Warning: Seriously, I just feel a need to put a warning on this one. Proceed cautiously. Even my stomach took a lurch.

This is not a joke

Nor is it some sick twist on an anti-abortion law, such as the case in the legendary minor-in-possession dispute.

This is reality, and rather morbid.

Missouri authorities issued an Amber Alert for an infant who may have survived after a woman was slain and a fetus removed from her body.

Bobbi Jo Stinnett, who was eight months' pregnant, was killed Thursday afternoon in her home in Skidmore in northwestern Missouri, the Nodaway County Sheriff's Department said.

The initial Amber Alert said that "the fetus was extracted from the victim."

A statement from the sheriff's department said the fetus was removed by the same "person or persons" who killed Stinnett ....

.... The alert said that the suspect "has blond hair and [is] possibly driving a red vehicle."

It advised people to look for bloody clothing or towels and said the infant could have health issues and would have a freshly cut umbilical cord if alive.

CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/17/missouri.fetus/index.html)

I am unsure at this time what commentary goes here.
____________________

Notes:
CNN.com. "Amber Alert issued after fetus removed from mother's body". December 17, 2004. See http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/17/missouri.fetus/index.html

Source: CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/)
Link: http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/17/missouri.fetus/index.html
Title: "Baby found in Kansas might be missing girl"
Date: December 17, 2004

Authorities believe an infant girl found at the home of a Kansas woman is the same baby taken from her mother's womb Thursday after the mother was killed in Missouri.

Lisa Montgomery, 36, of Melvern, Kansas, confessed to strangling Bobbie Jo Stinnett, 23, and then "removing the fetus," according to an FBI affidavit filed Friday ....

.... Montgomery, whom authorities say had a miscarriage earlier this year, was arrested and charged with kidnapping resulting in death. If convicted, Montgomery could receive a maximum sentence of life in prison or the death penalty, and a maximum $250,000 fine ....

.... (T)he FBI was given a tip by a dog breeder in North Carolina who saw postings from Stinnett, who was eight months pregnant, and Montgomery in an Internet chat room ....

.... The FBI traced an e-mail to Montgomery and sent agents to monitor the woman's home, where they saw her with a "newborn female infant."

Friday night, the healthy, one-day-old baby was in a hospital in Topeka, Kansas, being examined by a pediatrician, Espey said.

CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/17/missouri.fetus/index.html)

A phrase keeps turning over in my mind: "This is not happening. This is not happening."

But of course, it is.

There is so much human suffering wrapped up in this tale that I can't begin to comprehend it.
____________________

Notes:
CNN.com. "Baby found in Kansas might be missing girl". December 17, 2004. http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/17/missouri.fetus/index.html

At least the child is ok...poor orphan.

Strong Content Advisory?

In this day and age? That is supposed to make me feel queasy? Back to watching Night of the Living Dead... At least it is better than flipping to CNN, saying "oh how sad", and then flipping right back to MTV.


"The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open."
(Hosea 13:16)

Strong Content Advisory?

Yeah. Every once in a while, I see a headline online and avoid reading the story. Sometimes I click on the story thinking it's something else. When I first saw the headline, it wasn't just "Amber alert issued for fetus", but it mentioned Missouri, as well, which was the reason I followed up at all. I have since strenuously avoided watching the news today. It's kind of like the incident not too long ago where someone threw an infant out of a car in hopes of ditching the police. I saw the headline, refused to read the story, and was sitting with the news on TV in the background, not paying attention, and happened to look up squarely into the dash-cam of the incident. It ruined my day for about three days.

In the end, I allowed myself to be surprised by the story. Anytime I get flipped by the news, I consider whether and how to pass the information along.

If you want queasy, just launch a gnutella client and search for "snuff" or "faces of death".

This ... this is just sickeningly sad.


At least the child is ok...poor orphan

I am under the impression that the young one has a father, one Zeb Stinnett; his absence from the news stories is understandable: what can he possibly say at this point?

And poor freaking Kevin, as well:

Montgomery's husband told the FBI that his wife had called him Thursday night from Topeka and told him she had just given birth. Kevin Montgomery drove 40 miles with his two teenagers to pick up his wife. Lisa Montgomery rode home with her husband while one of the children drove the other car home, according to the affidavit.

CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/17/missouri.fetus/index.html)

I hope the press is keeping a respectful difference from the Stinnett and Montgomery families. Each has much to do tonight, much to think about, much to understand. That last, though, might be an impossible task.
____________________

Notes:
CNN.com. "Baby found in Kansas might be missing girl". December 17, 2004. http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/17/missouri.fetus/index.html

After what went down with scott peterson i doubt the media is going to let either of them get any rest. Which one of them is the next Scott Peterson? That will be the question. In the Stinnett case could Zeb had hired hitmen to kill his wife and pay was they could keep the kid? They had only been married a year, year seems pretty soon to have a kid. Could he have become overwhelmed with having to work so much in order to get enough money to raise this kid? These are questions we'll hear coming form the media in the near future, maybe not this week or next but soon.

