This case has Nancy Grace written all over it, but we cannot overlook it here on Crime Rant. We want to apologize for that right off ther bat.

There’s got to be a special place in hell for women who kill their children: most of us are probably on board with that idea. Yet, what if a mother places her baby in a microwave and hits “high” for a few minutes, or at least until the child’s insides burn up? Where, then, does that woman end up? Is hell too mild a punishment?

Jury selection began Monday in China’s trial. She is accused of killing her 1-month-old daughter by burning the child to death in a microwave oven.

But let me tell you, the state’s evidence is shoddy, at best. To be honest, I’m not even sure how or why this woman ended up on trial to begin with (although I have a pretty good idea, which I’ll kepe to myself).

Investigators believe China put her baby, Paris Talley, into a microwave at her home, but China’s attorneys argue she had nothing to do with the crime.

According to CNN, “Coroner’s officials have said the baby suffered high-heat internal injuries and had no external burns. They have ruled out scalding water, open flame or other possible causes of death that could have damaged the skin.”

This is an interesting case. One we need to watch closely. Here you have a woman who claims she had nothing to do with her daughter’s death and was “stunned when investigators told her that a microwave might have been involved.” It was China, after all, who took the baby to the hospital after finding her unconscious.

Last July, police Detective Michael Galbraith testified at a pre-trial hearing that China told him she arrived home during the early morning hours after drinking all night, fell asleep, and was awakened at 2:30 a.m. by the baby’s crying. She said she “warmed a bottle in the microwave oven, tried to give it to the baby, changed the child’s diaper and then fell asleep on the couch with the baby on her chest.” China and her children were the only people in the apartment until her boyfriend arrived several hours later and noticed something was wrong with the baby.

IT LOOKS LIKE TIME ONCE AGAIN TO POINT OUT THE NEWS OVERLOOKED BY MILANO'S CRUSADE TO BASH MEN.  MILANO NOW APPEARS TO EITHER BE NOT SLEEPING OR USING AN ALARM CLOCK SO SHE CAN MAN BASH MORE OFTEN THAN THE AVERAGE BABY

Faced with what happened, China told the cop: “If I hadn’t gotten so drunk, I guess my baby wouldn’t have died.”

Now, is that statement a claim of responsibility, or does it sound like a mother (who is certainly not immune to alcohol and other problems) wrapped up in guilt?

Most interesting, Robert Belloto, a staff pharmacist at Good Samaritan Hospital, where China brought the baby after finding her unconscious, testified that “he does not believe it would have been possible for Arnold to place the baby in the microwave because the woman was so intoxicated.”

I’m wondering if the microwave oven was checked. Had it been old and the door not sealed properly, well, it’s possible that microwaves leaked into the atmosphere and killed that child. For a newborn, it doesn’t take much.

Then again, it’s also possible that China put the child into the oven. But something tells me there’s more working here than a murder case.

11 Women Are on Death Row for Killing Their Kids

DISTORTING THE TRUTH ABOUT SPOUSAL MURDER

HOW WOMEN'S ADVOCATES TRY TO FOOL YOU ABOUT SPOUSAL MURDER

Consider the following paragraph from page 118 of the World Health Organization's (WHO) huge pdf file, "World report on violence and health." It is an example of how ideological groups try to fool you about gender violence:

“Studies from Australia, Canada, Israel, South Africa and the United States of America show that 40–70% of female murder victims were killed by their husbands or boyfriends, frequently in the context of an ongoing abusive relationship. This contrasts starkly with the situation of male murder victims. In the United States, for example, only 4% of men murdered between 1976 and 1996 were killed by their wives, ex-wives or girlfriends. In Australia between 1989 and 1996, the figure was 8.2%”

Sounds really horrific for women relative to men, right? There's just one problem. While percentages don't lie, they can distort the truth when used without the actual numbers that show how the percentages were derived. (Time magazine once tried this trick regarding the number of women murdered in the workplace vs. the number of men murdered.)

By leaving out actual homicide numbers and using only percentages, WHO is able to suggest that in the U.S., for example, nearly 14 times as many women are murdered by intimates as men. (To get the figure of nearly 14 times, I averaged the 40-70% of women murdered in the five countries, getting a result of 55%. I then divided the 55% by the 4% of men murdered in the U.S., which comes out to 13.75.)

