2

I've read in countless magazines that Countess Elizabeth Báthory (1560-1640) was the most prolific serial killer and it is taken as accepted. But it might also be possible that Bathory was framed!

While it is certain that some aspects of her persona were exaggerated, is it even possible that she did not even commit any murder and she was setup?

Flimzy
  • 15,520
  • 14
  • 63
  • 132
Eliza
  • 21
  • 1
  • Welcome to Skeptics. There seems little doubt that the folklore is exaggerated - no-one seems to be disputing that. The link you provide does not deny she was a murderer, and does not claim she was framed. That appears to be your speculation, and is therefore off-topic. If someone is putting forward the claim that she was innocent and/or framed, please link to it. – Oddthinking Aug 10 '14 at 03:02
  • @Oddthinking I read the claim to be that she is/was a serial killer, and this question is asking "is that true?" –  Aug 10 '14 at 03:26
  • 1
    @Articuno: Then we get into the muddy waters of what is the criteria for knowing? There was a trial. She was found guilty. We can rightfully doubt the reliability of trials (especially then) but there is no reproducibility, so what has scientific skepticism got to go on? – Oddthinking Aug 10 '14 at 03:56
  • @Odd well then we should use that as the close reason rather than off topic for lack of notable claim. Perhaps opinion based if you think the historical record is not adequate. But that presupposes the answer. I guess i don't understand this closure. –  Aug 10 '14 at 05:02
  • 1
    @Oddthinking Sometimes ([for example in this case](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilles_de_Rais#Question_of_guilt)) contemporary judgement of available evidence concludes there was a mistrial. It's a legitimate 'history' question, IMO. Whether history questions belong on a site intended for scientific skepticism is a different question. – ChrisW Aug 10 '14 at 13:28

0 Answers0