Well you forunately/unfortunately have not been 'desensitized'. Maybe because you are a father. I expect you will be looking for the death penalty (or worse) for the unfortunate person who had a bad day or two and did something contrary to society's expectations.

I have been pretty much indifferent to this story.



Do you suppose maybe the person who did this maybe has a good reason (at least to them) for doing this? After all people usually don't behave so. Not usually.

I expect you will be looking for the death penalty (or worse) for the unfortunate person who had a bad day or two and did something contrary to society's expectations.

Hardly. I object doctrinally to the death penalty: it doesn't accomplish anything. Killing somebody, or seeing them killed, won't do anything to change the fact that this has happened.

Besides, society's to blame. All that value on family and motherhood ... okay, so this isn't the time for even minor sarcasm. My apologies. But I am more interested in learning the pressures that cracked the killer more than I am in societal revenge. An eye for an eye leaves everybody blind.

As to the reason? I'm sure it seemed a good reason at the time. The nature of the crime screams for an insanity defense. If it brings answers, I'll accept it.

I've heard of this happening before.
Only the one I heard about the mother survived, she had her unborn child ripped from her stomach while she was alive.
I think thats a bit more exciting than this case. Imagine how she would have felt afterwards?
I think I've heard that this isn't uncommon in african countries.

I generally agree with southstar that this is pretty boring, not boring, but in the context of a strong content advisory and all the "I don't know what to say" it fails to live up to the hype.
If they cut open her stomach, took out a knife and fork and ate her baby while it was living inside her, and you had the video, that would warrant a strong content advisory.

Perhaps. I suppose I could have polled, "Who here has witnessed a C-section?"

Of course, I find it curious that the United States has apparently degraded to match the chaos that comes with African poverty and superstition. Such a theoretic transcension as American society is supposed to have achieved accords with the reasons we come together in society in the first place.

I have been present at 3 C-sections, and they aren't that bad. But then I suppose they were in a hospital and doctors were the one's removing the child from the mother's womb and who were all awake and in no pain during the whole procedure. Music was playing in the background and most importantly, all were alive after the procedures and got to take the baby home. Quite different from being stabbed to death and having some insane woman cut you open and tear the baby out of your body.

These stories are not as uncommon. For example, here is a story of this kind of thing taking place in Columbia in June this year:

The woman faces charges of drugging the child's mother and leading her to a house where her womb was cut open.

Police say the operation to remove the eight-month-old foetus may have been performed with a kitchen knife.

The baby - found with the alleged kidnapper - has been re-united with its true mother, who had been left for dead in the central town of Girardot.

She managed to summon help, despite bleeding heavily from the surgery.
Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3778663.stm)


This one's from 2000:

A PREGNANT US woman was found dead yesterday, her baby torn from her body in a crude Caesarean section. The woman suspected of stealing the child killed herself as police arrived to question her.
The 8lb, 6oz baby was found asleep in a crib in the nursery of the suspect woman’s home in Ravenna, Ohio and was in good condition in hospital.
The body of Theresa Andrews, 23, who vanished a week before her due date, was found buried in the suspect’s dirt floor garage. It was unknown whether she was alive when her baby was taken, Coroner Roger Marcial said.
The abdomen ‘‘was cut horizontally and that’s the only way to have gotten the baby out,’’ Mr Marcial said. An autopsy was planned.
Prosecutor Victor Vigluicci said the baby was probably born on September 27, the day Andrews disappeared.

------------------------------------------------------------------

A similar case occurred 13 years ago in Albuquerque, when a woman faked a pregnancy, then abducted and strangled Cindy Ray, 23, who was eight and a half months pregnant. Darci Pierce used a car key to cut the baby from the womb and tried to pass the child off as her own.
In Chicago in 1995, a woman and two of her children were killed, and her unborn child was slashed from her womb because another woman wanted the baby. The infant boy survived.

Link (http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2000/10/05/current/fpage_6.htm)


We live in a world where sick, demented people reside, be it in the third world or in developed countries like the US.

Shouldn't a case where a killer kills a late-term pregnant woman and saves the baby be less revolting than where a killer kills a late-term pregnant woman and leaves the baby to die with her, like in the Peterson case? I think the higher "revulsion factor" of the Stinnett case comes from the thought of the baby being cut out rather than the severity of the crime, which is lower than in the Peterson case.

