Hiding Crimes and Confronting Clergy

Hi listeners, it's Vanessa. Before we get into today's episode, I want to tell you about another show I think you'll love Hidden History with Dr. Harini Bot. Every Monday, Dr. Bot goes where history gets mysterious, vanished civilizations, doomsday prophecies, paranormal phenomena, and events that science still can't fully explain Dctor Bott treats these moments like open case files, not myths, not superstition, just incomplete explanations, waiting for a closer look. Hidden history drops every Monday. Follow now on Apple podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen, so you never miss a mystery This is Cime House What kinds of things would you do if you knew you'd never get caught? Would you rob a bank? Steal precious gems from a museum or maybe even sneak into a top secret government building For most people, our riskiest fantasies are all about making our own lives better, or doing something that's once in a lifetime But for Elizabeth Bathory, she reportedly used her complete power and impunity to satiate her thirst for blood Elizabeth had it all, powerower, wealth, and status And if the stories are to be believed, she used it to do the one thing in the world she enjoyed most Massacring innocent young girls The human mind is powerful. It shapes how we think, feel, love, and hate, but sometimes it drives people to commit the unthinkable. This is Serial Killers and Murderous Minds, a crrime House original. I'm Vanessa Richardson. And I'm forensic psychologist doctor Tistan Inngels. Every Monday and Thursday, we uncover the darkest Minds in history, analyzing what makes a killer Crime House is madeade possible by you. Please rate, review, and follow sererial killers and Murderous Minds To enhance your listening experience with add free early access to each two part series and bonus content, subscribe to Crime House Pus on Apple Podcasts And today, Vanessa and I are thrilled to welcome Dr. Harrini Bott, the host of Hidden History, the debut show from Pave's new history studio, Reewind. Thanks you too, so glad to be here. We are so happy you could join us. Every week on Hidden History, Harrini takes a deep dive into some of history's most enduring mysteries Dfied explanation back then and today We're talking deadly dancing plagues, unsolved murders straight out of Game of Thrones, ghost ships drifting through the Atlantic Ocean and so much more. You can check out new episodes every Monday on Apple podcasts or Spotify, and on YouTube at Hidden History Pod Follow and subscribe so you don't miss a moment. Yes, I cannot recommend it enough and I am thrilled to welcome another doctor to the Pay family. For the next two episodes, Harini will introduce this week's topic Then be sure to stick around at the end of partart two for an extended sit down as I talk to her about all things hidd in history along with a special preview Thanks so much to both of you. I'm especially excited to join you two for these episodes because they feel like they'd be right at home on Hidden History too where the truth gets mixed in with a bit of the supernatural, leaving us to question the real story. Before we get started, be advised that this episode contains discussion of murder torture and violence to women and children. So please listen with care Today, Vanessa and doctor Engels begin their deep dive into the life of Countess Elizabeth Bathory, better known as the Blood Countess. In sixteenth and seventeenth century Hungary, Elizabeth had everything land, power, and riches But she also hid a dark secret. thirst for blood left hundreds dead, making Elizabeth one of the most prolific serial killers ever. As Vanessa goes through the story, Dr. Engels will be talking about things like how growing up with extreme privilege and wealth can influence a killer's bloodlust How living among the violence of war can desensitize them to violence how some killers love of dark magic. fuels their sense of murder as a means to an end And as always, they'll be asking the question, what makes a killer From the day she was born, Elizabeth Bathory was unlike anyone else in the world. While much of what we know about her is up for debate today, the most widely accepted details of her life paint a picture of wealth, intrigue, and bloodshed And it all started with the life she inherited Elizabeth was born into nobility on august seventh, fifteen sixty in the Kingdom of Hungary Her family was one of the oldest and most established in the country, full of princes and cardinals Her uncle, Stephen Bathory, later went on to become the king of Poland Needless to say, the Bathereies were steeped in power and influence, and with that came a lot of privilege for Elizabeth. She had wealth, grand estates, and access to education, which was rare for girls at the time Her governnesses taught her multiple languages and everything else she'd need to know in order to run a castle of her own one day Even though her governesses educated her, they were also at her beck and call. There was nothing she couldn't have. Whatever Elizabeth wanted, she got Growing up with that level of wealth and status can shape a child's development, especially in sixteenth century, Hungary, where class differences are so visible If a child is consistently given what they want and the people around them exist primarily to meet their needs, that can foster entitlement. Everyone and everything is organizing around her and for her rather than teaching her how to function on her own within her environment. And from a behavioral standpoint, if every time she wants or demands something, she gets it, that's rewarding her behavior. That's rewarding the demand. And that's operate conditioning So for