WTF?? People scare me

[cloudy]

Victim IDs attacker in womb slashing
Prosecutor: Pennsylvania woman says neighbor tried to steal her fetus

Associated Press

FORD CITY, Pa. - A pregnant woman whose belly was slashed with a razor knife in an attempt to steal her baby identified the attacker as her next-door neighbor, a prosecutor said Friday.

Valerie Lynn Oskin, 30, told investigators it was “definitely” Peggy Jo Conner who attacked her, Armstrong County District Attorney Scott Andreassi said.

Oskin was rescued after a teenager spotted the women, and the baby boy was delivered at a hospital in healthy condition, official said. Oskin has head injuries but has been improving, officials said.

Conner, 38, is jailed without bail on charges of attempted homicide, aggravated assault and aggravated assault of an unborn child.

She is accused of hitting Oskin with a baseball bat Wednesday, then driving her about 15 miles to a secluded, wooded area about 50 miles northeast of Pittsburgh and cutting Oskin’s abdomen along a previous Caesarean scar.

Prosecutors said Oskin would have died if Adam Silvis, 17, hadn’t come across the two women while riding his all-terrain vehicle. He alerted his father, who called police.

Doctors at Allegheny General Hospital in Pittsburgh performed an emergency Caesarean on Wednesday to deliver the baby.

Oskin’s breathing tube was removed Friday as her condition improved. One of the first things she asked investigators was if her child was all right, Andreassi said at a news conference.

Police found a bassinet and baby swing in Conner’s home but said they don’t know if Conner had been recently pregnant or had planned to take Oskin’s baby.

Conner’s preliminary hearing was scheduled for Tuesday, if Oskin is able to testify by then.

Oskin’s recollection is spotty due to her head injury, Andreassi said. She remembers being hit, waking up later and being driven around by Conner, but doesn’t recall an exact time line.

Thomas Wilks, who says he is Conner’s husband but is separated from her, has called the allegations against her “impossible” and said she truly was pregnant.

Conner and Oskin had a “close friendship,” Wilks said. “It was getting closer as the days went by. They were pregnant together.”

 

[rgraham666]

You and me both.

 

[impressive]

 

[Guest]

The mortality rate for pregnant women should be going down, not up.

Horrifying.

 

[lucky-E-leven]

Sadly, this isn't the first time such a thing has happened.
Hoping the best for mother and child.

 

[HollyHawkk]

What an odd thing to have to be worried about people stealing from you!

I hope the mom and baby are doing ok!

 

[CharleyH]

Interesting. Although, I'm not sure it's particularly odd from my point of view, and at least from a psychological standpoint, I might lean to believe she probably had a very common sense reason for doing this. Since bearing a child is so prominantly featured (sometimes pressured) in some portions of society, as the thing to do to be considered a whole and successful woman (depending on her background) it would not shock me to find out (especially knowing she was preganant and separated and perhaps close to the woman she attacked) that she either miscarried her own child and was depressed, or was suffering from a delusion that the other woman was not fit to care for a child in some way.

Just an brief observation.

 

[cantdog]

A reasonable speculation. But the whole mental process you describe is still pathological, and takes a big dip south towrd the end of the sequence.

 

[minsue]

It's not the first time it's happened and, horrifyingly, it's almost certainly not the last.

 

[rgraham666]

I was thinking much the same thing Charley.

Interestingly enough, I just started re-reading The Anatomy of Motive, a book by the man who used to be chief profiler at the FBI. I was wondering what he would have to say about this.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Although, I'm not sure it's particularly odd from my point of view, and at least from a psychological standpoint

It's horrifying... and certainly pathological... like the stories you hear of mothers with postpartum psychosis killing their own children... but it really isn't "odd" ... nothing human is foreign to me, who said that? We are capable of fantastically heinous acts, human beings... Things like this always make my heart ache for the Feminine in our culture... so devalued, twisted, and distorted, we don't even recognize it anymore...

and imagine this mother, if she IS pregnant... what happens to that child? *sigh*

 

[cantdog]

It's horrifying... and certainly pathological... like the stories you hear of mothers with postpartum psychosis killing their own children... but it really isn't "odd" ... nothing human is foreign to me, who said that? We are capable of fantastically heinous acts, human beings... Things like this always make my heart ache for the Feminine in our culture... so devalued, twisted, and distorted, we don't even recognize it anymore...

and imagine this mother, if she IS pregnant... what happens to that child? *sigh*

Terence.

I am a man: nothing human is alien to me.
-- Publius Terentius Afer (Terence)

 

[cantdog]

We see that, and of course, have to erect some exceptions. Nothing human is alien to me except Australian Rules Football-- or whatever it is.