I don't think it has anything at all to do with the "revulsion factor" or the amount of deaths that resulted from the incident.
I think a big part of it, for me at least, is the motive.
She killed this woman and stole the unborn baby out of her womb because she wanted a baby of her own.
It is the sick depravity of a mind that would do that and see it as OK to raise this child as her own.
I can understand murders that are committed out of fear, hatred, passion and many other reasons.
This I can't understand.
This is vile.
I am all for rehabilitation and I understadn that someone who does this is not well and needs treatment, but some things cross my line.
This woman has no place in society. I can find no place of forgiveness for this act and things like this speak to the part of me that is pro capital punishment.

zanket,
You talk about the severity of the crime as if it is some sort of currency scale.
"Well, let's see one murder is less dead people than two..."
It just doesn't work that way for me.

I don't see why we expect that expecting that people should be respectful of one another is going to make everyone be respectful to one another.

The moment is a wild, insane place for many. It just depends on the moment.

I would hypothesize and attest with much conviction that I'm incapable of such an act as that cited. On the other hand, I do not think it completely out of the realm of possibility that I could be coerced or demented into finding it the most desirable course of action.

Blame is pointless, prevention paramount... however, freedom is paramount as well.

So, so many competing values on so, so many levels. Apparently, sometimes the moment goes supernova.

*sigh*

It's a wonder we're alive at all.

At this point I simply don't see how it can be stopped and it seems to me that the present system of deterents is as good as can be currently managed. I suppose it's a fine line between freedom and felony.

It's still a damned shame for that poor girl and her baby. It's difficult to imagine how someone could justify that action to themselves, yet it's quite apparent that it can be done.

I hope to continue to pleasantly avoid the dreadfully dark side of life. I'll do what I can to ensure that others I encounter have the opportunity to do the same. Well... until they piss me off. Then who knows! :rolleyes:

According to Mapquest, Melvern, Kansas and Skidmore, Missouri are 176.77 miles away from each other. Three hours, eight minutes driving time.
This hardly seems like it happened "in the moment".
Three hours driving time to cool off and the obvious pre-conception of the crime negates any "crime of passion" defense in my book.

The Map (http://www.mapquest.com/directions/main.adp?go=1&do=nw&un=m&cl=EN&ct=NA&rsres=1&1y=US&1a=&1c=melvern&1s=ks&1z=&1ah=&2y=US&2a=&2c=skidmore&2s=mo&2z=&2ah=)

According to Mapquest, Melvern, Kansas and Skidmore, Missouri are 176.77 miles away from each other. Three hours, eight minutes driving time.
This hardly seems like it happened "in the moment".
Three hours driving time to cool off and the obvious pre-conception of the crime negates any "crime of passion" defense in my book.

The Map (http://www.mapquest.com/directions/main.adp?go=1&do=nw&un=m&cl=EN&ct=NA&rsres=1&1y=US&1a=&1c=melvern&1s=ks&1z=&1ah=&2y=US&2a=&2c=skidmore&2s=mo&2z=&2ah=)

By the moment, I mean circumstance. For whatever reason, those sick fucks thought it a good idea. That's disgusting for sure, but obviously that wasn't enough to stop the killer.

Complicated apes. That's the deal.

To the killer - for whatever reason - killing that woman and cutting her open became a banana.

This act was not a spur of the moment killing. This was planned. She got in her car, drove all the way there with the intention of killing that woman and stealing her baby out of her body. She wanted a baby and she lost her own, she decided to just get another one. She found a pregnant woman in an internet chatroom and then tracked her down, stabbed her and cut the baby from her body. One does not do this on the spur of the moment. It shows premeditation. I don't know whether this womans should get life in prison or life in a mental institution.

The mind cannot grasp such a crime. For any individual to actually commit such an act blows the mind (for lack of a better term). Is she insane? I'd say yes. But her premeditation contradicts any notion of insanity that are present.

The question that niggles inside my brain is how her husband did not pick up that something was wrong. While one would not expect him to guess that she'd murdered someone and stolen the baby from their womb, he would have known she'd miscarried. Did she hide the miscarriage from him and the rest of the family all this time? Didn't he question why she'd driven all that way, only to call and say she'd just given birth, 'come and pick me up'. What sane, rational human being would not find some questions there. 1) 'You'd miscarried, how can you have just given birth?'... 2) 'Why did you drive all the way out here not pregnant and call and say you'd just given birth?'... The mind boggles actually. How he took her home and not to a hospital if she'd just given birth, also raises a lot of questions. Either he was in on it or knew what that she had stolen a child and said nothing to the authorities and left his wife to her delusions. Or he was completely blind to the obvious, which would mean he is a simpleton. I don't know what's worse.

While one would not expect him to guess that she'd murdered someone and stolen the baby from their womb, he would have known she'd miscarried. Did she hide the miscarriage from him and the rest of the family all this time? Didn't he question why she'd driven all that way, only to call and say she'd just given birth, 'come and pick me up'.

