SAN ANTONIO (July 27) - The scene was so gruesome investigators could barely speak: A 3½-week-old boy lay dismembered in the bedroom of a single-story house, three of his tiny toes chewed off, his face torn away, his head severed and his brains ripped out.

"At this particular scene you could have heard a pin drop," San Antonio Police Chief William McManus said Monday. "No one was speaking. It was about as somber as it could have been."

Officers called to the home early Sunday found the boy's mother, Otty Sanchez, sitting on the couch with a self-inflicted wound to her chest and her throat partially slashed, screaming "I killed my baby! I killed my baby!" police said. She told officers the devil made her do it, police said.

Sanchez, 33, apparently ate the child's brain and some other body parts before stabbing herself, McManus said.
"It's too heinous for me to describe it any further," McManus told reporters.

Sanchez is charged with capital murder in the death of her son, Scott Wesley Buccholtz-Sanchez. She was being treated Monday at a hospital, and was being held on $1 million bail.
The slaying occurred a week after the child's father moved out, McManus said. Otty Sanchez's sister and her sister's two children, ages 5 and 7, were in the house, but none were harmed.


wtf???? i think this crazy woman might actually be more crazy than casey anthony. i just dont get how u can kill your baby, take it apart and eat it after having just grown it inside you for 9 months. that poor baby boy. i hope the mother rots. i am gonna go hug my lil boy now and tell him i love him.

I feel sick.

The woman has schizophrenia and had stopped taking her medication. I'm not saying it justifies matters, but it answers your question on how she could have possibly done it. People with schizophrenia hear and see some crazy shit. She probably truly believed the devil was there and forcing her to do that horrible stuff. It's really sad that this happened. I think the dad who moved out should have taken the baby with him because he knew she was insane, but sitting around saying shoulda coulda woulda is really easy after the fact. I'm sure that entire family is just devastated.

Wow. Human beings (if you can even call her that) never fail to astonish me.

Is someone with a mental illness not a human being?

Well, when referring to someone who has alzheimers, is bipolar, or suffers from dementia... Of course they are. But a person who murders, dismembers, and then eats the brain of their own child... That's a little questionable, in my opinion. Would you call that 'humane' behavior?

No. Of course it's not something anyone would consider 'humane' behavior. But since when is a person defined by ONE behavior? Especially when said behavior is not really a feature of who she is... it is not a feature of her personality, her beliefs, her ethics. It is a feature of her DISEASE.

Unfortunately, that's a very fine line, and this discussion has no real conclusion. I agree with you to an extent, but by the same logic, how can we judge death row inmates by whichever ONE action put them where they are? The person is no less dangerous just because their behavior is caused by a disease. If someone breaks into your house and murders your family, and you later find out that they're a sociopath, would anyone in their right mind say "Ok, let him go then..." Not likely. I know I wouldn't, and not just for my own personal vendetta, either... But because it's a pretty safe bet that it would be someone else's family next time, and I couldn't have that on my conscience

Firstly, it is not the same thing if a sociopath murders someone. Sociopaths have a personality disorder. Personality disorders are not permitted as a defence in court because people with personality disorders know right from wrong (even if, like in the case of sociopaths, they do not feel guilt or remorse), they fully know what they are doing and understand the consequences. They do not experience delusions or hallucinations. Psychosis is very different and people who are experiencing a psychotic episode often feel their thoughts and actions are being controlled by someone else (commonly the devil). They experience delusions (a delusion is a 'false belief' i.e. something that is clearly not real to everyone else) and hallucinations (usually hearing voices). This distorts their understanding of the world around them (for example the woman may have believed that her child was not her child, but was say a demon which had to be killed. Obviously I'm guessing... but that's the sort of thing I'm talking about. Sounds ridiculous to the rest of us... but to someone experiencing that psychotic episode it is SO real that it can't possibly be in their head) and affects their decisions. For that reason, in extreme cases, psychosis CAN be used as a defence.

Secondly, I do not support the death penalty because I don't believe we can judge death on those people (nor can we always be sure they're guilty).

I never once claimed someone was less dangerous because their behavior is caused by a disease. In fact it probably makes them more dangerous. I didn't say this woman isn't dangerous. She clearly is (and it SHOULD have been picked up on by a psychiatrist or social worker or her husband and her children protected from her by those who were mentally in a position to do so). And so, I also never said you should just let people like this go (in fact i don't believe I made any statement at all on my feelings on where she should go. All I did was try and explain WHY she may have done what she did. Making a defence and suggesting a sentence are two totally different things). Right now I think she should go to a secure psychiatric ward. After that it depends on how she responds to treatment and her trial, and the evidence for her actions being a result of her disease (or not).

