4 ms·

To be honest, I’m not sure as I haven’t followed the case closely, nor am I aware of the evidence. If that were the case though, it would be horrible. However

To be honest, I’m not sure as I haven’t followed the case closely, nor am I aware of the evidence. If that were the case though, it would be horrible. However, angles of death are still terrifying!

lordfrito 3y ago
Sounds like she was working/present for 100% of the deaths/problems. The next most present staff member was only there for 10% of the incidents. Incidents stopped after she was taken off the floor. That's plus the ramblings scrawled on various notes that were found in her house don't paint a picture of a stable mind. Troubling case, especially as she doesn't fit a classic cluster A, B, C etc personality profiles associated with this kind of malignant behavior
- lordfrito 3y ago
  Want to correct this: she was present for 100% of the 24 incidents, the next most present staff members was only there for 10 of the 24 incidents (~40%)
  - keepamovin 3y ago
    Thanks. Just curious what is cluster A, B, C? I think women have an easier time hiding such behaviours because they are protected by cultural stereotypes of being nurturing, and people often think of women as "harmless" or even "victims". Unfortunately the malignant ones can use such generalities as shields to disguise their abuses. My instinct is that, because of their access to children, and their relative physical weakness compared to men, most victims of female abuse / homicide are children, which by virtue of the stereotypes and age of victims, historically go both uninvestigated and under-reported. Finally, my instinct is that males and females exhibit similarly violent inclinations in similar ratios, however, females, by virtue of being physically weaker in general, as well as by a survival/concealment need to fulfill social stereotypes, need to be more careful with how they choose to express such. So, they are more likely to choose younger more defenceless victims, render their victims defenceless using drugs or poison, utilize the assistance of a male to conspire with, or express their inclinations in non-"homicidal" ways, such as through emotional, verbal or sexual abuse. It may seem a chasm between a male killer and a female verbal abuser, but can you imagine the harm done to a young child subjected to years of persistent verbal/emotional abuse from a sociopathic/psychopathic female? Utterly devastating. All cases of the preceding, because of the stereotypes about women, and the generally younger or less autonomous victims, go under investigated or underreported. I don't think it's an exaggeration in fact to say that female killers and abusers are the great secret pandemic of our time, because of the opportunities afforded to those with such inclinations to misuse social stereotypes to conceal their behavior and protect themselves from scrutiny and investigation. TL;DR - female psychos can effortlessly fly beneath the radar of society, ensuring their trusted positions give them access to an endless stream of possible victims, who they can harm with impunity, knowing people are highly unlikely to suspect them of anything. And, when cornered, or threatened, they can always turn around and lie, "That man, He, He Did it! He did it all! Kill him, arrest him, not me!" and again because of the stereotypes they abuse for camouflage, they know that most people are likely to believe them. At least at first. At least for a while. But not forever. Hopefully more awareness of this epidemic comes to light and the perpetrators are justifiably punished. People should feel safe, especially from those they expect to feel safe around! Flip side is, don't just trust people you think you should because of stereotypes.
    - Quinzel 3y ago