What WHO is banking on, I suspect, is this: when reading the paragraph, we unconsciously assume – because the huge report at this point has already focused almost exclusively on the horrors of violence against women -- that women are murdered in an actual number equal to or greater than the number of men murdered, even though the homicide figures by sex are disclosed elsewhere in the report. To further nudge us into sympathizing with female victims of violence, WHO employs the emphatic term “only 4%” to address the men murdered by intimates in the U.S.

To get a true picture of men and women murdered by intimates, consider the following figures on homicides by sex in the U.S. in 2000 (see "Cable TV's Crime Shows Love White Female Homicide Victims," which provides the government source for the numbers):

Men------12,407
Women---3,799

Now let's do the simple math:

Four percent of 12,407 is 496 men murdered by intimates. Fifty-five percent -- the average of 40-70% in the five countries -- of 3,799 is 2,089 women murdered by intimates. If in the U.S. only 40% of female murder victims were killed by intimates, the number is 1,520. That's still over three times as many women murdered by intimates as men -- but it's a far cry from the nearly 14 times as many that WHO would like us to picture.

Into this we must add the observations of Dr. Warren Farrell, who writes in Chapter Six of his book Women Can't Hear What Men Don't Say:

The basic trick of the Ad Council's ad is that a high percentage of murdered wives are murdered by their husband or ex-husband exactly because married women are so rarely murdered to begin with. 

But aren't husbands more likely to kill their wives than vice-versa? Again, we enter the arena of "who's the biggest victim?" It bothers me to have to document that the sexes kill their spouses about equally, but there are life-and-death consequences that result from feminists persuading the public that it is almost exclusively husbands who kill wives. It leads to financing of only women's shelters and hotlines without shelters and hotlines for men, thus leaving men with no place to go when they are in danger, so he becomes a powder keg that can endanger his wife rather than someone who can find a supportive retreat while he cools off.

The brief answer to this accusation is that no one knows for sure which sex kills the other more. In a second we'll see why it's likely that more wives kill husbands, but until the government is willing to collect data about the three female methods of killing, we can only do an educated guess. I'll explain...

On the surface, the Bureau of Justice reports women are the perpetrators in 41% of spousal murders. However, the male method of killing is with a knife or gun, done by himself. The three female methods of killing are different. The third female method is poisoning, but I'll deal first with the first two methods, both of which are "multiple offender killings" — that is, a wife either hires a professional killer or persuades a boyfriend. We only know that in multiple offender killings there are four times as many husbands as victims than wives, according to the FBI. These multiple offender killings are meant, of course, to not be discovered, but even a multiple offender killing that is discovered is not recorded by the government as a wife killing a husband, it is listed separately by the FBI as a "multiple offender killing." That is, the 41% figure does not include either of the first two female methods of killing.

How common are contract killings? We don't know. Perhaps the best hint we have of how many husbands could be killed by contract comes from the FBI, reporting that some 7800 men were killed without the killer being identified (vs. 1500 women). This number is almost 9 times larger than all of the wives killed by spouses and ex-spouses put together . However, this "9 times as many" figure is a very inadequate hint since many of these men were doubtless killed by other men, and many are unmarried — and our comparisons are among married people.

Most important, of the hundred or so contract killings about which I have read, only a small percentage were originally recognized as such. The very purpose in hiring a professional was to have the husband's death appear as an accident so she can collect insurance money. And that is also the purpose of the third female method: poisoning.

Joyce Cohen exemplifies a typical contract killing. Stanley Cohen was a Florida millionaire when Joyce became his secretary. Eventually they got married, but soon got bored enough with each other that, among other things, they had not had sex for two years. (I did not personally investigate this.) Joyce feared a divorce would return her to being a secretary. So she used $100,000 of Stanley's money to hire some young men to kill her husband. When he was asleep and naked, she had him shot four times in the head with his own gun. 80 Joyce's motivation is obvious (although statistically her existence as a spouse-killer is invisible).

A husband is much more likely to kill in an emotional fit of rage (so much for the rational sex!). Or he kills his wife and children, and then turns the gun to his own head. Next time you read about a husband killing a wife in the newspaper, read a little further in the article and you'll be surprised to see how often he also kills himself. And obviously the killing of himself indicates that money is not his primary motivation. When people commit suicide, it is because they feel there is no one who loves them or needs them.

In brief, a wife's style of killing reflects her motivation which requires the killing not be detected; a husband's style of killing reflects his motivation and, well, a husband who kills himself is pretty likely to be caught — a dead husband is a dead giveaway. Even if her killing does get detected, it is much more likely to never be recorded as a spouse killing — but as a "multiple offender" killing, or an accident or a heart attack. When a woman is murdered, we are more likely to track down the killer than when a man is murdered.

The next time you see an article that is obviously attempting to impose on you a certain view by using percentages but no numbers, ask the writer and his/her editor to provide the numbers so you can get the complete picture.

CONTRARY TO THE CONSTANT MAN HATING BARRAGE, THE WORLD IS FILLED WITH FEMALE KILLERS AND ASSORTED EVIL DOERS.  HERE IS A BRIEF SMATTERING:

Susan "Sadie May Glutz" Atkins
Manson Family Member, Murderer
Susan "Sadie" Atkins is a former member of the Charles Manson family. She swore before a Grand Jury, that under the direction of Charlie Manson, she stabbed actress Sharon Tate.

Suzanne Basso
Kidnapper, Murderer
Basso kidnapped a 59-year old retarded man and brutally beat him with various items resulting in his death.

Kenisha Berry
Baby Killer
Berry brutally suffocated her 4-day-old baby boy.

Linda Carty
Kidnapper, Murderer
Carty hogtied a woman who had a three-day-old baby, taped a bag over her head and suffocated her.

Lynette Alice "Squeaky" Fromme
Mason Family Member, Attempted Assassination
Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme became the voice of cult leader, Charlie Manson, when he was sent to prison. She also pointed a gun at President Ford, for which she is now serving a life sentence.

Cathy Lynn Henderson
Baby Killer, Kidnapper
Henderson was convicted in the abduction and murder of a 3-month-old baby boy she was babysitting.

Brittany Holberg
Robber, Murderer
Holberg robbed and murdered an 80-year-old man, striking him with a hammer and stabbing him nearly 60 times.

Karla Homolka
Rapist, Torturer, Murderer
Karla Homolka, one of Canada's most horrific female convicts, has been released from prison after serving a 12-year sentence for her involvement in drugging, raping, torturing and killing young girls over a decade ago. The dead teens included her own young sister who she was offered to her boyfriend as a gift.

Stacey Lannert
Murderer
On July 4, 1990, Stacey Ann Lannert, age 18, shot and killed her father, Tom Lannert, as he lay sleeping in the family's St. John, Missouri, home. In her statement to the police Stacey claimed that her father had sexually abused her. She was later found guilty of first degree murder of her father and sentenced to life in prison

Kimberly McCarthy
Murderer
McCarthy stabbed a 70-year-old woman repeatidly resulting in her death.

Blanche Moore
Murderer
Moore had a bad habit of poisoning the men in her life with arsenic. She is currently on death row for killing a boyfriend.

Frances Elaine Newton
Child Killer, Murderer
Newton shot and killed her husband, her seven-year-old son and her 21-month-old daughter for insurance money.

Carlette Parker
Kidnapper, Thief, Murderer
Parker kidnapped an 88-year-old woman, withdrew money from her account, pepper-sprayed her, then drowned her in a bathtub.

Darlie Routier
Child Killer
Darlier Routier sits on death row in Texas for the murder of her children. Many questions have come up since her trial. Was she railroaded? You decide.

Erica Sheppard
Robbery, Murderer
Sheppard wanted her victim's car, so she slashed her throat with a knife five times and beat her with a statue.

Christina S. Walters
Murderer
As part of a gang-initiation, Walters randomly selected three teenaged girls and shot them. Two of the girls died, one survived.

Andrea Yates
Child Killer
A profile of Andrea Yates, her life, her marriage to Rusty Yates, and the tragic events that led up to her drowning her five children.

IF BAD ACTS BY MEN ARE GOING TO BE NOTED MULTIPLE TIMES DAILY, SO ARE BAD ACTS BY WOMEN, EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FAIRNESS IN REPORTING

In a horrible and bizarre tragedy, police in Houston, Texas, today reported that a woman called them asking for someone to come to the home to look in on her children.