If I'm not mistaken, aren't they trying to say that this was possibly caused by Post-partum Depression? Her family (and/or doctors) couldn't have possibly picked up on that at any other stage of her life. I fully understand the nature of hallucinations and delusions, don't get me wrong- I'm just looking at the bigger picture. Yes, she (probably) had some sort of hallucination, most likely brought on by a mental illness in one form or another. Yes, that is very unfortunate for her. But a CHILD is now dead, had absolutely no manner of defending himself, and will never have the chance to grow up and experience his life, all because the person who was supposed to be there to protect him had a moment where she 'thought he was the devil' (or whatever the case was).

If she truly is sick, then maybe she doesn't deserve to rot in the bowels of Hell for all eternity, but if there is one thing that can be said for people with mental disorders that cause hallucinations- They aren't usually a one-time thing. You don't hallucinate to the point of murdering another human being (especially your own infant child) and then get over it the next day. And then there is always the other possibility- What if she's not 'sick' at all? What if she is truly just an 'evil' (for lack of a better word) person?

It seems nowadays that people try to label everything in a manner that makes sense to them, even if what they are labeling doesn't fit the category at all. For instance, if someone commits a crime so heinous, and so despicable (I can think of one offhand...) that no one else can wrap their minds around it, they automatically label the offender as 'sick', even when they are not. It seems almost as if we are afraid to admit that there are people out there who just don't care. Not about themselves, or anyone else around them. They just..don't...care.

I don't know if you watch Steve Wilkos or not, but this episode is a perfect example. A clip really does no justice to the absolute indifference of this woman to the torture and murder of her little boy (to which she was an accomplice) but I'm sure you will be able to see what I mean:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAFDRd7LGlM

It's not postnatal depression (or rather postnatal psychosis). She was diagnosed before all of this happened as having schizophrenia, by a psychiatrist. And if a psychiatrist diagnosed her, she WAS schizophrenic. The diagnosis is not one which is made lightly, and having worked with people with schizophrenia myself it is usually quite clear (based on a specific diagnostic criteria) that that is the diagnosis. It is also not easy to fake schizophrenia (as patients with personality disorders who have committed crimes sometimes try and do). A trained psychiatrist would know the difference.

I'm not disputing the fact that a child is dead, nor how awful that is. I'm just not going to say "something terrible has happened therefore the person who did it must be evil", especially not when there's a lot to suggest that she was ill, and not just evil (and based on the description of events we have it is HIGHLY likely that schizophrenia contributed to the outcome... to what degree is a decision for the courts).

I agree, schizophrenia is not a 'one time thing', but we already know that she had been diagnosed as schizophrenic prior to these events. And of course she won't just get over it the next day. However, if she really wasn't taking meds at the time... then it is possible that if she does start to take medication (or is forced to do so), she may become well again. Only then will she really understand what she's done.

The other things to consider is the possibility that she may have stopped taking her schizophrenic medication during her prgenancy because of the risk to her baby. She may have been trying to protect her baby... this easily (especially combined with the hormonal changes during pregnancy and postnatal period) could have caused her to relapse... to the point where she refused to start her medication again after the birth. Of course I don't know if this was the case or not, but it's a real possibility.

As I've said, we're not just labelling her to make this make sense to us... she was diagnosed by a psychiatrist (before she did this)!

I don't have time to watch the clip, but will try and watch later (and I've never heard of Steve Wilkos). Is the woman in it schizophrenic? And was she still psychotic at the time of the interview?

I'm not saying that some people do bad things because they just don't care (and in fact many of those people probably have personality disorders, which is very different), however, in THIS case, based on the information we have, that does not sound to be the case.

I've only read the article here, so I will assume you are correct about her being schizophrenic. The meds help with the illness, yes, but unfortunately the people cant always be trusted to take them, especially if they are primarily caring for themselves. She may have come off the meds to protect her unborn child, but if that's the case, would it be 'politically incorrect' to say that maybe she shouldn't have been having children to begin with? Knowing what harm the medication she NEEDS could potentially cause the baby, as well as what harm SHE could cause if she fails to take them? But I suppose it's 'unethical' to suggest that anyone not be permitted to bear children, even with the potential risks and obvious red flags looming in the distance.