I would imagine we'll find out more about the Montgomery family dynamic, but what if he expected her to be in Topeka for those days? Perhaps she simply fooled him about the miscarriage and pretended she was seeking better maintenance than could be had in Melvern. I don't know Kansas, though. Something about rice and corn, though. Oh, wait, that was a Chex commercial.

There was the occasion, though, not too long ago, that the forum discussed a woman who recovered her daughter almost by accident; someone plotted a fake pregnancy, set the family house on fire, abducted the infant daughter, and got away with it for over five years.

I know it sounds misogynistic, but I'll withhold the application to my partner and Mrs. Montgomery: My partner, believing herself pregnant, went out and got hammered before telling me she was pregnant. She also managed to tell me in the middle of a fight. Calmer, hung over, and repentant the next day, she apologized for attacking me on the street. Simmering about the alcohol and pregnancy issue, I asked her what her doctor had to say, and then upon hearing her answer ordered her to actually go to a doctor. If an EPT is enough to know you're pregnant, it's enough to know you don't need beer and Jameson.

However, she's also f@cking bonkers. Her take on the assault is that since I didn't have her arrested on the spot, it never happened. She gets pissed if anyone mentions it and calls them liars. Furthermore, she tells the neighbors that I'm violent and dangerous. Add to that the aspect that when she's ultimately stressed, she hops into a self-destructive mode and tries to give herself concussions. (She's threatened to have me arrested if I ever intervene in that process again; I'm unsure how to answer to the police on that future occasion: yes, I let her beat herself to death because ....)

Now, all of that otherwise-morbid background is necessary because I can honestly say that if I (or one of her barfly buddies) knocked her up again, and she decided that this baby would be the thing that heals our relationship (she wants a secure relationship, but never liked me and apparently has never liked the sex), and then miscarried that baby, yes, she might try to conceal that fact from me as long as possible. Under enough stress, she would probably kill herself instead of someone else, but the point is that the one thing she cannot stand is to face the truth in hard times.

The misogynistic aspect arises from the notion that she whines all the freaking time. I hear so much about what's wrong with her that I don't believe her because of one simple fact: she never sees a doctor despite being "sick" more often than a living person ought to. (I'll skip the litany, suffice to say that any excuse she wants to make will eventually fall back to her being sick.)

She's so contradictory that she blamed her hangover on the food at her work. This would not be a problematic excuse except for the amount of time every freaking day she tells me about how her company's food is better than any other, and how their health controls are better than any other, blah-blah-blah.

In the end, there's only so much a guy can take. A friend once told me that he had a new appreciation for her; he'd previously called her the Devil (and he's an atheist, at that). It was her behavior during her pregnancy that did it. And then after she had the baby he realized what I had told him then: I can cope with her pregnancy because it's the same as I get any day she's not pregnant. I didn't really notice the difference.

So it strikes me that yes, it is entirely possible for the husband to have been out of the loop if he's so sick of her behavior that he's merely waiting for the next instruction to go to the hospital or call the doctor or go to forty-six stores in search of a specific brand of textured vegetable protein.

Mr. Montgomery has two teenage children. Between that and a pregnant wife whose actions define her as being unstable, yes, I assure you it is with in the realm of reasonable possibility that he did not know she miscarried. It could be that the only way he can fulfill his perception of family duties is to tune out a certain amount of her sh@t.

Between grief and hormones, Mrs. Montgomery has a possible insanity defense before her. The greatest tragedy would come if it turns out she needed psychiatric help before this.

In the end, I have no idea what anybody else is like when pregnant, or immediately after. But I do know a certain degree of insanity is possible to begin with. And yes, if Mrs. Montgomery falls within that range, then it's entirely possible the husband was clueless.

I would imagine we'll find out more about the Montgomery family dynamic, but what if he expected her to be in Topeka for those days? Perhaps she simply fooled him about the miscarriage and pretended she was seeking better maintenance than could be had in Melvern. I don't know Kansas, though. Something about rice and corn, though. Oh, wait, that was a Chex commercial.

One is not pregnant for days Tiassa. For her to have been able to pretend she was pregnant, she'd have had to have been away from her family basically straight after her miscarriage. The article referred to her having miscarried earlier on in the year. Unless she had stuffed pillows of varying sizes up her clothes during the later months of her pregnancy, it would be difficult to actually pretend to be pregnant during the last weeks, especially if you're living in a house with your husband and teenage children. If she went out and bought a pregnancy suit that allows itself to be inflated with water and worn under clothing, as that worn on TV when pregnancies are faked, it shows premeditation once again. If she faked her pregnancy, a contingency plan would have been in place for her to actually get a newborn baby to pass it off as her own. Again, that shows premeditation.