Elizabeth, that reinforcement is also built into her entire social structure. The people around her are expected to comply with her demands. But also there's a social hierarchy that she's operating in Everyone has to defer, obey, or serve her because of her nobility, and that alone can impact how she understands relationships This can cause her to eventually dehumanize anyone who is not at or above her social class. That doesn't mean this outcome is inevitable for anyone in her position. But in an environment like that with few boundaries or accountability, there is a greater risk of developing that entitlement or superiority or grandiosity in a more functional rather than emotional way of relating to other people In general, nowadays, are there any known psychological differences between people who are extremely wealthy and those who are not? And is wealth associated with a lesser capacity for empathy? There actually has been a lot of research on this, but I want to preface by saying that there are a lot of variables to consider. So for example, the extent of someone's wealth is one variable and whether they were born into that wealth or if they acquired it later in life. And I say that because I don't want to oversimplify this answer by any means And that said, some studies have found that on average, people with more wealth or higher social status can be less attuned to others' emotions. This is less about the person and more about the environment. When you don't have to depend on others for emotional support prical help or even information because many of those needs can be met independently or through paid services, for example You don't have to attend to people in the same way as those who have less means than you. So even when those needs that you have are being met through other people like service workers, those relationships are transactional. There isn't the same need to consistently check on someone else's emotions or their perspectives even or their wellbeing for that relationship to function. it's a paid service So in that sense, you can see how that applies to Elizabeth, especially in her environment Elizabeth may have had it all, but there was also a dark side to her charmed life In the fifteen sixties, Hungary was steeped in chaos. The country was ravaged by war, torn between the Ottoman Empire and the Habsburg dynasty. Famine and plague were rampant, and so was extreme violence As a result of all the conflict, public torture and executions became commonplace. In fact, a lot of the time they were used as entertainment, and the Bathory family had a long line of fierce warriors who saw violence as a means to an end By the time Elizabeth was born, the Bathereies had been ruling over the local peasantry for centuries kept their power by instilling fear, even if that meant enacting gruesome violence According to some records, Elizabeth's uncle once captured a rebel peasant, burned him alive, and forced his men to eat his flesh. As a noble girl, Elizabeth didn't have to witness these brutal acts of war, but her family made sure that she did because they brought the violence to their own doorstep Elizabeth grew up in a castle known as Eschade. It was part of a palatial estate completely walled off and staffed by a legion of servants, butlers, and handmaidens For those who lived inside the walls, it was a lavish fortress. but on the outside, commoners referred to ahade as a house of horrors Rumors abounded as to the atrocities that occurred there, and from the time she was just five years old, Elizabeth allegedly witnessed decapitations, hangings, and public floggings. When the same people who are meant to protect you are also causing harm It can blur the line between care and violence or loyalty and fear. This is where we start to see the cycle of violence, which is something I routinely taught in a group setting to incarcerated adults Childhood exposure to violence, even if it's just witnessed or talked about by trusted adults, can cause them to internalize violence as a way of relating to others Children aren't inherently violent, but they can become that way when it's been modeled, reinforced, and normalized they can become desensitized to it as well. And importantly, it can impact empathy because they're learning in an environment where survival may require them as children, to suppress their empathy or to align with the adults who hold the power when they have very little power of their own What is the risk of a child becoming more prone to violence themselves if they witness so much of it, especially such gruesome and torturous violence There is an increased risk. and one of the clearest ways we understand this is through Albert Bandura's work on social learning theory Bandura discovered that children learn by observing others, especially authority figures. In his Bobo doll experiment, children watch an adult behave aggressively toward the doll They watched them hit it, kick it, and even use objects to attack it When the children were later given access to the same doll, many of them didn't just imitate the same aggression, they replicated it in very similar ways even repeating the same exact actions and phrases that they just watch the adults do So the established research has shown that violence that is observed, modeled and reinforced can lead to the desensitization I talked about and the normalization of violence, which ultimately increases their risk of aggression That is not a causation, though There's many children that have been exposed to violence even repeatedly in their own environments, whether it's their micro or macro environments, but they do not go on to commit acts of violence themselves And that's because there are