Today’s Superhuman Yet Truly Morbid Fact!
Case study of a 21-year-old necrophile who worked as a morgue attendant:
He violated scores of female corpses in the two years that he was working at the morgue, by practicing various perversions on them, ranging in age from infants to elderly women. He usually began by sucking their breasts and copulating his mouth to their privates, after which acts he would become so excited that he would crawl upon their bodies, and with superhuman effort he would perform the act of coitus. On one occasion he was so impressed with the corpse of a young girl fifteen years of age that when alone with her the first night after her death, he drank some of her blood. This made him so sexually excited that he put a rubber tube up into the urethra, and with his mouth sucked the urine from her bladder. On this occasion he felt more and more of an urge to go further and felt that if he could only devour her – eat her up – even chew part of her body, it would give him great satisfaction. He was unable to resist this desire, and turning the body upon its face, he bit into the flesh of the buttocks near the rectum. He then crawled upon the cadaver and performed an act of sodomy on the corpse.
(The man was tried and found guilty, and was sent to a hospital for the criminal insane.)
Culled from: The Sexual Criminal by J. Paul De River
Facts
So, I’m continuing to read the 1949 criminology textbook “The Sexual Criminal” as my bedtime reading. (And if I seem a little strange, well, that’s because I am.) It’s extremely fascinating/disturbing… but also very enlightening as to the kind of sexist and homophobic rationale that passed as scholarly thinking back in those days.
For example:
Last night’s chapter was entitled “Sadistic Bestiality”. I was bracing myself for the worst… but it wasn’t particularly graphic, thank goodness. There were only two cases discussed and I found the difference between them quite enlightening.
The first case was a man who liked to screw chickens while wringing their necks. (Which brought back memories of the comic book Jonah Hex.) He also tortured and killed other animals while having sex with them. Truly a despicable human being whom I would love to impale with a huge screw myself.
The second case was a woman who let her dog screw her. That’s it. She didn’t beat the dog, she didn’t stab it to death, she didn’t torture it. She just passively allowed it to do what it wanted to do to her. (And she was embarrassed and humiliated that she did this.)
So I gather from this chapter that a woman simply has to engage in an act and it automatically becomes “sadistic”? Whereas a man really has to work to earn that title? Kind of like how a woman who enjoys being orally pleasured is automatically branded a “masochist”. Whereas a man has to enjoy having needles stuck in his penis to earn the same title?
It’s a very strange world that this J. Paul De River inhabited.
Library
Today’s Unaborted Yet Truly Morbid Fact!
When suspicion of abortion or fornication lay in her background, then an accused witch in 17th century New England stood little chance of survival. When brought to trial in New England, Alice Lake utterly denied that she had practiced witchcraft but confessed that as a single woman she had sinned, become pregnant, and tried to abort the fetus. Although she failed, “yet she was a murderer in the sight of God [and herself] for her endeavors.” This admission of attempted abortion was sufficient to condemn her of witchcraft, and Alice was executed in 1648, leaving four small children.
Culled from: Witchcraze
You know, I really wish that this fact sounded like a horrific bygone of a dark and ignorant age of humanity… but it seems that you can take some people out of the Dark Ages, but you can’t take the Dark Ages out of some people.
Facts
Today’s State-Of-The-Art Yet Truly Morbid Fact!
Built on the banks of the Hudson River in Westchester County, New York in 1825, Sing Sing Prison already had become internationally famous by 1831. Much of the institution’s early success was due to brutal slavery, which helped make it profitable for a short time. By the late 19th century hundreds of convicts had perished, with causes of death ranging from consumption to starvation, suicide, and physical abuse, including water torture in the infamous shower bath, a non-electric and, usually, nonfatal precursor of the electric chair. Legal executions at Sing Sing did not begin until 1891, using the new method of electrocution that recently had been tested at Sing Sing and first was used at another New York prison, Auburn, in 1890. During the first four decades of executions at Sing Sing, the death house consisted of a section of the prison that was appropriated as the Condemned Cells. But a rash of daring escapes, including the violent breakout of condemned murderer Oreste Shillitoni, who killed a prison guard and serious wounded another before he was quickly recaptured and executed in 1916, prompted the construction of a special state-of-the-art prison within a prison: the Sing Sing Death House.
Culled from:Â Condemned: Inside the Sing Sing Death House
Facts
Today’s Awful Yet Truly Morbid Fact!
In England in 1812, records show that enlisted men were flogged for the smallest offences, and for the graver ones often flogged to death, the number of lashes being awarded by court martial. One eyewitness described how he had seen ‘men suffer five hundred and even seven hundred strokes before being taken down, the blood running down into their shoes, their backs flayed like raw, red, chopped-sausage meat’. He continued:
Some bore this awful punishment without flinching, for two or three hundred lashes, chewing a musket ball or a bit of leather to stifle or prevent their cries of agony. After two hundred lashes they did not seem to feel the same torture. Sometimes the head dropped over to one side but the lashing went on, the surgeon in attendance examining the patient from time to time to see what more he could bear. I DID see, with horror, one prisoner take seven hundred before being taken down, this sentence being carried out before the whole brigade.
Culled from: The Book Of Execution
Facts
Today’s morbid fact is a bit of philosophical musing by Colin Wilson in his (actually not very good) book The Mammoth Book of True Crime. I found it interesting and thought you might as well?
Today’s Hair-Raising Yet Truly Morbid Fact!
T.S. Duke’s Celebrated Criminal Cases of America (1910) contains a hair-raising account of “The Outrages Committed by the Sioux Indians” between 1852 and 1862, with details of rapes and mutilations that would have convinced any reader that the Sioux deserved mass extermination. Nowadays, civilized opinion has swung the other way; it was the white men who were the criminals; the Indian was only trying to defend his own right to live. Yet when we read Duke’s account today, we are less concerned with the rights and wrongs than with the unreducible human tragedy:
The hero of the day was an 11-year-old boy named Martin Eastlick, who carried his 15-month-old brother Johnny on his back for 50 miles, but he died shortly afterwards from exposure, over-exertion and lack of nourishment. Mr. Eastlick had been killed and Mrs. Eastlick was lying helpless on the ground from a bullet wound. Her two little boys named Freddie and Frank, aged five and seven respectively, were with her. Two squaws saw them, and catching the children they beat them to death with bludgeons before the helpless mother’s eyes. Many other children were only beaten until they were left helpless and then left to die from hunger and exposure.
Thirty-eight Indians were tried and executed for the massacres. They would have argued that it was unfair to treat the massacre as a ‘crime’, since they were at war with the white man, and the white man had treated Indian women and children just as brutally. In retrospect we can see that it makes no difference whether it was called an act of war or a crime, for they are synonymous. The only logical course, it seems, is to recognize that murder is always unjustified, whether it is a criminal act or an act of war.
Culled from: The Mammoth Book Of True Crime by Colin Wilson
So, do you agree with Colin? Is murder always unjustified?
Facts