So it strikes me that yes, it is entirely possible for the husband to have been out of the loop if he's so sick of her behavior that he's merely waiting for the next instruction to go to the hospital or call the doctor or go to forty-six stores in search of a specific brand of textured vegetable protein.

Mr. Montgomery has two teenage children. Between that and a pregnant wife whose actions define her as being unstable, yes, I assure you it is with in the realm of reasonable possibility that he did not know she miscarried. It could be that the only way he can fulfill his perception of family duties is to tune out a certain amount of her sh@t.
As sick as you may be about your partner's behaviour, would you not notice that she was pregnant? Let's say during the second and third trimester, would it not be evident that she was pregnant? Wouldn't you notice if that distinct bulge around her midsection started to disappear, only to have a baby appear a couple of months later?

Between grief and hormones, Mrs. Montgomery has a possible insanity defense before her. The greatest tragedy would come if it turns out she needed psychiatric help before this.
I would day that yes, an insanity defence would be in order for Mrs Montgomery. And the level of premeditation indicates that the need for psychiatric help was needed before this act.

As to your partner Tiassa... well.. all I can ask is, why? Why stay if you're that unhappy? Why stay for your child, if your child is going to grow up and be witness to her parent's unhappiness with each other? Why not see a lawyer and see if you can get custody of your child and get out? But then, I guess you stay for your own reasons. And it's not anyone's business to tell you to leave.

The article referred to her having miscarried earlier on in the year. Unless she had stuffed pillows of varying sizes up her clothes during the later months of her pregnancy, it would be difficult to actually pretend to be pregnant during the last weeks, especially if you're living in a house with your husband and teenage children. If she went out and bought a pregnancy suit that allows itself to be inflated with water and worn under clothing, as that worn on TV when pregnancies are faked, it shows premeditation once again.

To the one, this is still possible. To the other, my daughter is two years old, my partner is prone to fits of screaming about how horrible the sex is and always was, and if she decides to claim it's hormones resulting from having been pregnant two years ago, she gets to claim that and all I get to do is hope she goes to see a doctor about it.

It will be harder to convince a jury that Montgomery's premeditation is symptomatic of her insanity, but it can be done.

As sick as you may be about your partner's behaviour, would you not notice that she was pregnant? Let's say during the second and third trimester, would it not be evident that she was pregnant? Wouldn't you notice if that distinct bulge around her midsection started to disappear, only to have a baby appear a couple of months later?

In theory. Depends on how crazy she is. Other than that, I don't even notice her haircuts anymore.

Besides, I make a point of trying to not see her body anymore. I don't need to see it. It's not mine to enjoy. She doesn't take care of it. She's the only adult I see on any sort of regular basis. Quite literally, it could be done. All it really requires is some insanity on her part, and the fact that I just don't really care what she does anymore, and would prefer if she just shut up and kept to herself entirely.

As to your partner Tiassa... well.. all I can ask is, why? Why stay if you're that unhappy? Why stay for your child, if your child is going to grow up and be witness to her parent's unhappiness with each other?

A number of factors. That we were together long enough to reproduce resulted essentially from my leaving myself wide open to it. I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt on principle. She wanted it specifically to exploit. Turns out she was planning this for a few years.

Add to that an old, outstanding DUI that I can beat if I can afford a lawyer. In the meantime, my driving privileges are technically restored, and all I need to do is find a few hours when she's not drunk and passed out in order to slip away to the DMV and get my license back.

And then I can worry about a job and getting the hell out of this house.

Well, okay, I should probably study for the test first. I haven't actually tested for a license in fourteen years.

As to the rest, she's already declared her intention to lie in court. She will not help with me acquit myself, even though her mere presence is instrumental to the whole DUI arrest in the first place. (An amazing psychosis. It's not so much that she remembers it differently per se, but that the true story of why we were pulled over in the first place, something she explained to her father, since I was driving his pickup truck at the time, is now "news to her". Nothing can convince her that she's been aware of the fact that she's the reason we were pulled over.

She knows she's the key. And just like her damn soap operas, she sees that as the power to justify massive dishonesty.

I'm only in this for my daughter. If my partner wants to continue to behave the way she is, she will eventually be arrested or get killed in a car wreck. Not much I can do about it. I'll need about seven people for the freaking intervention, and the two people I know would do it if I asked, well, I've asked for enough of my mother, and one of my close friends ... well, my partner thinks everybody I know hates her, so one of the most qualified people I know to do this is essentially out.

It's about five after ten in the morning. She just left to meet a friend at the bar. Which puzzles me, because we're so out of money right now I can't describe it.