protective factors in their lives that include at least one stable and supportive relationship, emotional regulation skills that were introduced or coping strategies that help them build resiliency and perspective. Elizabeth learned early on that other people, especially those with less status, could and should be used as playthinginks And even when extreme violence wasn't involved, her family took pleasure in others' pain Apparently, Elizabeth's own brother was a sex fiend who would run around town naked and drunk. Finding women to harass and abuse And then there was Elizabeth's aunt, Clara, who proved to be quite the influence on her Clara was bisexual, and as Elizabeth got a little older, her aunt reportedly brought her to orgies and showed her how to make love to women Not only that, but Clara had a taste for violence herself. It's rumored that she killed two of her four husbands. If that's true, then Clara likely taught Elizabeth that taking someone's life was okay, not just for the sake of the kingdom, but for personal pleasure and gain She was also heavily involved in occult practices and introduced Elizabeth to all sorts of people fluent in dark magic Elizabeth learned all about the use of herbal remedies and alchemy whenever she needed a pick meu. as well as how to cast spells against enemies So now Elizabeth is being taught to ritualize violence and that gives it power and purpose and that changes the meaning of it Because once behavior becomes part of a ritual or a belief system, it becomes easier to justify or rationalize. And we saw a version of that in our episodes on Adolfo Constanzo His use of ritual and spirituality allowed him and his followers to view violence as necessary for power and protection. And it also introduces secrecy and exclusivity in this case. These practices were often exclusive and not something that everyone had access to. And I can see how that would be especially appealing to Elizabeth because firstly, it's being introduced by a trusted adult, her aunt. but it also fits into a pattern she already knows She's been growing up in a world where status and hierarchy matter, so exclusivity already carries value to her. This becomes another layer of that, and that likely legitimizes this practice even more to her. You mentioned our episodes on Adolpho Constanzso's cult and everything you talked about the psychology behind witchcraft and What else can you tell us that might be relevant to Elizabeth's story also? So when people practice witchcraft, do they tend to believe that everything that happens is the will of a higher power? And if so, how does that affect the brain mechanisms behind personal accountability, shame and regret, etcetera It's important, you know For me to be clear here because modern witchcraft and related practices are very diverse But many emphasize intention or personal responsibility and certainly the consequences of their actions. And what we're talking about here is when a belief system is shaped in a way that justifies their harm. Aolpho may or may not have genuinely believed in a higher power, that's up for debate But what's more important is that he needed the others to believe in that higher power because it gave him control over them It was what kept them aligned with him. And without that, everything he had built, his entire identity would collapse, and he would not be able to justify killing innocent people, which was something that he secretly loved to do Elizabeth doesn't need a supernatural force though. She doesn't need that to get people to believe in her or align with her. She has inherited authority and people are obligated to that already So for her, I think the interest is purely in the fact that the practices that she was being introduced to by her aunt were something that justified and normalized violence but it also exposed her to other ideas that made her feel more in control and more powerful Elizabeth learns through observing other people, as we all do, but at some point, critical thinking kicks in and we use our own rational thought, judgment, and reasoning to question, challenge, and form independent opinions about what we've been taught to believe. I have yet to see an example of her doing any of those things So I think for her at the core, or at least at the core for both of them, really, these beliefs legitimized and supported what they wanted to do And we will see a lot more of this with Elizabeth in episode two Through a modern lens, many reports say Elizabeth loved the darkness that surrounded her According to one story, she witnessed an accused criminal be seown into the stomach of a dying horse and left there to die Wed the entire gruesome process without batting an eye. and when it was done She laughed At the same time, Elizabeth was often unhappy. She struggled a lot with her physical and mental health. Not only was she prone to serious migraines and seizures, but she was known to fly into fits of rage In the sixteenth century, there weren't treatments for these things the way there are today, so Elizabeth simply lived with them. If anything, she drew from her inexplicable rage Because once Elizabeth was old enough to gain some power of her own, she was able to turn her most nightmarish fantasies into reality. In sixteenth century Hungary, Elizabeth Bathory was a noblewoman with a unique reputation. Her family was known for being some of the most violent rulers in the war torn country, and they didn't just kill in battle didid it for fun Elizabeth learned from the warriors in her family all about torturous methods of punishment And when she wasn't watching someone being flogged or decapitated, her aunt Clara taught her how to inject a little violence into her everyday life Clara had taught Elizabeth a lot of things, everything from having sex with other women to how to enlist the help of a forest witch for casting spells And as Elizabeth approached marrying age, Clara was said to have taught her a key aspect of running her own castle How to torture her own servants Details of the methods Clara passed down aren't clear, but in fifteen seventy five, when Elizabeth was just fourteen years old, she started putting them to use That year, Elizabeth was married off to nineteen year old Count Forenz Nadosi and moved into his castle By all accounts, Elizabeth was a dutiful wife, and soon she became a devoted mother She and Forennce had five children, although only three of them survived past childhood For years, the family lived peacefully at the Nadojdi castle, at least so it seemed When Elizabeth was about twenty four years old in fifteen eighty five, some strange things started happening. She'd already learned from her aunt, Clara, how to torture her servants Apparently Berent started taking things to the next level As a nobleman himself, the count was used to all the same violence as Elizabeth. In fact, as an accomplished soldier, he likely enacted his fair share. so once he realized just how harsh Elizabeth could be toward her servants and how much she enjoyed it Forenz seemingly wanted to help make her happy He gifted her a pair of gloves with spikes on them so she could mercilessly batter anyone who made a mistake. And once in a while, Forents would reportedly select a servant girl to strip naked Lather in honey and send outside to be attacked by insects Nadordi Castle was surrounded by swampand. And again, this was the Middle Ages, so these girls didn't just suffer a few mosquito bites, they could die, and Elizabeth watched in pleasure. Both Elizabeth and Feren are coming from environments where violence is already familiar and normalized for them We've already talked about desensitization and how that can happen with repeated exposure to violence, but what stands out here is how that violence becomes relational between them Elizabeth appears to get gratification from control and dominance tied to harming others. and Forenz seems to recognize that. So instead of inhibiting it, he's leaning into it. And that's where the creativity is coming from concept called habituation, where someone's response to a repeated stimulus decreases over time. So applied here, repeated violence can lose its intensity. so more extreme or novel acts are introduced to achieve the same reaction. And when those reactions are positive meaning they're working, they're effective, that reinforces the violence even more. And because Fores is the one to escalate it, it also takes on that relational function. It becomes a form of Very disturbing bonding between them He's aligning with her through shared behavior and shared values, even though those behaviors are very harmful And while that's disturbing, it's not entirely unheard of in dynamics where both individuals are reinforcing each other. And underlying all of this is power They're operating in a system where there are very few, if any, consequences. The people they're harming are socially beneath them What do you make of the shift in the nobles torturing peasants and war enemies? to them torturing their own household staff Well, violence against war enemies can be framed as duty or necessity, and peasants at that time are viewed as lower status and more expendable, which is unfortunate, but it was accurate for that time. They're also not part of the immedia household, like you said, but now there's that shift and that's where that cycle of violence comes in. Because remember, Elizabeth wasn't just exposed to violence throughout her childhood. she was actually guided into it. She was taught annt model to her that harming household staff in particular was acceptable and that it could happen without consequence. That fits directly with what we discussed earlier about that learned behavior and social learning theory. She's being shown who is acceptable to target and how to do it. She's guided into it and once that boundary' crossed, it becomes much easier for that behavior to continue and escalate within the space where she has the most access and the most control, especially now when her own husband is also guiding and reinforcing it as well It's likely that Elizabeth and Forence used their ruthlessness to keep their household members in check. Not only were their servants walking on pins and needles, deathly afraid to make the smallest mistakes But while the couple toyed with their victims, the other staff members had no choice but to watch And say nothing, because if anyone tried to help one of their fellow workers, they'd be tortured next And they weren't just scared into silence. Some of them were even coerced into helping Elizabeth and Forenz brutalize others mainly a local woman named Anna Darvulia, but it seems like she was happy to be part of it Anna had worked for the Nadoshdi family for some time. after Elizabeth married Forencez Anna moved into the castle permanently. that might have been because of how much the two women had in common. Elizabeth's aunt Clara had already taught her the ins and outs of dark Magic, and Anna possessed those same skills and interests Others referred to her as a quote wild beast in female form Anna was known to beat and even strangle other servants who displeased her Eventually, things took a dark but inevitable turn. Anna set up her own torture chamber within the castle, where she showed Elizabeth how to viciously beat someone until they died Beatings were Anna's preferred method of killing. She often delivered up to five hundred blows before the victim's body finally succumbed As a close confidant to the countountess, Anna was allowed and even encouraged torture and kill with Elizabeth and on her own as well So Anna is now being positioned like a tutor, except what she's teaching is brutality. and that connects directly to how Elizabeth has been raised She's grown up in an environment where everything is organized around her. People exist to serve a function in her life rather than her learning how to function alongside others She hasn't had to figure things out on her own. Since she was a child, she has been systematically influenced, educated, and guided by those around her, from staff to family to her husband. It's as if she's become dependent on others to shape her understanding of the world, and that's no excuse for her behavior by any means. It's just an explanation. And Anna fits that pattern The difference now is that Elizabeth has more control over who she allows into that role. She can be selective about who teaches her and what they teach her And that's where the risk comes in because the people who might challenge her or set limits, or introduce accountability are not the ones she's going to let in. The individuals she's choosing and keeping are the ones who reinforce and escalate the behavior she wants. She's creating a very closed system of her own Details of the first murder to take place in the castle are unclear, but once it started, the killings spiraled out of control. And that may have been because certain staff members knew what they had to do to survive Soon, Elizabeth had more than just Anna helping her, She formed a tight inner circle who helped her find, torture, kill, and dispose of her victims This included a young man named John and three women, Pelena, Katerina, and Dorothhea All of these people had other normal duties around the house. Helena was actually the wet nurse to Elizabeth's children But when it came to other children, she wasn't as kind Together with the help of Anna, the group began torturing and killing young girls, some as young as ten years old They often did this while Elizabeth watched for her entertainment Other times they would just provide victims to Elizabeth who would then beat, stab, or otherwise brutalize these children in whatever way she pleased. Many of these girls were from the peasant class and more or less sold to Elizabeth as workers and were completely under her care These children were expected to be polite, submissive, and unquestioning in their loyalty to the Countess and anyone who held a higher station. whichich meant if someone like Helena, the wet nurse, demanded that a young girl come with her to a strange inner room of the castle, The girl had no choice but to obey Oh, this is truly horrible I mean, what stands out here is obviously not just the violence, it's the selectivity Elizabeth isn't just targeting randomly and she never has. Except now she's targeting a group that is structurally powerless, extremely vulnerable. and they're socially conditioned to obey her. and unlikely to be protected or even believed. And when someone has access to absolute power with little risk of consequence like Elizabeth Behavior will follow the path of least resistance. These girls are accessible client and unable to challenge her authority. That makes them the safest targets from her perspective There also seems to be an element of control that's amplified by this dynamic. The more powerless her victims are, the more control she feels Serial killers tend to choose victims that are accessible, vulnerable, and desirable, and this is no different. I'm horrified not only by her behavior, but by the fact that she was a mom. What can you tell us about the psychology involved when someone who has children of their own targets children as victims You know that seems like something that's really hard for anybody who is very pro social to reconcile, but having children doesn't necessarily protect someone from harming other children. But what we often see in cases like that is selective empathy That's care and protection toward their own children, but that doesn't extend to other children, especially if those children are viewed through a different lens, like status or role Also, we don't know how Elizabeth has been treating her own children either That said, in Elizabeth's eyes, these children are seen as servants, not children with their own parents who love them, and that makes it easier for her to override their vulnerability So with that said, that's compartmentalization, where she can exist as a mother in one context and someone who harms children in another without those roles fully like confronting each other And she also lost two of her own children Remember, she's somebody who has never not had everything she wanted So her tolerance for losing something or not getting what she wants is likely very low, if not nonone existent and losts for her can feel like something that should never have happened or something that violates her order, the order that she's come to expect. So if she had any kind of grief over that, it's not the way most people would experience it. It's more like a threat to her sense of entitlement and control. So that said, her interest in violence alone like, I think predates those losses of her children. So it's not the origin, but it could have amplified it Because if loss can happen to her a noble woman who gets everything, then the idea of controlling or taking from others, especially those with less power or social status, can feel more permissible to her or even inevitable. So I think it also gives her permission Elizabeth was correct to assume that her power and class status would allow her to get away with things, especially because at the time, members of the peasant class were legally considered resources for the upper classes, not human beings in their own right. So if peasant children entered Nadojhdi and never came out again, their families just had to accept it Elizabeth knew she had everyone under her thumb, or at least she thought she did But it wouldn't be long before she got overconfident, and her cruelty was exposed Hi, my name is Lloyd Lockridge, and I'm the host of a new podcast from Odyssey called Family Lore In this podcast, I'm going to have people on to tell unusual and sometimes far fetched stories about their families. I've heard my whole life that she invented the margarita. And then we're going to investigate those stories and find out how much of it is true. He gets a patent one month before the Wright brrothers. Oh my God Please follow and listen to Family Lore, an Odyssey podcast available now on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your shows In the early sixteen hundreds, Elizabeth Bathory was a countountess in charge of her own castle And within the walls of her fortress, Elizabeth dominated her own circle of hell She'd married Count Forenz Nadjdi, and together with Elizabeth's close inner circle of household staff members, they regularly tortured and killed young servant girls The rest of Elizabeth's staff knew something terrible was going on. They could hear the sounds of muffled screams, and they would see the occasional bloodstain on the wall of her chambers they weren't in a position to do anything about it. If they tried to say something, they knew they'd be next Even though the other servants couldn't save each other, some of them still found the courage to say something on the outside. Not every servant was confined to the castle. many of them only went there to work their shifts before going home for the night And once they were back on the outskirts of society and outside of earshot They whispered about the true horrors of Nadjdi Castle The more people talked, the more word spread. And soon other nobles and members of the clergy heard all the gruesome tales No one did anything, either because they were just as powerful and bloodthirsty as Elizabeth was or they simply didn't care enough about what was happening to lower class girls I wish this That lack of reaction was surprising, but unfortunately it's something that still happens today When victims are socioeconomically disadvantaged Their cases often carry less urgency They're often seen as less credible, even shamed or blamed for being in quote risky environments And that reduces the pressure to act. And without that, it becomes easier to delay, dismiss, or avoid getting involved And you also have power dynamics at play. Elizabeth holds significant status. Because of that, there can be fear of retaliation, fear of being wrong, or fear of challenging someone who has that kind of influence. That's what creates the hesitation. And in the meantime, gossip like this happens and gossip is often dismissed But in marginalized communities, it can be its own informal warning system It can allow community members to share information or compare experiences and signal risk to each other. We saw something similar in our episodes on the Jeff Davis eightight murders If you haven't listened to those yet, you definitely should. Information about those murders were circulating within the community long before there was any kind of meaningful response And unfortunately, gossip doesn't carry authority and it certainly doesn't carry legitimacy when it comes from marginalized communities. So in the meantime, what you end up with is a gap where people know something is wrong in the community, they're talking about it. they're trying to get some kind of help, and they're trying to protect each other in the meantime But when you don't have the institutional power behind it, then you don't have anything to really facilitate the action It's unclear whether Elizabeth was simply a product of her time or conscientiously taking advantage of her position of power, but she realized she needed to conceal her actions better For years, whenever a servant died, Elizabeth had members of her inner circle bury them somewhere off the castle grounds Sometimes it was near the side of the road, other times, bodies were disposed of in village grain stores Elizabeth seemed to want the bodies brought far away, but she also seemed to realize that if she kept doing that, people would catch on, and they might even revolt So eventually she tried hiding the evidence of her crimes in plain sight One day after one of her servants was killed, Elizabeth decided to pretend that the girl had died from sickness, so she contacted a priest, claimed the girl had died of cholera, and he came to the castle to perform the customary burial rites Typically, the deceased's body would be laid out on a bed for the priest to bless them, but when the priest arrived, the girl's coffin was already sealed shut Elizabeth said she'd done this to prevent the spread of cholera. In reality, the victim had been so badly brutalized she just couldn't allow the priest to see the true state of the body And It worked. The priest believed Elizabeth. After he performed the blessing, the coffin was carried off to be buried in a church cemetery Elizabeth is attempting to manage exposure She understands how the system works. She knows the role of the priest, and she's confident that she can control that interaction without anticipating any kind of pushback or exposure. And by involving him, she's not just hiding the truth, she's shaping the narrative. A priest carries assumed trust and authority in the same way that she does So his involvement adds legitimacy to her version of the events, which can help quiet the rumors that have been circulating. because one word from him That will spread very quickly And I believe Elizabeth is relying on both of their statuses to protect her because that has worked for her all of her life. And she's become so accustomed to that protection that she expects it to continue to work in this case. Elizabeth's plan had gone off without a hitch. She not only found a way to dispose of the body without arousing suspicion, but she'd begun to put the rumors to rest, because clearly, she wasn't afraid to allow clergy members into the castle She was so happy with how well her plan had worked, she wasted no time before doing it again The next time a servant died, Elizabeth called upon the clergy again Just like before, the coffin was nailed shut, but the priest noticed something else that was strange Elizabeth had said that another young girl had died, but the casket was too big for a child pointed this out, Elizabeth made a surprising admission. She said that there were actually two bodies inside the coffin. The priest was alarmed. This completely went against custom. He pulled Elizabeth to the side and quietly asked her why she would allow two bodies to be buried in the same coffin D despite his calm, patient demeanor Elizabeth lashed out She quickly lost her temper and said that the two girls had died one right after the other. She was visibly agitated, and the priest knew better than to keep pressing After all, Elizabeth not only had much more status than him, but she had a reputation for her sudden fits of rage And he knew better than to anger her further In behavioral psychology, there is something called avoidance and escape conditioning Both are forms of negative reinforcement where behavior in someone is shaped to reduce or prevent an unpleasant experience. It applies here, and actually in most relationships Elizabeth has a well known pattern of intense, unpredictable rage like you described. When anyone is repeatedly exposed to reactions like that They begin to naturally adjust their behavior around it Most people subsequently learn either to escape the interaction once it starts, that kind of reaction, or to avoid triggering it altogether because it alleviates that unpleasant experience. So if the act of challenging Elizabeth leads to a volatile response or unpredictable response, then behaviorally speaking Others who hear or see this will learn I'm not going to question her if they want to remain safe and comfortable. So by the time the priest is in that room, he doesn't necessarily need to be explicitly threatened by her. The social cues are already there. He's seeing it. He knows what kind of response is possible, and he knows the safest option is to escape that interaction by not pressing further And in that sense, Elizabeth is shaping behavior psychologically, whether she's consciously aware of it or not. Individuals do use reactions like this intentionally to control others because it can be a tool for manipulation, especially in controlling or coercive relationships Other times, it's less deliberate, and it's more about poor impulse, control, shame, or emotional dysregulation. In Elizabeth's case, we know she suffers from migraines and seizures and that there are some mental health problems that you highlighted earlier on. So for her, I think it's likely a combination of both. But regardless of her intent, the outcome is the same impmacting people. People have learned not to challenge her and it's working for her There was nothing the priest could do except follow Elizabeth's orders. He blessed both girls then had the coffin removed from the castle As he made his way back to the church, he tried to calm his fears by telling himself there must have been a cholera outbreak at the castle But his nagging suspicion wouldn't go away. He decided he had to figure out the truth. so he formed a plan of his own The next time Elizabeth called on the church to bless and bury a body, they told her no they refused to do it unless they could see the body themselves This angered Elizabeth and she refused to do as they wished. Despite her fury, she knew she had to strategize. If anyone could threaten her unchecked power, it was the priests, and they were ono her Before Elizabeth could figure out her next move, a shocking and unexpected event changed the course of her entire life And in order to save herself, Elizabeth Bathy would do something more monstrous than ever before Thanks so much for listening. Come back next time as Dr. Harini Bott joins Dr. Enngls and me for the conclusion of our deep dive into the mind of Elizabeth Bathory you allall then Serial Killers and Murderous Minds is a Crime House original powered by Pave Studios. Here at Crime House, we want to thank each and every one of you for your support. If you like what you heard today, reach out on Instagram at Crime House Don't forget to rate, review, and follow serial killers and murderous minds wherever you get your podcasts. Your feedback truly makes a difference. And to enhance your listening experience, subscribe to Crime House plus on Apple Podcasts. You'll get every episode of Serial Killers and Murderous Minds ad free, along with early access to each thrilling two part series Serial Killers and Murderous Minds is hosted by M Vanessa Richardson, forensic psychologist Dr. Tistan Engls, and today's special guest, Dr. Harini Bott. and is a crime House original powered by Pave Studios. This episode was brought to life by the Serial Killers and Murderous Minds team Max Cutler, Ron Shapiro, Alex Benadon, Lauri Marinelli, Natalie Protzovsky, Alyssa Fox, Sarah Bachelor and Carrie Murphy. Thank you for listening