OK i just assumed she was one of Britain's worse serial killers possibly responsible for over 20 deaths but was she?
I was left wanting more. There was no EVIDENCE of her killing anyone, arsenic was used everywhere in victorian times even on wallpaper and yes CLEANING they used it in soft soap quite regularly most households used it. I have read more about her, and when the police checked her home where the child had died, they found nothing which would have had arsanic in it, just medicine bottles with the childs name on them, as he was being treated for an illness, yet some of these bottles were empty, and some had gone missing.
Part of the evidence was it was said that Mary ann cotton had given the boy a severe beating a few days before his death, yet on the coroners first report they mentioned nothing about bruises or any beating, in actual fact they found no real reason why he died. Surely if he had been given arsenic he would have had traces of massive fit.
I really think that they should commission another series now about the evidence and other issues surrounding this women. I am not convinced she was a serial killer after my research. Out of 100 children born 50 would be dead in a few months, a very high mortality rate, her mother clearly died of hepatitis and when would she have gotten time to go off and buy arsenic to kill her with and wouldn't there have been a trace of it in a teapot or did she walk around with her killing teapot. Her friend died, did she kill her or did she succumb to the same illness her sister in law had?
No i am not convinced. I think the series was written well but I feel it could have gone further much further. I am not saying she didn't kill anyone but i am not sure she was the killer they were making her out to be.
She had lived quite happy in cornwall OK it is said some of her children died there but then so did many children die as the chances were very very high for death.
Yes i enjoyed it and it did make me want to know more, all the evidence and transcripts were purely heresay. No real evidence was found if it was now i think the case would have been thrown out. Yes they found traces of arsenic in the boys body when they exhumed him but arsenic is in the ground, and it was proved that the home where he was living with his stepmother had arsenic in the wallpaper.
Her death was horrific she didn't die of hanging she suffocated as the execution was done very poorly and she took a long time to die, as she was being suffocated not having her neck broken. We know nothing of it really just supposition, and i think now it would be great to have a follow up of the case.
the series must be good because it made me want to know more about the whys and wheres of it all i thought the acting was brilliant either way Mary Anne cotton was a very troubled young women but i am not convinced she was a monster.
I was left wanting more. There was no EVIDENCE of her killing anyone, arsenic was used everywhere in victorian times even on wallpaper and yes CLEANING they used it in soft soap quite regularly most households used it. I have read more about her, and when the police checked her home where the child had died, they found nothing which would have had arsanic in it, just medicine bottles with the childs name on them, as he was being treated for an illness, yet some of these bottles were empty, and some had gone missing.
Part of the evidence was it was said that Mary ann cotton had given the boy a severe beating a few days before his death, yet on the coroners first report they mentioned nothing about bruises or any beating, in actual fact they found no real reason why he died. Surely if he had been given arsenic he would have had traces of massive fit.
I really think that they should commission another series now about the evidence and other issues surrounding this women. I am not convinced she was a serial killer after my research. Out of 100 children born 50 would be dead in a few months, a very high mortality rate, her mother clearly died of hepatitis and when would she have gotten time to go off and buy arsenic to kill her with and wouldn't there have been a trace of it in a teapot or did she walk around with her killing teapot. Her friend died, did she kill her or did she succumb to the same illness her sister in law had?
No i am not convinced. I think the series was written well but I feel it could have gone further much further. I am not saying she didn't kill anyone but i am not sure she was the killer they were making her out to be.
She had lived quite happy in cornwall OK it is said some of her children died there but then so did many children die as the chances were very very high for death.
Yes i enjoyed it and it did make me want to know more, all the evidence and transcripts were purely heresay. No real evidence was found if it was now i think the case would have been thrown out. Yes they found traces of arsenic in the boys body when they exhumed him but arsenic is in the ground, and it was proved that the home where he was living with his stepmother had arsenic in the wallpaper.
Her death was horrific she didn't die of hanging she suffocated as the execution was done very poorly and she took a long time to die, as she was being suffocated not having her neck broken. We know nothing of it really just supposition, and i think now it would be great to have a follow up of the case.
the series must be good because it made me want to know more about the whys and wheres of it all i thought the acting was brilliant either way Mary Anne cotton was a very troubled young women but i am not convinced she was a monster.