Melissa Huckaby Is A Suspect in Two Southern California Arsons

[airportwoman]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090418/ap_on_re_us/girl_in_suitcase

I could certainly see why, but as any criminologist will tell you, nothing is impossible when it comes to human depravity.

Yes, I am very aware that Melissa Huckaby hasn't been convicted yet.

[Tracian]

Here is another case regarding the twisted acts of a woman...quite similar:

Latasha Pulliam
Illinois In 1991, Pulliam and her boyfriend sexually assaulted, tortured and strangled her neighbors 6-year-old daughter in Chicago. Pulliam confessed to shutting the girl in a closet until she suffocated, and then hiding the body in a garbage can.

http://shutdeathrow.20m.com/photo2.html

[airportwoman]

Actually, what criminologists say is, criminal behavior is quite predictable and follows very clear patterns. That's why the FBI is so good at profiling the type of criminals to look for, when crime evidence comes in. If the nature of the crime and the evidence completely surprised you, take another very open minded look. You're probably wrong.

Or anyway, that's why my criminology professor said. ;D

But around the time we think we have it all figured out, someone's going to come along and blow everything out of the water.

Aileen Wuornos is one who comes to mind.

[airportwoman]

Here is another case regarding the twisted acts of a woman...quite similar:

Latasha Pulliam
Illinois In 1991, Pulliam and her boyfriend sexually assaulted, tortured and strangled her neighbors 6-year-old daughter in Chicago. Pulliam confessed to shutting the girl in a closet until she suffocated, and then hiding the body in a garbage can.

http://shutdeathrow.20m.com/photo2.html

Thing is, in this case a man was also involved.

In the Cantu case, it appears that a woman acted alone and that's what is so unusual about it.

[Tracian]

That crime isn't the same, tracian, at all. In fact, there are MANY crimes where women participate in sexual perverseness/torture to please their men. Mothers will even offer up their young daughters to lovers, or past abusers.

Demonic, I know. But not the same at all - as a woman doing this for her own pleasure and acting alone.

Do you notice how many people are willing to believe Melissa did this but insist she had a male accomplice? It's because that's believable, and not uncommon.


I didn't say the 'same' I said similar, and if you research this 'person' *using that term loosely* you will find that she has sexually assaulted children in the past on her own.

[Martek]

Actually, what criminologists say is, criminal behavior is quite predictable and follows very clear patterns

Yes, but "rare" (as this crime's been called) does not equal "didn't happen".

While "the jury is still out" on this case, one should not blind themselves of the possibility that a "rare" crime did occur simply because it is rare and does not follow the usual "profiles".

Martek

[Martek]

Martek, the jury isn't "out" on this one.

The jury has not been seated, and the evidence has not been made public. There is no evidence in this crime that has been heard by the public.

Give me a break, will ya? It's obvious I was using a "figure of speech".

Sheesh

[AmndaRcknwth]

Maybe because you seem to be dreaming, Rachel.

No ofense to you, but I'd rather defend something, anything except a child rapist.

Male OR female.

[baywench]

But around the time we think we have it all figured out, someone's going to come along and blow everything out of the water.

Aileen Wuornos is one who comes to mind.

Or the D.C. snipers. Profiling is a curve "an average" at best. I have no trouble believing she did this and did it alone, and that she is not insane. Depravity is so hard to understand but it doesn't mean it won't happen. The scariest thing to me is knowing there are other human beings with no soul, no emotion, no guilt. How do you deal with this people? jmo

[dulcinea]

I am curious to know if there are any hard statistics on how often a profile is "accurate" and just how "accurate" it is. The only time I ever hear profiling mentioned is when the profile created fit the case pretty well. How often is a profile created and does not reflect the perpetrator at all? If profiling is indeed so accurate, why is it not used more frequently? It seems to me that if it is so accurate, it would aid in identifying possible suspects in cases that go cold.

[taylor63]

Martek, the jury isn't "out" on this one.

The jury has not been seated, and the evidence has not been made public. There is no evidence in this crime that has been heard by the public.

I do understand that many people believe that if LE says it, it MUST be true. If a DA charges it, it must be true.

That's just simply not the case. At all. No one from the public has any idea, whatsoever, what evidence LE has. We do know with a great degree of certainty that Melissa is responsible for Sandra's death, and that's all we know.

My heart is very heavy with current cases in Texas where the Innocence Project has - against the will of LE and with great difficulty from the system - proven convicted criminals are innocent.

DA's usually have their hearts in the right place, but they are often completely wrong.

