT: Alameda county’s “alimony martyr,” Emil R. Whittenberg, is willing to go to work and pay alimony in order to get out of jail, but he was still a cell inmate today, his fourteenth day of imprisonment. No longer is he a militant striker openly, whatever his private convictions on alimony, he now craves the freedom of the wide open spaces.

But Wittenberg’s freedom largely depends upon the consent of his wife to arrangements by which he may get out of jail and work for her support. Her attitude today remained constant, if he will pay, he may go free, but no pay, no freedom.

Conference between Public Defender Willard Shea and Attorney Clarence De Lancey, counsel for Mrs. Wittenberg, is being held today over Wittenberg’s plea.

Even the moral support of Sam W. Reid, famous alimony-martyr of Glenn county, California, failed to hold Wittenberg against the craving for freedom.


Wittenberg’s plight has attracted another sympathizer, C. M. Castellazzo, box 1533 Redwood road, Castellazzo wants to enlist the men in a general campaign against the "women’s clubs.” “It will take manhood to put it over,” he wrote Wittenberg.

Castellazzo’s letter says in part:

I read with interest that, you are forming an Anti-Alimony club. I understand that the club will urge special legislation for alimony payers. Let me inform you that it will take move than mere urging to put it over.

You have the combined forces of women’s clubs against you. You note that the women’s clubs which claim to have high ideals and an eagerness for righteousness are not helping you in your predicament. It will take manhood to put it over. It requires initiative by taking what is right, not mere urging.

I , too, am forming a club. It will stand for more than Anti-Alimony. The club will stand for Anti-Alimony, Anti-Prohibition, Anti-Hypocrisy, and a few other important items which I do not care to discuss by letter.

All men worthy of the name men, who are not mentally degenerate, such as those who figure that the women are always right – are eligible to the club. Since you state that you are without funds, I am enclosing a 2-cent stamp, should you wish to make a reply. Wishing you the best of luck, I am,
Very truly yours, C. M. CASTELLAZZO...


Signing himself “Another Alimony Dodger,” still another supporter came to Wittenberg’s camp today. He said:

“Dear Sir:
“It is with interest I read of your case, and I heartily sympathize with your case. America is today run by women. When a man is so foolish as to marry one of them, he is done for, so long as she cares to hang on to him.

“About the only relief that the man has is that some other bonehead will come along and take friend wife off his hands. Every man of experience knows that most wives will not give up one meal ticket until she has the next in sight.

“I am wondering if there isn’t a better way out of your difficulties than the one you have chosen. Isn’t it possible for you to pay tip and leave California? It seems a shame that you should have to waste your time and lose your freedom over such a trifling matter.

“You are at least lucky in being divorced. Some of us have not been so fortunate. I personally spent about four hours in jail, and three weeks later, when I got things in shape, I took a 2000-mile trip for my health. I found my health so much better that I have never gone hack.

“You will only afford your alimony-grabber satisfaction by remaining in jail when you might be working to your own advantage if you were free and out of California.

“More power to you! I hope you never pay, but that, you will work out some scheme to beat the alimony graft.

“American men are today the laughing stock of the rest of the world, and of their more intelligent fellow Americans – and they deserve to be.

“Never in the history of the human race have men fallen into such a preposterous situation as that of most American husbands. The humor of the situation lies in the fact unil they have built the net in which they are now floundering. One by one they have passed stupid and asinine laws till today a man has as much right to say what shall be done with his properly, his children, or even his person, as a jack ass.

“Well, I must close. Here’s a handshake for you and all the fellow alimony dodgers. Perhaps in time other slaves will gee the light and stand out against this asinine and tyrannous graft. Until that time it will be each of us for himself and the devil take the hindmost.”

[“Alimony Martyr Ready to Work and Pay, Escape Jail,” Oakland Tribune (Ca.), Nov. 18, 1927, p. 18]


For more revelations of this suppressed history, see The Alimony Racket: Checklist of Posts


Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Female Serial Killers of 19th Century America

There are at least 73 known Female Serial Killers of 19th century America.

1816 – Rachel Clark – Carlisle, Pennsylvania
1829 – Martha “Patty” Cannon – Maryland/Delaware state line
1840 – Kinney, Hannah Hanson – Boston & Lowell, Massachusetts
1845 – Mrs. Elizabeth Reed – Lawrenceville, Illinois
1847 – Mary Runkle – Whitesboro, Oneida County, New York
1851 – Nancy Farrer – Cincinnati, Ohio
1852 – Nancy Hufford  – Cumberland, Md., Somerset, Pa.
1857 – Polly Frisch (Hoag) – Alabama, Genessee County, New York
1857 – Elizabeth Routt – Hazel Green, Tennessee
1858 – Lydia Studley – Valley Falls, Rhode Island
1858 – Phebe Westlake (nee Irwin) – Chester, New York
1860 – Mary Jane “Bricktop” Jackson – New Orleans, Louisiana
1860 – Elizabeth P. McCraney – Lancaster, Wisconsin; Medford, Otsego, N. Y.
1865 – Martha Grinder – Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
1869 – “Gardiner, Maine Black Widow Serial Killer” – Gardiner, Maine
1869 – Mrs. Wahle – Jacksonville, Illinois
1869 – Mrs. White – Lafayette Township, Sussex County, New Jersey
1870 – "Detroit Black Widow" – Detroit Michigan
1871 – Catherine Batchelor – Lockport, Indiana
1871 – Lydia Sherman – New Brunswick, New Jersey; New Haven & Danby, Ct.
1871 – Elizabeth Wharton – Baltimore, Maryland
1872 – Charlotte Lamb – Trimbelle, Wisconsin
1872 – Martha Whetstone – St. Louis, Missouri
1873 Kate & Katie Bender (“Bloody Benders”) – Cherry Vale, Kansas
1873 – Sarah Earhardt  – Germantown, Ohio
1873 Mrs. York – Moweaqua, Illinois (discredited)
1875 – Julia Fortemeyer – St. Louis, Missouri
1875 – Mary Reignolds – Holliston, Massachusetts (child care provider)
1876 – Margaret McClosky – New York, New York (child care provider)
1877 – Agnes Parr – Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (child care provider)
1877 – Rozilla Worcester – New York, New York (child care provider)
1878 Mrs. David Drake – Westfield, Massachusetts
1878 Sallie Hardman (Gibbs) – Enon, Ohio
1879 – Alice Danbrough – Lebanon, Illinois
1879 – Frances Shrouder – Chittenango, New York
1881 – Nellie Webb (Nancy French) – Lancaster, New Hampshire
1882 – Sally Story – Little Falls, New Jersey
1882 – Phyllis Wright – Savanna, Georgia
1883 – Emma Stillwell – Waterford, Ohio
1884 – Angenette B. S. Haight – Morrisville, New York
1884 – Nettie Hoxan – Whitewater, Wisconsin
1884 – Miss S. S. Nivison – Hammonton, New Jersey (child care provider)
1885 – Mary Kleman – Dubuque, Iowa
1886 – Sarah J. Dockery – Fulton, Kentucky
1886 – Mary Hart – Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
1886 – Harriet Nason – Rutland, Vermont
1886 – Sarah Jane Robinson – Somerville, Massachusetts
1887 – Cynthia McDonald – Rochester, New York (child care provider)
1887 – Annie Snoots – Adamsville, Ohio
1888 – Mrs. Johnston – Villea, Iowa
1888 – Sarah Whiteling  – Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
1889 – Lizzie Brennan – Holyoke, Massachusetts
1889 – Mary Glynn – Pittston, Pennsylvania
1889 – Jennie Seiffert – St. Louis, Missouri (child care provider)
1889 – Annie Zachoegner – Pittsburg, Pennsylvania
1890 – Charles & Catherine Claus – Long Island, New York (child care provider)
1891 – Evelyn Abbott – Roxbury, Massachusetts (child care provider)
1891 – Mrs. Thomas Austin – Louisville, Kentucky
1891 – Mrs. John Dorsey – Indianapolis, Indiana
1891 – Mrs. Caroline D. Sorgenfrie – Rome, N.Y.
1892 – Mary Ann Armagost – David City, Nebraska
1892 – Annie Hanson – Chicago, Illinois (child care provider)
1893 – Lizzie Halliday – Burlingham, New York
1892 – Ella Holdridge – Tonawanda, New York – age 14 at time of apprehension
1893 – Meyer, Mrs. D. H. – Illinois, Indiana, New York & Ohio
1893 – Belinda Laphame – San Francisco, Ca.
1893 Annie Wagner – Indianapolis, Indiana
1893 Mattie C. Shann – Princeton, New Jersey
1894 – Mrs. Julian Butler – Hamburg, Michigan
1894 – Mary Cowan – Dixmont, Maine
1894 – Katharine & Elizabeth Nolan – Waterford, New York
1897 – Jennie Layton & Mary Sammon – Camden, New Jersey
1897 – Nancy Staffleback – Galena, Kansas
1899Lulu Johnson – Enid, Oklahoma Territory


