Ok, I am a bit confused. Klara Mauerova, 31, is a member of a cannibal cult in teh Czech Republic who ortured her son in a locked cellar while relatives skinned him and forced him to eat his own flesh. The sentence: nine years. That is less than a tax evasion sentence.
Her sister Katerina, 35, was given ten years for her role in the sickening abuse. The court gave these light sentences despite testimony from the sons that their mother and relatives had stubbed cigarettes out on their bare skin, whipped them with belts, and tried to drown them. There was also sexual abuse and mutilation evidence.
This is simply an appalling sentence given the horrible severity of the crimes. Even with lower sentences in other countries, this is simply baffling.
For the full story, click here.
10 thoughts on “Cannibal Mother Who Skinned Son and Forced Him to Eat His Own Flesh is Given Nine Years”
Talk about a miscarriage of justice! This is so outrageous that I can barely type this! They should be given death, by slow torture! And that would even be too good for them! Evil, vile, sub humans!
thats so far out,its out of this world. robert
Another version of ‘when children get stuck in the wrong families.’ Can someone explain what family values mean again? 🙁
That’s so inequitable, unjust and inhuman, I am left speechless.
that is, seen the boy on the baby monitor.
I wondered too if the judges were members or were otherwise influenced by this group, possibly by fear. Secrecy is a huge advantage to these groups. If a neighbor had not seen the somehow on a baby monitor, this may never have come out. More details are given in the Prague Post.
“…One of the case’s most curious characters was the child “Anna” who, following her escape from the childcare facility, was found to be the 33-year-old defendant Škrlová, impersonating a child. Škrlová was detained in Norway in January 2007, where she had been posing as a boy named Adam.
Now, Ondřej and Jakub’s mother, Klára, sat hunched in a defendant’s chair, wearing a light summer outfit and staring at the floor. Their aunt Kateřina sat with a thick file on her lap, taking notes and regularly consulting with her lawyer.
The proceedings were officiated by the presiding judge, Göth, who, along with two associate judges, made up the judiciary senate. Without a jury, the verdict is decided by the judiciary senate, and the July 23 testimonies included some unnerving stories to inform that decision.
First to take the stand was Brno Deputy Mayor Anna Böhmová, who had inspected the Paprsek youth center in February 2004, where defendants Kateřina and Hana worked. During that visit, the defendants asked that Böhmová not open a particular door. But Böhmová did so anyway, long enough to catch a glimpse of a dim room with a figure lying on a mattress.
The Böhmová testimony was followed by that of teacher Zdenka Hájková, who had given Ondřej his home-schooling progress exam for the 2006–07 school year. She testified that the boy appeared alarmingly sick. But, instead of questioning his condition, she sent him home to rest.
Listening to such statements, it was hard to resist the thought that, if either woman had alerted authorities to their observations, the events the rest of the day’s witnesses recounted might have been avoided.
Next to take the stand was Brno police officer Miroslav Gregor, who had entered the Mauerová home to search for the boy seen on the neighbor’s baby monitor. His testimony described a “wild girl” in the living room, and Klára and Kateřina’s desperate attempts to keep him from opening the closet door behind which Ondřej was kept.
When the next witness, fireman Petr Hanák, described breaking through that door and freeing Ondřej, his statements about the smell of vomit and excrement inside elicited a wave of murmurs and uncomfortable seat-shifting from spectators. Klára sobbed quietly to herself.
Jakub and Ondřej’s abuse is believed to have been organized by a Brno splinter sect of a religious following called the Grail Movement. The sect — of which all the defendants except Klára are members — had been cut off by Grail Movement officials. But its local leader, Josef Skrla, continued his own following, which included the next witness, Tomáš Herfort.
The testimony of Herfort, who had left the group years earlier, focused on sect mentality, in which life revolved around pleasing Škrla with spiritual devotion and manual labor. If Herfort were to leave the group, he believed that his life would “collapse” into evil.
The testimony was of particular interest to Klára, whose defense maintains that she was manipulated by sect members to abuse her boys. While Klára brightened at Herfort’s statements, her mood changed abruptly when the final witness of the morning took the stand.
Jiří Hlaváček was a Mauerová family friend, who testified that, in fall 2005, he’d received a call from Klára, who asked if he could drive her to pick up Anna. Despite sensing a bad situation, he agreed, and drove while Klára took directions from Kateřina on the phone. They eventually found Anna in a wooded area with bound wrists and a bag over her head.
On the return trip, Hlaváček said he wanted to call the police, but Klára begged him not to, saying that such interference would endanger Anna…..”
Hey, in Amerika if she had killed him and eaten him, she would have gotten less time because, after all, she had just suffered the loss of a child.
Inexplicably light sentences. Were the people who decided the sentences also members of this Grail Movement cult?
I bet she’ll regain custody of these kids after she serves her term. Some legal systems never consider what the victim wants. It’s as if they have a guide to go by. If you commit a certain crime, this is how much time you get, regardless of the circumstances.
There was a woman in our town who drowned her 2 yr old daughter and left her body in the tub for a week. Then, once discovered by another family member, she cried to the police that the devil made her do it. She got 3 years, 1 yr suspended (is that the correct term?) for time already served. She got out after 1 1/2 yrs because of Indiana’s good behavior law. She also regained custody of her three other children. WTF?
I don’t understand this sentence either. I would think that these persons would be at least sentenced for 20 or 30 years with counseling and psychiatric treatment required. Very strange set of facts and a strange result.
Comments are closed.