Why isn't everyone else hoping they're wrong? Why are people being so ugly to me for hoping Sandra wasn't tortured? Why am I receiving these nasty messages for even suggesting - and hoping - that Sandra wasn't in fact tortured?

I also hope and pray this little girl didn't suffer and wasn't tortured before she was killed. In fact,I hope that the killer is right and that this was a tragic accident, and that Sandra didn't really even know what happened before she passed. Although sadly I doubt that is the case at least from the evidence I have heard so far.

[aproudmom]

I'm out of this thread.

Prayers that sweet Sandra is at peace with the Angels, and prayers that her family can heal and somehow move forward after losing this dear child.

I know according to many I seem to be dreaming, but I'll check back in this thread during the trial. I'm a huge believer in innocent until proven guilty, and then keep an open mind. Because the public is so often wrong.


That may be awhile RR..:biggrin:don't go anywhere you have the right to your opinion even if a lot of use disagree

[n/t]

Yes, women do rape girls.

Here is one case...

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/06/27/poundstone.arrest/

and another...

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051028/NEWS02/510280410


and more.....


http://eau.regale.free.fr/article_052.html

[bonniez45]

I think maybe why so many are having trouble with the rape is because there looking at it that she received some kind of sexual satisfaction from it but, in my opinion I believe it had nothing to do with that and the act itself relates to something else and I do believe it was premeditated in some way because of the other child that was drugged and she went with children she knew because they were easier for her to get at. I also believe she knows why she wanted to do this evan if it is not normal. It just seems to me that it is some kind of reaction to something real or made up in her mind.

[trucrime]

That's just simply not the case. At all. No one from the public has any idea, whatsoever, what evidence LE has. We do know with a great degree of certainty that Melissa is responsible for Sandra's death, and that's all we know.


RR - Im not trying to pick on you here. You should come back to state your opinion too, everyone is entitled to that and I hope you know I along with most people on the board respect that.

BUT... we do have at least some small iotas of evidence LE has...
1 - the suitcase Sandra was found in belonged to Melissa's
2 - Melissa found a note, but now its being alleged she wrote the note to herself
3 - Melissa was in the hospital after Sandra went missing but before she was arrested, its being alleged she swallowed blades but family members saying something else
4 - Melissa consented to a long media interview, inconsistencies within helped LE get more evidence against her

granted we dont know everything else, what more LE may or may not have. But we do know some stuff, so to imply there's no evidence out to the public simply isnt true. Sure it hasnt been heard by a jury yet but Im not sure if that's what you meant?
JMO.

[Details]

Defending the truth, rather than fantasies - whether light or dark - is always worth it. If there's evidence of torture, that's worth looking at - but so is the hopeful possibility that she was not tortured. Nor is this an absurd possibility - we've got nothing to say she was, no history nor indication from the (OK, "alleged") killer that she tortured her. We've got evidence reportedly of sexual abuse - doesn't mean this cannot be an accident, and not torture - for example, the case where the molester used a drug to knock the child out, and it was too much.

Using loaded terms, like "defending a child rapist" to another poster - that's really wrong. To accuse someone of that, even by implication, is just the worst thing I can think of.

[AmndaRcknwth]

Rape IS torture.

Especially RAPE IS TORTURE when it is committed on a child.

It would cause ripping and bleeding. If the foreign object was sharp, well you get the idea.

After 10 days decomposing in a filthy "pond" there would have to be OBVIOUS indications of rape with a foreign object.

Defending the truth is not what this is about, it is getting to the truth.

Raping a child is almost? the worst thing I can think of.
The charges for that are not something someone dreamed up to make the news, fgs. It would be a fact.

The only question now is 'did Melissa do it alone' (which they believe she did) not the question of 'was it done'.

[Details]

That's all theories, and it is not "defending a child rapist" to consider the alternatives. Forensics are quite advanced, and the damage doesn't have to be the type of enourmous thing you are thinking of to be seen. And the idea that the 'foreign object' must be some sharp ripping implement - it's just a theory. Child rape does not always mean intercourse - particularly when we are talking about a female offender.

You're thinking of the worst - and while that may be true, many more mild options may also be true. It's not "defending a child rapist" to think of those possibilities, to prefer not to believe the worst until there is some evidence to say it happened.

[Lovethechild]

Thanks for the link. This chick is crazy...to say the least.:cursing:

[Lovethechild]

Not to mention dangerous and demonic.

:scared:


OMG, ITA!:cursing:

[kitty1182]

There is no telling what we are going to learn about this woman..:mad:

[aproudmom]

What is next fgs this girl..