Normally, I do not list cases in which there are not 3 or more separate murders (or attempts). There are, however, some exceptions: youthful killers and Black Widows with 2 victims. Here are examples of these:

1846 – Elizabeth Van Valkenbugh – Fulton, New York (2 husbands murdered)
1874 – Mrs. Pleasant – Fort Laramie, Wyoming (2 husbands murdered)
1881 – “Bronco Lou” (Mrs. Yankers) – Southern Colorado (2 husbands murdered)
1888 – Martha Johnson – Stafford, Connecticut (2 husbands murdered)
1892 – Kate Painter – Pittsburg, Pennsylvania (2 husbands murdered)
1895 – Mary E. Hughson – Muskogee, Michigan (2 husbands murdered)
1896 – Fanny Scofield – Oswego, New York (aged 13; 2 murders)
1898 – Mrs. Camfield – Cataldo, Idaho (2 husbands murdered)


4 DISCREDITED LEGENDS (19th c): Rebecca Cotton, South Carolina, 1790s (actual person, murders are a legend); Lavinia Fisher, 1793-1820, Charleston, SC (actual criminal who was executed, but serial killings committed by her seem to be a legend); Delphine Marie LaLaurie (actual person, but serial murders are undocumented), Louisiana; Sally Skull, 1860s, Texas (unverified legend that she was a serial killer)

Peter Vronsky's list, published in 2007, containing 140 female serial killer cases, lists only five 19th century US cases: Bender, Cannon, Jackson, Robinson and Sherman. I have not included Rachel Wall, the piratess executed in Massachusetts in 1789, on my list, as it is uncertain what her role might have been in the 24 murders attributed to the crew with which she was associated.


The following article from 1873 demonstrates that the current widely-held belief that serial killers of the female sex are an anomaly was not held back then. Nor was that belief held in the 1920s either (“Three Women Who Admit Poisoning 29 Persons,” May 1, 1925). The myth of female killers’ being rare, in comparison with males, and related myths (that serial killers are primarily Caucasians or that they are rare outside North America) are of fairly recent origin (1980s).

FULL TEXT: Another female poisoner has been brought to justice. Recently, at Germantown, Ohio, public attention was attracted to the simultaneous poisoning by arsenic of three members of a family named Hanna, while visiting the house of a kinswoman, one Sarah Earhardt. Fortunately the amount administered to each of the intended victims proved insufficient to cause death. Upon investigation evidence was produced, if correct, proving the woman Earlhardt to be as great a monster as either Lydia Sherman, Jane Ann Cotton or Mrs. Grinder. She is now in custody on a charge of having attempted to take the lives of the three Hannas, and it is to be the intention of the State prosecuting counsel to introduce testimony at the trial to show that she has poisoned her husband, her son’s wife, her son-in-law’s child, and her husband’s first wife, all within a few years. Minor crimes, such its the poisoning of juvenile animals and the burning of numerous houses, are also said to be among the number of her achievements. By the death of the Hannas she would have come into possession of a considerable amount of property. The most extraordinary circumstance in connection with this case is that the woman is upward of seventy years of age.

[“Another Female Poisoner.” The Bloomfield Times (New Bloomfield, Pa.),  Jun. 10, 1873, p. 4]




A commonly cited statistic is that 16% of known serial murderers in the United States from 1800 and 1995 are female The total number of female serial killers known to the criminologist who proposed this ratio was 62 (Hickey, 2002; 213). As you can see, the count (on this website) at present of known female serial killer cases before 1900 is currently 65, the vast majority of which are unknown to even specialized scholars.