Hacking open women to steal their babies seems like an exception. There was a time when I had a large list of exceptions. The more cynical I got, the longer it grew. Eventually it toppled of its own weight, leaving me existential. There they are. They ain't pretty, humans. But they're us.

 

[CharleyH]

A reasonable speculation. But the whole mental process you describe is still pathological, and takes a big dip south towrd the end of the sequence.

Ah, I didn't think to much about it, just a first impression, Cant (kiss by the way) but you are quite right. Still, hearing you, RG and others give their impressions is always fascinating to me, and I suppose especially on a topic about 'motives' as RG points out, which has fascinated us all for eternity. It seems as if we constantly attempt to discover the answer to that elusive but oft' asked question of childhood: why?

Intriguing. It's of particular interest to me in regards to women, since not much is yet known in this area, or perhaps in areas where women commit more sexually sadistic crimes.

 

[rgraham666]

Australian Rules Football is just like rugby, except uppercuts are not considered standard offensive maneuvers in rugby.

To me, motive most often boils down to want. Humans always want something.

For some reason, this poor woman decided she wanted the other one's baby and was willing to do anything to satisfy that want.

Somewhere the want of a child overrode her wanting to do the good thing.

Christ, I become incoherent as I grow more tired.

 

[CharleyH]

Well, I guess Rugby ends any discussion on non-narritive motives.

Otherwise, I could also suggest that "want" is not always a motive in reality. To further that, I will suggest that "want" is merely a narrative technique that we have learned.

 

[cantdog]

Yep, the idea that we are motivated by self-interest is essentially dogmatic hooey. It's one of the reasons amicus sounds such an ass. It's a big discussion, though, motive.

A good one for writers to have, maybe.

 

[rgraham666]

Yep, the idea that we are motivated by self-interest is essentially dogmatic hooey. It's one of the reasons amicus sounds such an ass. It's a big discussion, though, motive.

A good one for writers to have, maybe.

Does that mean that wanting to do the good thing is entirely self motivated?

Wanting to belong to something greater, better is entirely in one's self interest?

It's only when self interest is a substitute for ethics that it becomes a problem.

 

[Quiet_Cool]

Does that mean that wanting to do the good thing is entirely self motivated?

Wanting to belong to something greater, better is entirely in one's self interest?

It's only when self interest is a substitute for ethics that it becomes a problem.

Exactly.

I've been hearing about this story for a few days now, or so it seems. Maybe it's just been highly reported here, since it's a PA story.

As per my understanding, she was never pregnant, or at very least they've found no real evidence that she was. The simple fact that they spent so much time together tells me that, regardless of what the estranged husband wants to believe, it's hard for the victim to be mistaken as to who she was attacked by.

The question for me isn't so much what motivated her, because that's psychology, and while I do believe it has notable social merit to it, it seems the more advancements we make, the less we're able to apply them to better our culture. What I wonder is whether or not she'll be considered sane enough to be competent, and therefore stand trial.

Q_C

 

[Svenskaflicka]

What I'd like to know is what the crazy woman was thinking - "I'll steal the baby from her belly, and noone will found out it was me. I'll live with the baby forever, raise it as my own, and no-one will be able to tell that the kid looks like my dead neighbour and not like me."

???

 

[Liar]

Yeah, I don't think rational thought was high on her to-do list there.

Scary story.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Yeah, I don't think rational thought was high on her to-do list there.

well yeah... that's kind of a prerequisite for psychosis... she was clearly delusional... or simply sociopathic...

 

[rgraham666]

well yeah... that's kind of a prerequisite for psychosis... she was clearly delusional... or simply sociopathic...

Delusional most likely. A kid is a lot of responsibility, and sociopaths avoid that like the plague.

They love authourity, but not the consequences of it.

 

[CharleyH]

Does that mean that wanting to do the good thing is entirely self motivated?

Wanting to belong to something greater, better is entirely in one's self interest?

It's only when self interest is a substitute for ethics that it becomes a problem.

I doubt that Cant was answering you, but 1) Yes, stastically. 2) Yes, because one only "belongs" in order to be accepted in the clique as greater and better, otherwise, why bother? 3) Not necessarily as it depends on the definition of ethics.

 

[Quiet_Cool]

I doubt that Cant was answering you, but 1) Yes, stastically. 2) Yes, because one only "belongs" in order to be accepted in the clique as greater and better, otherwise, why bother? 3) Not necessarily as it depends on the definition of ethics.

Interesting post...

Well, not really.

There's such a thing as over-philosophizing, Charley.

Q_C