As for the clip... Steve Wilkos was the old body guard for the Jerry Springer show. Don't let that deter you, however, he is rather insightful at times. The woman in the clip is not schizophrenic, but I'm not sure if she was ever diagnosed with any other mental illnesses. She was present in her house over a lengthy timespan while her boyfriend tied up, tortured, and eventually killed her little boy. She never helped her child, never cared... Nothing. Sat and watched TV in the other room, knowing full well what was going on, and hearing her child crying from where he was hung upside-down in the closet. She denied knowing anything about it at first (despite the gouges and burns all over the boy's body), and when Steve asked her how she couldn't notice when she gave her boy a bath, she literally just shrugged- As simply and as calmly as someone would if asked which color they prefer for couch cushions. She never shed a tear or anything. She was so calm, and matter-of-fact about everything that I would go as far as to say she almost looked doped up. I've seen people react with more compassion when a goldfish dies, let alone her own child, and in such a horrible way. To top it all off, when asked if she wishes she could have done anything differently, she (again, very coldly and indifferently) replies "Yeah... I guess maybe I should have helped him." ..... Wow. You have to see the woman's composure to get a genuine feel for how chilling this story really is. She truly is one of those people that just don't care.

The meds help with the illness, yes, but unfortunately the people cant always be trusted to take them

Well, yes. I know that, and you'll see that further down this thread I have tried to explain WHY schizophenics commonly refuse their meds (a lack of insight is a symptom of the disease. They do not believe they are sick).

As for the part about why she would risk having children. Well, we can only speculate. Perhaps her condition had been well controlled for several years and her doctors decided it would probably be safe to stop the meds briefly and monitor closely for a relapse. This sort of decision is one commonly faced because mental health problems are common, but many of the drugs used are harmful to the baby during pregnancy. And some people may be ok for brief periods off meds. But we are of course guessing. I'm just saying it is a possibility.

If this was the case then she probably didn't know what a danger she could be. Her psychosis could have been worse than ever due to a combination of factors, including pregnancy hormones.

Besides that the pregnancy may not have been intentional and accidents happen. And she may not believe in abortion.

I haven't managed to watch the clip but it sounds like that was a very different situation to the one we were discussing here. That woman doesn't sound schizophenic (although she may well have a personality disorder but that would not be an excuse for the crime she committed). I certainly would not have been defending her. This situation we're discussing here is different though.

Oops, I just realised the predictive text on my Blackberry kept writing schizophenic instead of schizophrenic. :P

Who knows? I guess the ultimate bottom line is that it was a horrific tragedy that never should have happened, even if there was no real way to prevent it

Agreed.

You can only imagine how devastated this woman must feel after coming out of psychosis!

I noticed you like House M.D.

Have you ever seen this episode: http://www.housemd-guide.com/season2/222forever.php ?

I'm interested in what you think about that episode, as it's a bit similar to this situation. Does the visual of everything going on make you feel bad at all for the mother on this episode when she finally comes out of her psychotic state and realizes she practically killed her own baby? That episode was actually the first thing I thought of when I heard about this.

It's an extremely sad situation, but I have agree with RedFraggle. This woman was mentally ill, possibly didn't even know what she was doing until it was too late. It's terrible what happened to the baby, but now the baby is pain free, and a mother is left with a lifetime of torture. It's very sad that no one took the time to notice that there was an obvious problem.

(Back to the House episode real quick, I especially like the line where House points out to the dead child's father that had he paid more attention to the mother's obvious problem it could have all been prevented.)

I've seen every episode of House (have every season on DVD), but I dont recall most of them unless I'm actually watching them. I'll watch that one again when I get a chance, but I'm guessing she (the mother) must have been pretty far gone if House made that comment to the father. I'm guessing it wasnt so obvious in this case (at least I would hope not), but I dont know.

I don't think she was much worse than this lady must have been.

ugh so many crazy ass ppl out there

Jon - Kate - 8.

Octomom.

Next TV series: ZombieMom.

When I heard about this on the news, I literally became sick.

http://news.aol.com/article/police-say-woman-kills-baby-eats-brain/588892

Oh my gosh! I agree 100%. I don't get it. Having had a child in me for nine months I can even COMPREHEND how they could even want to kill their baby. This is just horrible.