Oh, hey, I just thought of a third person I could get to help intervene. But years ago, when I returned to Seattle and she came with me, he apparently took her aside and explained in classic, patient tones that if she f@cked up my life, he'd find her and kill her. Now, everybody involved knows he won't actually harm her. But he won't spare any unkind words in explaining the situation to her. Bottom line is that she will, quite literally, attempt to kill herself in front of a roomful of people if she feels cornered. I must necessarily plan for this in order to prevent it.

Oh, yeah. And she's a gun owner. A smuggled, illegal weapon at that, but she's a gun owner. She once tried lecturing me, and while she told me what kind of person I am, she carefully but casually started stacking up all her ammunition on the dresser as a message.

In the end, I just sort of tune those parts out. No matter what she does, it's my legal obligation to put up with it. Even if she points that gun at me, I can't do anything about it because you simply can't hit a woman. And yes, women know this. And she knows this. If she hits me hard enough, her bruised fist will be cause enough to haul me to jail. That's the way it goes.

So to get by, you just stop paying attention to certain things.

If Mrs. Montgomery remotely approaches this standard, then no, her husband would not necessarily have known the difference, because he would not necessarily have been paying that close of attention.

zanket,
You talk about the severity of the crime as if it is some sort of currency scale.
"Well, let's see one murder is less dead people than two..."
It just doesn't work that way for me.

Well, someone does decide those things, so it's a valid question. The question for anyone is: If you were forced to choose which case is more revolting, this one or the Peterson case, which would you choose and why?

Seems to me that people by and large found the Peterson case "shocking," maybe "disgusting," but not so far as "revolting" as in this Stinnett case. Even though Peterson killed the baby too. I'm curious as to why.

Bells:
Two female acquaintences of mine - people I see nearly daily - are pregnent. Apparently late term.
I didn't well realize until others told me. Now of course it seems obvious.

I haven't the foggiest notion of what pregnency is like or what pregnent women are like or how obvious pregnency is or how large a woman gets. Childbearing, beyond the obvious "egad! chase any possibility away with injections and prophylactics!" is a mystery to me.

Most men are probably the same way. Hell, a sizable number of women are the same way - I mean after all, people knew all this shit when they lived in villages and stinky hovels and had to know about it. Now you don't learn about pregnency until you decide to become pregnent.....at least for the middle class. Kinda odd, when you think about it.

So yes, it shows premeditation on her part. Let's hope the dysgenic whore is executed - though that's unlikely!. But it doesn't say much about her husband.

As Tiassa illustrates, what man would want to go near such a batshit-insane slut?

-Edit-
zanket:

Well, someone does decide those things, so it's a valid question. The question for anyone is: If you were forced to choose which case is more revolting, this one or the Peterson case, which would you choose and why?

I didn't follow the Peterson case, but what disgusted me about it was not the crime so much as the fact that he was convicted on such scant evidence. I read an article where one of the jurors was quoted saying he felt Peterson was guilty in part because "he didn't look like someone who had lost his wife"

Dear fucking lord.

This is just plain demented. What I find most demented is that it happens on a semi-regular basis.

Now speaking as a woman, with admittedly no experience in childbearing - where in hell did she get the idea to rip another person open and remove

I think what disturbs one most - from a feminist standpoint - is how literally it reduces the woman who was killed into, well, a baby maker.
Or whatever paternalists like to call us.
The fact that the crime was committed by another woman just makes things more disturbing.

But beyond that....there's something a bit off about pregnency. Yeah, it's a beautiful thing, to bring new life into the world, to infuse new blood into your race, to sacrifice of oneself so that something more than oneself is created. Yadda yadda - it's still damn creepy to think of having this thing that looks like a bloody chicken-fish parasitising your body for nine months, then being expelled through hours of contractions.

The whole case sounds like something Chris Barnes (http://www.darklyrics.com/c/cannibalcorpse.html) would think up if he watched CNN for 36 hours straight.

My ex gained 6 pounds with her pregnancy by her 7th month.
She didn't start showing until her 8th.
Her family didn't know she was pregnant until she told them duing her 8th month.
It's not always that obvious.

The sad thing to all this is I was a Missouri police officer for 7 years and getting a alert issued is pretty hard now days I know the sheriff had alot of trouble getting this one issued.

Tiassa
To the one, this is still possible. To the other, my daughter is two years old, my partner is prone to fits of screaming about how horrible the sex is and always was, and if she decides to claim it's hormones resulting from having been pregnant two years ago, she gets to claim that and all I get to do is hope she goes to see a doctor about it.

In theory. Depends on how crazy she is. Other than that, I don't even notice her haircuts anymore.

Besides, I make a point of trying to not see her body anymore. I don't need to see it. It's not mine to enjoy. She doesn't take care of it. She's the only adult I see on any sort of regular basis. Quite literally, it could be done. All it really requires is some insanity on her part, and the fact that I just don't really care what she does anymore, and would prefer if she just shut up and kept to herself entirely.

Tiassa, no matter how you may feel about your partner and even if she hid a miscarriage from you during its full term, would you not feel a tad iffy if she rang you one day and said 'I'm in this parking lot in another town and I've just given birth, can you please come and pick me up and take me home?... Oh and bring someone with you to drive my car home'...? Would you not ask a few questions? What sane rational individual would not? The first question that a normal person would ask in such a situation would be... why aren't you in a hospital? Or what do you mean take you home... I'm taking you to a hospital. Or even, why didn't you or haven't you called an ambulance? There are so many questions that need to be asked in this situation. Even if you don't notice anything about her anymore, do you not question the circumstances?

Oh, yeah. And she's a gun owner. A smuggled, illegal weapon at that, but she's a gun owner. She once tried lecturing me, and while she told me what kind of person I am, she carefully but casually started stacking up all her ammunition on the dresser as a message.
There's one way to get out of the house and get her out of your lives. Dob her in to the police. When she goes out late at night and you know she's drunk, dob her in annonymously. When she's out of the house, replace her ammunition with blanks. She threatens to kill you, keep a small tape recorder in your pocket and switch it on during one of your fights. Go and see a lawyer about getting custody of your daughter, because she is the one who will be most badly influenced by the mere presence of this woman. Document all of the abuse she commits in a journal. Date and time each one. Contact the police now and tell them, at least then there is a record of your story with them. Tell them she is abusive, keeps an illegal gun in the house, has a child living in that same house. Tell them you are not only scared for your own life, but most importantly the life of your daughter. You have witnesses who have seen her at her worst, bring them in as well.

Oh, hey, I just thought of a third person I could get to help intervene. But years ago, when I returned to Seattle and she came with me, he apparently took her aside and explained in classic, patient tones that if she f@cked up my life, he'd find her and kill her. Now, everybody involved knows he won't actually harm her. But he won't spare any unkind words in explaining the situation to her. Bottom line is that she will, quite literally, attempt to kill herself in front of a roomful of people if she feels cornered. I must necessarily plan for this in order to prevent it.
If you ever do have an intervention, make sure you have gone to the police and advised them of what you plan to do. Get one of them to come along if need be so that they can see that you have done nothing to physically harm her. I'd also look at seeing a psychiatrist before taking such a step and make sure that you can have that psychiatrist present during such an intervention.

In the end, I just sort of tune those parts out. No matter what she does, it's my legal obligation to put up with it. Even if she points that gun at me, I can't do anything about it because you simply can't hit a woman. And yes, women know this. And she knows this. If she hits me hard enough, her bruised fist will be cause enough to haul me to jail. That's the way it goes.
You shouldn't have to hit her, and you shouldn't hit her, just as she should not be violent towards you.

If Mrs. Montgomery remotely approaches this standard, then no, her husband would not necessarily have known the difference, because he would not necessarily have been paying that close of attention.
As I said to you above though. No matter how little attention he may have given her and she'd hidden her miscarriage, some questions would still be asked as to how she came to giving birth in a car park and did not call an ambulance, instead called hubby to tell him to give her a lift home.

Xev
Two female acquaintences of mine - people I see nearly daily - are pregnent. Apparently late term.
I didn't well realize until others told me. Now of course it seems obvious.
One can get away without telling another that they are pregnant. A pregnancy can be hidden up to a certain point, if the other is not observant enough. But to hide a miscarriage and fake a pregnancy is a lot harder. One usually ends up in hospital after a miscarriage. In fact the majority do, as a curette is usually required after a miscarriage to remove the rest of tissue that's remained in the uterus.

I haven't the foggiest notion of what pregnency is like or what pregnent women are like or how obvious pregnency is or how large a woman gets. Childbearing, beyond the obvious "egad! chase any possibility away with injections and prophylactics!" is a mystery to me.
Some women are more obvious than others. Some go insane during their pregnancy and others do not. When I was pregnant long ago, no one knew. I didn't start to show at all until my 6th month. My parents knew, because I'd told them, but if I didn't tell anyone, they didn't guess. I miscarried in my 7th month, but even then, no one would have guessed, aside from thinking I'd gotten a boob job and had put on a little bit of weight. And I hadn't changed at all. My hair was shinier, but that was about it. My moods didn't swing from side to side like a manic pendulum, nor did I become a crazy bitch. The only thing that used to make me feel grumpy was the heartburn I would sometimes get if I ate spicy food.

But my point is that to fake a pregnancy is a lot harder than to hide a pregnancy.

Most men are probably the same way. Hell, a sizable number of women are the same way - I mean after all, people knew all this shit when they lived in villages and stinky hovels and had to know about it. Now you don't learn about pregnency until you decide to become pregnent.....at least for the middle class. Kinda odd, when you think about it.
Yes it is odd. Pregnancy is now something that one simply 'does' for lack of a better word. In the days when we lived in huts in villages, having a baby was something that simply happened and a woman had to know about it. A woman knew when she was 'fertile' and would know when she was pregnant. Now days a woman has no idea unless she goes to a chemist and buys a take home test to find out. We don't know about pregnancy because we choose not to know until we simply have no choice but to learn. I'll admit I had bugger all idea when I became pregnant. I had to buy books about what I should and should not eat while pregnant. I had no idea that pregnant women should not eat anything processed, such as ham or salami for example, because it can harm the baby.

So yes, it shows premeditation on her part. Let's hope the dysgenic whore is executed - though that's unlikely!. But it doesn't say much about her husband.
I agree it does show premeditation on her part. She did not simply see a pregnant woman and think I want that baby and did it impulsively. She gained that girls trust through chatroom discussions. She deceived that poor girl and told her she wanted to buy one of the dogs the mother to be bred, all so she could get close enough to her. She then went there with the full intention of committing a crime that still has my mind reeling. And yes, I think it does not say much at all about her husband. But it leaves a lot of questions about the husband also. Did he know? Did he know she was insane and did not question when she called him and told him she'd just given birth to a baby in a car park and to come and pick her up?

Now speaking as a woman, with admittedly no experience in childbearing - where in hell did she get the idea to rip another person open and remove
That's what I always ask myself when I hear of these cases. What possesses any individual to actually think up something like this. One could say c-sections are done everyday, but this is something completely different. To sit there and think that I need to find a pregnant woman, kill her and then take her baby from her womb. What kind of fucked up individual would actually even think it, much less plan it and then actually do the act.

I think what disturbs one most - from a feminist standpoint - is how literally it reduces the woman who was killed into, well, a baby maker.
Or whatever paternalists like to call us.
The fact that the crime was committed by another woman just makes things more disturbing.
I fully agree. That this was done by a woman disturbs me as well. And looking into these sorts of crimes, the majority of them are committed by women. It astounds me and also makes my skin crawl. This woman wanted a baby. Saw a pregnant woman who had incubated the child long enough, and then just decided to take it from her.

But beyond that....there's something a bit off about pregnency. Yeah, it's a beautiful thing, to bring new life into the world, to infuse new blood into your race, to sacrifice of oneself so that something more than oneself is created. Yadda yadda - it's still damn creepy to think of having this thing that looks like a bloody chicken-fish parasitising your body for nine months, then being expelled through hours of contractions.
It is creepy. Even when I was pregnant, I found it creepy sometimes, to think that there was another person inside of me. I actually found it disturbing.

Source: CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/)
Link: http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/12/19/missouri.fetus/index.html
Title: "Couple allegedly showed off kidnapped baby"
Date: December 19, 2004

The Montgomerys said they had named the baby Abigail, a local pastor, Mike Wheatley, told CNN. Montgomery told him she had given birth to the child at a Topeka birthing center.

Wheatley said he and others, including Montgomery's husband, Kevin, believed she was pregnant and due in December. Wheatley recounted that he once commented to Lisa Montgomery that she was "kind of small to be having a baby that soon. She said, 'I've always had small babies,' and I just let it go at that" ....

.... The affidavit alleges that Kevin Montgomery told authorities his wife called him shortly after he arrived home from work Thursday, around 5:15 p.m., saying she had gone shopping in Topeka, went into labor and had a baby.

The husband and the couple's two high-school age children drove to Topeka and met Lisa Montgomery in the parking lot of a Long John Silver's restaurant. He, his wife and the child drove home in his pickup truck, and the older children drove his wife's car, a red Toyota Corolla, the affidavit alleges.

A check with the Topeka women's clinic where Montgomery claimed to have given birth revealed no babies were born there Thursday.

CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/12/19/missouri.fetus/index.html)

Todd Graves, a U.S. Attorney for western Missouri, told CNN that his office has not yet decided whether to seek the death penalty. Graves noted that while the crime was shocking, it is not particularly unusual. His district has achieved death sentences on the same charge twice in the past three years.
____________________

Notes:

CNN.com "Couple allegedly showed off kidnapped baby". December 19, 2004. See http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/12/19/missouri.fetus/index.html

The baby's name is Victoria Jo Stinnett.

You know, normally I welcome a baby to the world with an affectionate joke: "Welcome, little one; it's all downhill from here."

Somehow, that seems inappropriate. Or else a damning indictment of the human character.

• • •

An interesting discussion of maternal homicide as a general topic has arisen in the wake of this slaying. See:

St. George, Donna. "Researchers Stunned By Scope of Slayings". Washington Post, December 19, 2004; page A21. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10785-2004Dec18.html