- cross-posted to:
- world
- cross-posted to:
- world
You must log in or register to comment.
Serial killer and they got it wrong‽
It was her four kids that died while young, and article says at least two of them had a rare mutation that likely caused their deaths.
Apparently Australia had a law where if multiple kids in a family died, it was assumed to be murder. So they didn’t need much evidence to convict her.
Wish I didn’t think laws like that were a good idea, but after dealing with the ex-wife’s psychotic episode and threats to kill our child I did some digging and discovered that maternal infanticide is terrifyingly not as rare, and that it’s generally not counted as “murder” for statistics purpose (many countries have separate statutes which cover it).
Over the course of your life the people most likely to kill you are: yourself, your mother, your father, some step parent, some random person. Though if you make it to 5-6 years the parents stop being as big a threat.
Not a coincidence that that’s around the age they start leaving the house for school.
Genetics shows that the children had a high propensity for infant mortality of natural causes. Rtfa.
Rtfa
Psshh. Why would I do that when I could just read the headline and assume?
deleted by creator
Eh, the bot has problems and frequently can miss important contextual information. But at the very least it’s gonna be better than just the headline 9 times out of 10.
Lindy Chamberlain, this woman. I’m sure there’s heaps of others.
We get this so wrong sometimes, it’s crazy.
Media? Justice?
deleted by creator