It is also been claimed by criminologists that three-quarters of female serial killers in the us made their appearance since 1950, and that a full half only since 1975. (Hickey, 2002; 215). Thus it is often stated that the phenomenon is increasing at an extraordinary rate. Yet, the fact is that today’s criminologists are relying upon the scanty, incomplete research done by earlier generations of crime historians – without taking into account the fact that the subject female serial killers of the past (before the 1970s) have never been systematically and thoroughly researched by scholars.

A great many false assumptions about incidence of such cases and about larger questions of female psychopathology and criminality are challenged by the new research on female serial killers that is presented on this website.




Regarding Wikipedia and the “rarity” claim:

The Wikipedia page titled “Serial killer” (accessed Jan. 20, 2014) states: “Female serial killers are rare compared to their male counterparts.”

The Wikipedia list page titled “Category: Female Serial Killers” (accessed Jan. 20, 2014) contains links to a total of only 54 cases.


Monday, January 21, 2013

Sophisticated Feminist Intellectuals Just LOVE “Critical Theory”

Most feminists have mastered the intricacies of Einstein’s theory of relativity, having taken a minimum of 24 hours of 300 level or higher Gender Studies courses. Unlike a patriarch, a well-educated feminist can explain Einstein’s groundbreaking concept, the question of its veracity as well as its scientific significance, in only a few words, such as these:

“Everything is relative, right?”

“Einstein proved that, didn’t he?”


So get with the post-modern program. Don’t be patriarchal; study critical theory. It is progressive! Wayyyy progressive!

Gramsci rules! The “long march though the institutions”continues. Oppressors beware.

“Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.)” 

– Alan Sokal  (“A Physicist Experiments With Cultural Studies,” Lingua Franca. May/June 1996) 


Felicitas Sanchez Aguillon, Mexican Baby Farmer & Serial Killer - 1941

“From a young age she showed a perverse nature.” (Carlos Conde, former husband)

Felícitas Sánchez Aguillón or Sánchez Neyra (1890 - June 16, 1941) was a Mexican nurse, midwife, baby farmer and serial killer, active during the 1930s in Mexico City, who killed babies in her care. It is estimated that Felícitas murdered children in numbers ranging from between 40 and neatly a hundred. Her victims were aged from newborn to three years old. Typically she would poison or strangle the children, according to some reports sometimes she would dismember a child while still living. Felícitas was given various sobriquets by the Mexican press, such as "The Ogress of Colonia Roma", "The Female Ripper of Colonia Roma" and "The Human Crusher of little angels."

Felícitas was born in 1890 in Cerro Azul, Veracruz. Her mother never loved her and showed her affection. This caused her a psychopathic personality and aversion to all the maternal. Since childhood she showed a perverse behavior, habitually poisoning street dogs. During the 1900s, she graduated as a nurse and married Carlos Conde. She had twin daughters with him but didn't want to take care of them, and suggested to her husband that they give them up for adoption. He accepted this proposal, but after the daughters had been adopted, he changed his mind. However, Sánchez refused to tell him where their daughters were, which led to their divorce in 1910.

In that year Sánchez moved to Mexico City. In Mexico City, she lived in an apartment building located on Salamanca Street, Colonia Roma. She started to attend births and illegally practice abortions. She also began to trade in illegal adoptions. During the 1910s she was arrested twice for practicing illegal adoption and baby farming.

As with many other baby farmers across the world, Felícitas would take money from the mother of a newborn, promising to use the funds to care for the child until they could be given an adopted home. The truth was, she would sell those she could rid herself of as quickly as possible, and if the child was not sold within a few days she would murder it. According to one source she enjoyed beating her victims.

She dismembered the bodies and incinerated them. Dosing the flesh with gasoline before throwing them in the large furnace she had installed for that purpose, and in other cases she would flush the body parts down the toilet.

On April 8, 1941, human remains were discovered near her home. Three days later Felícitas Sánchez was arrested, along with two accomplices: her second husband Roberto or Alberto Covarrubías and a plumber, Salvador Martínez, who worked for Sánchez.

On July 16, 1941, before she could be tried for her crimnes, Felícitas Sánchez committed suicide. She and her second husband had a third daughter, who was placed in state care after her father was convicted for involvement in the murders.

[Based on Wikipedia and other sources]


For more cases of “Baby Farmers,” professional child care providers who murdered children see The Forgotten Serial Killers.


For more Real Life Ogresses see: Ogresses: Female Serial Killers of the Children of Others


Links to more Serial Killer Couples


Sunday, January 20, 2013

The Sh*t Heard Round the World: Germaine Greer’s Philosophy of Hate – 1970

The significance of the hugely influential 1970 book, The Female Eunuch, by Germaine Greer, is eloquently explained in this important article on the origins of the misandrist tyranny that we see growing like a cancer around us:

Big Sister: the legacy of Germaine Greer” by Neil Lyndon, A Voice for Men, January 15, 2013


Saturday, January 12, 2013

Nullify Misandry: The 10th Amendment is the Answer

Defunding misandry cannot come about by lobbying bribe-taking elected servants. They will not follow the Constitution.

The de-funding of misandry will come about the same way as the de-funding of the police state in general, the fiat money fraud system and the war-for-profit racket.


See this hilarious, well-done and succinct video introduction to the nullification concept:

Interview with a Zombie,” by Dr. Thomas Woods.


We are all duty-bound to resist all unconstitutional laws. An unconstitutional “law” is not a law.

Visit the Tenth Amendment Center. Get active. When we nullify government rackets we nullify the institutions of misandry.


Here is a 72 minute documentary film, free on YouTube: “Nullification: The Rightful Remedy


NOTE: Apparently some misandrists have seen this post and, in their infinite ignorance, have interpreted it as a reference to the specific issue of jury nullification as pertaining to specific laws which reduce the level of evidence in rape allegation cases, thereby violating constitutionally verified and protected due process.

For those who need to recover from their indoctrination:

Jury nullification is the exercise of constitutional sovereignty. Interposition and states’ nullification are extensions of the same. Misandry can take many forms. Nullification applies to all cases of STATE misandry.

An unconstitutional "law" is no law at all.

Why let the big gov't collectivists and special interests control the debate?

Men's rights is not about women (fake big money "rape culture" advertising, etc.). It is about men and their natural rights in the face of all who oppose those natural rights.

The Federal government erased civics studies from the schools. WE wonder why.


Against Civil Rights for Men

This collection is devoted to statements directed against the Men’s Rights Movement specifically rather than being a general compendium of misandric quotations.


►• “it’s more than unnecessary to discuss whether feminism has “gone too far” — it’s dangerous and wrong.”

[Katie J. M. Baker, “Men’s Rights Activists Don’t Deserve the Benefit of the Doubt, Jezebel, Sep.10, 2012]


►• “One of the incredibly dangerous aspects of the MRA movement is the father’s rights movement …”

[“Why the MRA (Men’s Rights Activist) Movement is Dangerousfor Women,” WTF (What the Feminist), Feb. 28, 2012]


►• “we need to take heed of the reemerging, online, campus oriented men’s rights movement and its propaganda. They are dangerous and the false ideas they propound will appeal to many young men on campuses and may lay the foundation for the next in a seemingly ceaseless wave of attacks on the feminist fight for women’s equality.”

[Michael Laxer, Ontario. Lies our fathers told us: The men’s rights movement and campus-based misogyny,”, Oct. 4, 2012]


►• “The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a US non-profit organisation dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry, has named men’s rights activists (MRAs) as a hate group in its latest quarterly publication.” [FACT: The SPLC (a wealthy and frequently anti-Constitution oriented advocacy organization) did not name men’s rights activists as a “hate group” in this or any other publication that we know of.]

[Jane Osmond, WVoN co-editor,Men’s rights activists named as hate group,” Women’s Views on News, Mar. 19, 2012]


►• “The Men’s Rights Movement is an organized, dedicated and growing hate movement that constitutes an explicit and violently oriented backlash against women and feminism.”

[Michael Laxer, “The Men’s Rights Movement, CAFE and the University of Toronto.” Dec. 14, 2012]

►• “Well, yes, but don't ignore the reason for the pushback: men's traditional privileges really are under attack. It's just that these rights, like the right to beat and rape your wife with impunity, are anathema to a truly free and equitable society. -- So they agitate for the right to rape and assault? – Not in so many words. But the MRAs do certainly seem preoccupied by the loss of that privilege.”

[Jeff Fecke,Explainer: What's an MRA?” Shakesville,


►• EXCERPT from a petition: “The Men's Rights Movement, while claiming to be for the betterment of both sexes, wishes for nothing more than to diminish the accomplishments of women, to vilify women, and to set women back by harassing them into silence, along with placing them in danger through their actions, which they openly admit are illegal.

Please sign this petition in order to have anything and everything that is Anti-Feminist and Anti-Woman, and also related to advocacy of the "Men's Rights Movement", defaulted as terrorism, or promotional of hatred and violence, so that the content may be flagged and removed from YouTube as it should be. Or, if nothing else, to send a message to the MRM, so that they know that this conduct is not appropriate.”

[Krista Heflin (Minneapolis, MN), “Google Inc., YouTube LLC: Categorize the MRM as flaggable forterrorism/promoting hate on YouTube.”, Petitioning Google Inc., YouTube LLC, Jan. 7, 2013]


►• “And anti-feminist men’s groups seek to defend that; they’re a response to a critique of their privilege. And so they’re not the flipside of feminism or radical feminism. They’re in a fundamentally different position politically, in the same way that a race-hate group, like the Ku Klux Klan, is in a different position from the civil rights or Black power movements that seek to undermine racism and inequalities that people of colour experience.” (Michael Flood, sociologist, Australia)

[Rhys Price-Robertson, “Anti-feminist men’s groups in Australia: An Interview with Michael Flood,” DVRCV Quarterly (Domestic Violence Resource Centre Victoria) (Australia), Edition 3 – Spring/Summer 2012, p. 10]


►•  “The last issue of the SPLC’s Intelligence Report presented a scathing portrait of “a hard-line fringe” of the Men’s Rights Movement (MRM): “women haters whose fury goes well beyond criticism of the family court system, domestic violence laws, and false rape accusations,” whose rage is “directed at all women, not only perceived feminists.”

[Arthur Goldwag, “Intelligence Report Article Provokes Fury Among Men’s Rights Activists,” SPLC Hatewatch, May 15, 2012]

[For a  critique of this quotation: John the Other,The continuing education of Arthur Goldwag,” A Voice for Men,” May 17, 2012]


What Does A Kidnapper Look Like? - Like a False Rape Accuser!

False rape accusation is proxy kidnapping or, at best, an attempt to commit proxy kidnapping. False rape accusation is, like kidnapping an extremely serious crime and it is necessary that we begin to treat it that way.


From – False Rape Accusers are individuals who willingly and knowingly makes or files a false rape accusation. This is arguably more corrosive to civil society than any other violent crime. False accusers make a cynical use of the legal system for personal vendetta, or in many cases, for profit and elevated social status which comes from being classified “victim.” Western courts and governments appear to be encouraging this, and incentivizing false rape accusations, by lowering the standards of evidence - and providing victim benefits, legal anonymity and reduced civil rights for individuals accused.

The list of false rape accusers presented on this site represents only the tip of the iceberg. A majority of false rape accusers are never charged, much less convicted. Among other things, many jurisdictions have informal policies not to charge false rape accusers due to external political pressures on the courts, which insist that charging false rape accusers will deter rape victims from coming forward. Some commentators have expressed a position that false accusers should not be charged at all. This is not the position of the editors of this site []. Of those false accusers who are charged, an inordinately high percentage are convicted. False rape reporting is the only crime for which charges are generally brought only when law enforcement is close to 100% certain of a conviction. But many false accusers are not charged, even after recantation.

Visit: and Community of the Wrongly Accused for more information


More historical cases of False Rape Accusations


Friday, January 11, 2013

Husbandicide: A Brief Overview of Its History from 1889

FULL TEXT: The crime of husbandicide – the word is as permissible as infanticide – is as old as the discovery, made a very long time ago, that marriage is sometimes a failure. Two thousand years ago Fabius Maximus ordered the execution of 170 women, who had leagued together for the purpose of murdering their husbands.

In the Middle Ages husband-poisoning threatened to become a popular if not a respectable institution. The inventor of the infamous Aqua Tofana [this is the name of the poison, actually: “Tofana Water”] pretended that, in enabling husbands and wives to «et quit of their troublesome partners she promoted the course of domestic harmony, and thus served a religious and conscientious purpose.

The idea, though hypocritical in its origin, got a fanatical hold of certain minds; and long after the recipe for the mysterious potion had been lost, there were poisoners who asserted the justifiable nature, if not the actual holiness of their grim profession. Less than a hundred years ago an old woman [Giovanna Bonanno] was executed at Palermo for dealing in a poisonous vinegar which she sold to any female who assured her that she had a bad husband of whom she wished to rid herself.

Husband-murder had, at one time, a special name in the vocabulary of English jurisprudence. Under the title of Petit-treason it was punished by strangulation and burning; and down to the thirtieth year of the reign of George III. this was the retribution meted out to women convicted of taking the lives of their consorts.

Poison, which effects its purpose without involving any conflict of physical force, is essentially a female weapon. This hypothesis is borne out by the French judicial statistics, which show that in twelve years there have been 260 women accused of murder by its means as against 219 men. Hence, while wives who die unnatural deaths are the victims of all kinds of violent crime, it is generally by poison that husbands met their end at the hands of their vindictive spouses.

 Of course, instances are not wanting of women who have availed themselves of the brutal procedure of the other sex, such as Catherine Hayes, who in 1728 gave her husband his quietus with a hatchett and Martha Alden who used a very unfeminine billhook for the same purpose eighty years later; but, as a general rule, the lethal instrument employed in such cases is poison. For instances we need not, unfortunately, travel out of our own country. Although we have not produced a Madame de Brinvilliers, or a Margaret Zwanziger, our criminal records afford many terrible examples of woman who have resorted to poison in order to remove a distasteful or betrayed husband. Many of these are similar in their details to the sensational case just tried at Liverpool.

In 1750 considerable public interest was aroused by the trial of Amy Huchinson, who was charged with administering a fatal dose of arsenic to her husband. The accused, who was only in her eighteenth year, had married John Hutchinson out of pique at the desertion of a former and more favored lover. The latter, however, returned on the very day of the wedding and met the bridal party coming out of church. The old intimacy was soon re-established, and speedily became criminal.

It was not long before Hutchinson's jealousy was aroused, and after many quarrels, the wife one day poured a strong dose of arsenic into her husband's ale, from the effects of which he died in a few hours. Amy was convicted, and notwithstanding her youth suffered death by strangulation and burning at Ely. Fifteen years later a similar case occurred in Forfarshire.

The accused, Katherine Ogilvie, formed a guilty attachment for her husband's brother, Lieutenant Patrick Ogilvie, in the first year of her married life. The liaison was discovered, and the younger Ogilvie was forbidden the house; whereupon the wife concerted measures with her lover to poison her husband. The poison, laudanum and arsenic, was supplied by Patrick, and administered by Mrs. Ogilvie in a bowl of tea. The laird died a few hours afterwards, declaring he had got his death from his wife’s hands.

The pair were tried and convicted. Patrick was executed; but Mrs. Ogilvie, after bearing  A child, managed to elude justice by escaping, Similar circumstances were repeated in a case which came before the assizes in 1772. The wife of a gentleman of position, Mr. John Bayer, of Riddleden, Bucks, was charged, together with her paramour, named Noble, with poisoning her husband. She was acquitted; but her accomplice was convicted and executed.

Another case occurred in 1843, when a man named Dudley, of Wrestlingford, was poisoned by his wife. No suspicion of the murder was entertained until eight months after, when the body was disinterred and the poisoned – arsenic – found in it in considerable quantities.

All the cases we have mentioned are cases of arsenic poisoning; but there are instances where other toxicological agents, each has strychnine and laudanum have been employed, in 1841 a woman named Coulroy was executed in Ireland for poisoning her husband with monkshood, a poison of very great activity, acting through the blood.

[“Husbandicide,” from St, James's Gazette, The Southland Times (Southland, New Zealand), Oct. 10, 1889, p. 4]