      A couple of things; Firstly, serial killing is actually a very rare crime. I would say that our perception of the frequency of serial killer murders is skewed by media representation of these crimes - because when they happen they are shocking and reported extensively, and so with that, also it becomes far more memorable. My next point: You argue that women have an easier time hiding “such behaviours” because of cultural stereotypes, but then go on to use instinct to argue your point, which isn’t good science and completely undermines your argument. I’m fairly confident that a lot of the points you make could be refuted with empirical evidence. Finally some other thoughts I might add: There is some evidence to suggest that female psychopaths are in someways different to male psychopaths. Male psychopaths are more antisocial and physically aggressive, whereas females use more relational and verbal aggression. Also, just in general, most psychopaths do not kill people. While female abusers and killers exist, I wouldn’t call it a secret pandemic of our time. Additionally, I think that serial killers found in healthcare settings “angels of death” or “angels of mercy” are less motivated by “aggressive/violent” factors, but rather they either believe that they are: 1. Easing suffering - putting someone out of their misery (which may also be delusional). OR 2. They enjoy the power that they have that they can kill people. OR 3. They have a Hero complex - that’s gone too far. They enjoy the adrenaline/excitement of resuscitations, and these situations often result in death - full resus is often chaotic and they’re even more difficult on a Night Shift when there is less people. OR 4. They revel in other people’s sorrow. OR some combination of the above…
      - keepamovin 3y ago
        So, wait, the reason you don't agree with this is because instinct is a problem for you and it's "not scientific"--I guess it depends how good your instincts are, huh--but you're confident there's evidence to refute what I say? Is that your instinct? You haven't engaged logically to refute my points, and your lack of response speaks volumes. Your invocation of "surely there's evidence" seems to indicate that you might think what I'm saying is true but have no other reply. Invoking science without evidence because you're "confident" it will back you, is an abuse of the very thing you merely pretend to be backed by, and not valid argument here. I'm not interested in the creepy weirdness of what it's actually like in a hospital ward; that's irrelevant. Are you defending these female abusers and killers out of fear they're being discriminated against? Justifying their actions with labels like "angel of mercy" is undeserved and abhorrent. You seem to have misunderstood what I'm saying. People who have an inclination to "such behavior" to harm others are essentially the same, regardless of gender. They don't care about causing harm, but due to their different biology, they express it differently. Female abusers might be less physically aggressive but utilize other forms of abuse. I think you're in agreement with some of my points, but you're quibbling over bizarre details. You've taken issue with calling this behavior the "secret pandemic," but I believe that female abusers take advantage of social stereotypes to conceal their actions. Their victims might not report it, and it's not investigated as often as it should be. This case illustrates those hallmarks, and the inclination towards violence is the same for both genders. Female killers and abusers need to be more conniving due to their physical limitations and take advantage of stereotypes for protection. If you want to argue against this idea, you can't just claim that science will back you up. You need to engage with the concepts I've presented. Why would you want to cover for these people? It doesn't make sense. Your argument seems insincere, and frankly, disturbing. BTW - does anyone else know what that cluster type is mentioned? I'd hoped to get an answer to that here.

lordfrito 3y ago

Sounds like she was working/present for 100% of the deaths/problems. The next most present staff member was only there for 10% of the incidents. Incidents stopped after she was taken off the floor. That's plus the ramblings scrawled on various notes that were found in her house don't paint a picture of a stable mind. Troubling case, especially as she doesn't fit a classic cluster A, B, C etc personality profiles associated with this kind of malignant behavior

lordfrito 3y ago
Want to correct this: she was present for 100% of the 24 incidents, the next most present staff members was only there for 10 of the 24 incidents (~40%)
- keepamovin 3y ago
  Thanks. Just curious what is cluster A, B, C? I think women have an easier time hiding such behaviours because they are protected by cultural stereotypes of being nurturing, and people often think of women as "harmless" or even "victims". Unfortunately the malignant ones can use such generalities as shields to disguise their abuses. My instinct is that, because of their access to children, and their relative physical weakness compared to men, most victims of female abuse / homicide are children, which by virtue of the stereotypes and age of victims, historically go both uninvestigated and under-reported. Finally, my instinct is that males and females exhibit similarly violent inclinations in similar ratios, however, females, by virtue of being physically weaker in general, as well as by a survival/concealment need to fulfill social stereotypes, need to be more careful with how they choose to express such. So, they are more likely to choose younger more defenceless victims, render their victims defenceless using drugs or poison, utilize the assistance of a male to conspire with, or express their inclinations in non-"homicidal" ways, such as through emotional, verbal or sexual abuse. It may seem a chasm between a male killer and a female verbal abuser, but can you imagine the harm done to a young child subjected to years of persistent verbal/emotional abuse from a sociopathic/psychopathic female? Utterly devastating. All cases of the preceding, because of the stereotypes about women, and the generally younger or less autonomous victims, go under investigated or underreported. I don't think it's an exaggeration in fact to say that female killers and abusers are the great secret pandemic of our time, because of the opportunities afforded to those with such inclinations to misuse social stereotypes to conceal their behavior and protect themselves from scrutiny and investigation. TL;DR - female psychos can effortlessly fly beneath the radar of society, ensuring their trusted positions give them access to an endless stream of possible victims, who they can harm with impunity, knowing people are highly unlikely to suspect them of anything. And, when cornered, or threatened, they can always turn around and lie, "That man, He, He Did it! He did it all! Kill him, arrest him, not me!" and again because of the stereotypes they abuse for camouflage, they know that most people are likely to believe them. At least at first. At least for a while. But not forever. Hopefully more awareness of this epidemic comes to light and the perpetrators are justifiably punished. People should feel safe, especially from those they expect to feel safe around! Flip side is, don't just trust people you think you should because of stereotypes.
  - Quinzel 3y ago
    A couple of things; Firstly, serial killing is actually a very rare crime. I would say that our perception of the frequency of serial killer murders is skewed by media representation of these crimes - because when they happen they are shocking and reported extensively, and so with that, also it becomes far more memorable. My next point: You argue that women have an easier time hiding “such behaviours” because of cultural stereotypes, but then go on to use instinct to argue your point, which isn’t good science and completely undermines your argument. I’m fairly confident that a lot of the points you make could be refuted with empirical evidence. Finally some other thoughts I might add: There is some evidence to suggest that female psychopaths are in someways different to male psychopaths. Male psychopaths are more antisocial and physically aggressive, whereas females use more relational and verbal aggression. Also, just in general, most psychopaths do not kill people. While female abusers and killers exist, I wouldn’t call it a secret pandemic of our time. Additionally, I think that serial killers found in healthcare settings “angels of death” or “angels of mercy” are less motivated by “aggressive/violent” factors, but rather they either believe that they are: 1. Easing suffering - putting someone out of their misery (which may also be delusional). OR 2. They enjoy the power that they have that they can kill people. OR 3. They have a Hero complex - that’s gone too far. They enjoy the adrenaline/excitement of resuscitations, and these situations often result in death - full resus is often chaotic and they’re even more difficult on a Night Shift when there is less people. OR 4. They revel in other people’s sorrow. OR some combination of the above…
    - keepamovin 3y ago
      So, wait, the reason you don't agree with this is because instinct is a problem for you and it's "not scientific"--I guess it depends how good your instincts are, huh--but you're confident there's evidence to refute what I say? Is that your instinct? You haven't engaged logically to refute my points, and your lack of response speaks volumes. Your invocation of "surely there's evidence" seems to indicate that you might think what I'm saying is true but have no other reply. Invoking science without evidence because you're "confident" it will back you, is an abuse of the very thing you merely pretend to be backed by, and not valid argument here. I'm not interested in the creepy weirdness of what it's actually like in a hospital ward; that's irrelevant. Are you defending these female abusers and killers out of fear they're being discriminated against? Justifying their actions with labels like "angel of mercy" is undeserved and abhorrent. You seem to have misunderstood what I'm saying. People who have an inclination to "such behavior" to harm others are essentially the same, regardless of gender. They don't care about causing harm, but due to their different biology, they express it differently. Female abusers might be less physically aggressive but utilize other forms of abuse. I think you're in agreement with some of my points, but you're quibbling over bizarre details. You've taken issue with calling this behavior the "secret pandemic," but I believe that female abusers take advantage of social stereotypes to conceal their actions. Their victims might not report it, and it's not investigated as often as it should be. This case illustrates those hallmarks, and the inclination towards violence is the same for both genders. Female killers and abusers need to be more conniving due to their physical limitations and take advantage of stereotypes for protection. If you want to argue against this idea, you can't just claim that science will back you up. You need to engage with the concepts I've presented. Why would you want to cover for these people? It doesn't make sense. Your argument seems insincere, and frankly, disturbing. BTW - does anyone else know what that cluster type is mentioned? I'd hoped to get an answer to that here.