[LisaM22]

so she raped and killed this child? and has many other things she may be guilty of? did she have a boyfriend that was involved too? or was this all on her own? you would not of been able to tell what kinda person she is by looking at her, it is usually criminal looking people that are rejected by society that do these kinda things

[KittyMom]

I have a sinking feeling this is the tip of the iceberg with this one. How scary that she hid this for so long.

[Details]

If a TV drama (Lie to me) can be believed (and writers do generally try to get their facts right), arson is often a crime committed by people who go on to become rapists. Similar needs and goals or some such - the feeling of power or some such. So - IF she did the arson, it fits into that pattern quite well.

[dulcinea]

What angers me the most is that this woman allegedly drugged a 7 year old girl a couple of months ago but nothing could be proven so no charges were filed. Perhaps of something had been done at that time, Sandra would still be here. (I read the article on CNN this morning but cannot find it now. I apologize for the lack of a link. Maybe there is one in the links thread?)

[dulcinea]

http://www.fox40.com/pages/landing_sandra_cantu/?Sandra-Cantu-Killer-Now-Tied-To-Girl-Dru=1&blockID=271080&feedID=2674

This is not the same article I read earlier, but it is similar. Tells about the drugging of the 7 year old girl in January.

[Adalena935]

I think arson certainly shows a disturbed mind. I agree with the above posters who say no telling what other crimes by this woman will come to light before this case is over with.

[carlybarly]

I haven't followed this as closely as some of you, but for some reason although I was shocked when I first heard it was a woman that did this, I cannot say I'm skeptical about it. Unfortunately woman can be just as bad, if not worse, than some men. My heart breaks to know that this poor little girl knew and likely trusted this woman and a part of me wonders, was this the first time?

I don't believe a man was involved, I don't know why I don't, but women molest and harm children too. Alot of times they are just more adept at hiding it cause who really suspects a woman of molestation or rape?

[openthebox]

Having been molested by females I have no trouble believing that women can be the lead perps in these cases. To add sick on top of sick, it took decades and many more victims, before anybody with authority would actually listen to us YELLING that it was females doing the deeds.
Wonder how many cold cases would be solved if society would accept that women can do this quite well on their own.

[lunchlady]

A female firebug? I don't think I've heard of that before, but of course MH is unusual in many ways it seems. To be committing arson with your kid in the house is really bizarre, but it also provides an excuse or alibi. "What mother of a small child would set a fire in her own building?" A crazy one, that's who.

Young male firebugs are usually cruel to animals too. Wonder if this is generally true for female firebugs or if they have other features, like the petty theft.

[FrankieBones1]

Yes, but "rare" (as this crime's been called) does not equal "didn't happen".

While "the jury is still out" on this case, one should not blind themselves of the possibility that a "rare" crime did occur simply because it is rare and does not follow the usual "profiles".

Martek

Great post, Martek. I believe most of us know that it was a figure of speech.

[Lovethechild]

Just throwing this out there but, Could she have been destroying evidence? :huh:Maybe set it out of anger? My vote is still "for getting attention".

[baywench]

Just throwing this out there but, Could she have been destroying evidence? :huh:Maybe set it out of anger? My vote is still "for getting attention".

I agree. I don't if there is a specific disorder but she seems to need attention. I think she is a sick puppy in many other ways also, but that's only reason I can think of that she herself injected her way into the case. jmo

[Firefly]

Martek, the jury isn't "out" on this one.

The jury has not been seated, and the evidence has not been made public. There is no evidence in this crime that has been heard by the public.

I do understand that many people believe that if LE says it, it MUST be true. If a DA charges it, it must be true.

That's just simply not the case. At all. No one from the public has any idea, whatsoever, what evidence LE has. We do know with a great degree of certainty that Melissa is responsible for Sandra's death, and that's all we know.

My heart is very heavy with current cases in Texas where the Innocence Project has - against the will of LE and with great difficulty from the system - proven convicted criminals are innocent.

DA's usually have their hearts in the right place, but they are often completely wrong.

Why isn't everyone else hoping they're wrong? Why are people being so ugly to me for hoping Sandra wasn't tortured? Why am I receiving these nasty messages for even suggesting - and hoping - that Sandra wasn't in fact tortured?

I actually agree with you. So I'll give you the thumbs up. :thumbup: I had predicted both a church involved and an arrest of a person with a child (and for that matter a brick building with a shed) on another board before those two events occured. So if psychic impressions mean anything to you, the message I keep getting is "No assault". Murder yes. But no assault.

Nice arguing. :biggrin: