Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was confused about the timeline, but I wonder if she did ever get knocked up by Joe, but was able to tell her next mark that it was his and he had to marry her.
That thought also crossed my mind especially in the beginning of their affair but after he told Marry Ann he was married, considering how easily she got pregnant and him not mentioning any kids, I think he was sterile. We didn't see he and his wife walking with any kids, did we? I may have forgotten. I find British accents so hard to understand. I don't think they mentioned her trying to pawn off his kid as one of whichever husband at the time.
But that brings up the question of whether she was a sociopath through and through, or if she'd had access to education, steady employment, and birth control would she have been the same kind of person?
I found it more chilling than something set in the current day somehow. But this woman is ice cold. She'd do quite well today as well, because she was smart and knew what people would believe.
I don't see her as a victum of her time so much as someone who would be a danger in any time. That ice cold behavior and total lack of any regret, just a reason she could always find. I wondered if she would have been so easy to trace a few centuries before when the modern rules of investigations were not necessarily in place.
Her performance was so chillingly perfect, so different then her role on Dowton Abbey, is awesome and she should win some awards for it.
I found it more chilling than something set in the current day somehow. But this woman is ice cold. She'd do quite well today as well, because she was smart and knew what people would believe.
I don't see her as a victum of her time so much as someone who would be a danger in any time. That ice cold behavior and total lack of any regret, just a reason she could always find. I wondered if she would have been so easy to trace a few centuries before when the modern rules of investigations were not necessarily in place.
Her performance was so chillingly perfect, so different then her role on Dowton Abbey, is awesome and she should win some awards for it.
It is interesting to think how easy it was for her to get away with what she did for so long. People living in poverty died fairly regularly, so that would not necessarily have been suspicious, and she could just move to another town 20 miles away and no one would know her or suspect her, and the authorities had no connections to make and no forensics.
I do still wonder what she was really like, though, since the Victorian media would have portrayed her as an unwomanly, unfeminine monster. How true could that be?
So, did she mean to kill her own daughter or was it just a ploy gone bad? She seemed to want the girl to only drink a wee bit of the tea and was a mess when she saw her drinking all of it. Why take the chance anyway?
No she didn't mean to kill her daughter. She just didn't want it to look suspicious that the other children in her care died while her own child didn't.
I've always felt sociopaths were born that way but who knows. A lot of people back then had difficult lives but they didn't resort to killing their husbands, children and other family and friends.
Interesting article in The Atlantic about children who are sociopaths--diagnosed as real threats--
Did n't get to finish -- my wifi was wonky
Is this a series or just one episode?
Found it to DVR at 1AM this Sunday
It is interesting to think how easy it was for her to get away with what she did for so long. People living in poverty died fairly regularly, so that would not necessarily have been suspicious, and she could just move to another town 20 miles away and no one would know her or suspect her, and the authorities had no connections to make and no forensics.
I do still wonder what she was really like, though, since the Victorian media would have portrayed her as an unwomanly, unfeminine monster. How true could that be?
This is not the only case of a mother being a serial killer of her babies--
Read about one in state like NY--rural area--
Woman had like 4 babies that it was finally determined she had killed but supposedly she was the prime example of "crib death" being inherited by all children in family...
Totally fake of course but she loved the attention from the research scientist who used her...
Can't remember her name or the title of the book I read about her--
Her husband had no clue supposedly--and they were married for decades....
She just wanted all his attention--babies were a threat---
There are other cases in news from time to time--
Likely more than anyone realizes
And not just "poor" families
In real life many families with money often are overlooked for crimes like this because of their social status and sterotypical assessment...
No she didn't mean to kill her daughter. She just didn't want it to look suspicious that the other children in her care died while her own child didn't.
Ha! I have to disagree.
So, a couple of questions... AFTER the 2 dead children were removed from the house why did she let her daughter sip from the poison tea? She held the cup to the daughters mouth.
WHY did she then leave the poison by the child's bedside and run the risk that she would drink more?? IF she was not wanting the child to die, she would have taken it away, replaced it with fresh non-poisoned tea.
I think she did want to rid herself of the daughter and when she cried, holding the dead girl, I think it was for herself, not the child.
Also, when it showed her at the waters edge, I thought, hoping, she was going to kill herself but then I realized a true narcissist wouldn't do that.
Just thoughts. (I've always wanted to be a prosecuting attorney)
She seemed certain that she wouldn't hang either. She told her friend (who she gave the baby to) "They'll never hang a mother". Thankfully, she got that one wrong.
Definitely awards are owed for the program. Very well done depicting the living conditions, the clothes, the possibility of just moving on and getting up to your old tricks again. Very frightening.
That thought also crossed my mind especially in the beginning of their affair but after he told Marry Ann he was married, considering how easily she got pregnant and him not mentioning any kids, I think he was sterile. We didn't see he and his wife walking with any kids, did we? I may have forgotten. I find British accents so hard to understand. I don't think they mentioned her trying to pawn off his kid as one of whichever husband at the time.
I, too, struggled with the accents so I turned on closed captioning. It really helped and I will use it in the future. Never had any trouble understanding British with shows like Downton Abbey, but when they run shows like this with a different kind of accent (and slang!), they are often very hard to understand.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
AFTER the 2 dead children were removed from the house why did she let her daughter sip from the poison tea? She held the cup to the daughters mouth. 