When police arrived at the house, 36 year-old Andrea Yates told them she killed her five children. They discovered the lifeless bodies of the children, aged 6 months to 7 years. Initial reports indicate that the woman drowned each child in the bathtub.

At this time no indication has been given as to why the woman would commit such an unthinkable, dreadful act, other than that she had experienced post-partum depression. The woman's husband, father of the children, was notified at the nearby Johnson Space Center, where he is employed.

There are no words to adequately express the horror and shock evoked in reaction to such an incident.

This woman is obviously a deranged, sick individual who did the most unnatural thing possible in this world – taking the lives of her very own flesh and blood.

Mass murder has become all too commonplace in modern society, by various, equally evil, methods. Stabbings and beatings and shootings in public places. Murder by drowning committed by mothers of their own children.

What answers can there be for such irrational, illogical and criminal acts?

What measures could possibly be enacted to prevent such killings?

It seems readily apparent that sick minds will employ any means at their disposal if they are so warped in mind and so devoid of heart to even conceive of such despicable acts.

At times such as these, public reaction is understandable and predictable.

However, the words and deeds of our supposed government leaders often, though highly selectively, focus on only one kind of the above crimes: those involving a firearm.

Never once have they clamored to ban baseball bats or knives or, now, bathtubs. Nor have they called for background checks – or closing flea market loopholes, for that matter – for any of these items used legally and lawfully everday by all of our citizens.

That, of course, would be crazy.

But when it comes to firearms, it’s a different story.

The Left breathlessly pounces on any of these crimes, demanding that the rights of law-abiding citizens be curtailed and trampled because some sicko committed murder.

That’s because the Left and its media promoters have deemed that the unconstitutional abridgement of the right to keep and bear arms has somehow become, improperly and falsely, an acceptable course of action.

And the sad fact is that never have any of these laws done anything other than restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens, due to what should be obvious: Criminals by definition do not obey the law in the first instance.

Never mind that they refused for eight years to enforce the 20,000 gun laws already on the books.

But the Left knows that and doesn’t really care one iota, because they have the political issue, which is all they ever want: to appeal to the mindless, feel-good, lowest common denominator.

Rather than lionize murderers such as McVeigh and Garza as they were rightly put to death for their heinous crimes, the media would do well to look at themselves, turning their thoughts and attention inward, to reflect and take responsibility for their part in running down our traditional values and our long-held notions of right and wrong.

And while they are at it, they should examine the questionable ethics and morals of the 49 senators who voted against the Boy Scouts of America last week, in a shameful display intended to trash the reputation of a youth group that has done nothing more than adhere to its deeply held beliefs and morals. Not surprisingly, the media also piled on to vilify the Scouts and those courageous senators who stood up for our young people.

Is it any wonder that the Clinton-inspired me, me, me philosophy has wrought the tragic devaluing of humanity, resulting in the brutal taking of life as has increasingly occurred since he first cast his shadow in the Oval Office?

The time for niceties and subtleties is long past.

Just ask the poor father whose own life was wrecked today.

July 19, 1908, Sunday

Section: Special Cable News Section, Page C8, 1081 words

The dead bodies of Ernest Glock, janitor of the Cordova Court apartments at 608 and 610 West 178th Street, and his wife, Sarah, were found in the rooms they occupied in the basement of the house yesterday morning under circumstances which indicate that the woman killed her husband in his sleep and then committed suicide. [ END OF FIRST PARAGRAPH ]

Check out the story at snopes

Ismael Kasooha
Kampala

Evas Ntegyereize of Kibaale district has killed her husband, Charles Biryomumaisho, for allegedly selling off a piglet without her consent.

The criminal investigations department officer, Michael Ogwal, said Ntegyereize, from Kyebumba village in Bwikara sub-county, used a blunt stick to hit Biryomumaisho, 56, several times on the head.

Biryomumaisho allegedly sold the piglet at sh20,000 without her consent. Some relatives said Biryomumaisho had only used sh2,000 to buy alcohol at the time of his death. The couple had six children and had stayed together for over 28 years.