Mary Bell: She was only 11 years old when the horrific and controversial nightmare took place
Parenthood is a gift. From the time our child is born, we imagine what they will be like at certain junctures in their life. We wonder what they will grow up to be like, because we want them to succeed. I would venture to say that all parents envision our children doing great things when they grow up.
However, a child’s future is shaped by the influences in their life. Unfortunately, some children lose their innocence way too soon. Whether they are the victims of abuse or they experience any other tragedy, they wind up having a different perspective on life. They no longer think that the world is good and they can make it better.
The conscience of children is formed by the influences that surround them; their notions of good and evil are the result of the moral atmosphere they breathe.
Jean Paul
Now, most children who experience tragedy when they are young don’t act out with violence until they become an adult. But then again, there are exceptions to every rule. There are some children who indulge their inner evil at a young age. Some even become deadly.
That happened in the case we are featuring today. Mary Bell murdered her first victim the day before she celebrated her 11th birthday. Then, two short months later, she and a friend murdered and mutilated another young boy from the neighborhood.
You might wonder what caused a prepubescent young girl to commit such horrific acts. Keep reading for the answers.
A Killer Child’s Story Begins
Mary Flora Bell was born on May 26, 1957, in Newcastle Upon Tyne, Northumberland England. Her mother, Elizabeth “Betty” McCrickett, a 16-year-old prostitute, did not want her from the moment she found out she was pregnant. It’s even reported that Betty told the doctors to “Take that thing away from me” as soon as she saw her daughter.
Things only got worse from that point on. Betty often took ”business” trips to Glasgow, and these occasions were the only times Mary had any peace. When her mom was around, Mary was subject to all forms of abuse, both mentally and physically.
Betty’s own sister once had to rescue Mary when she witnessed Betty attempting to give her away to a strange woman who could not adopt a child of her own. There were also other events that Betty claimed occurred because Mary was extremely accident prone for such a young child.
One such occasion was the time Mary seemed to just fall out of a window on her own. Another time Betty claimed Mary got ahold of some sleeping pills and accidentally overdosed on them.
It should be noted that at the time of her fall from the window, Mary incurred prefrontal lobe damage. This type of brain injury could account for her actions later in life.
Critics and experts alike are divided as to Betty’s motivations behind her treatment of Mary. There are those who believe Betty simply detested the burden of having a child, so she tried everything she could to get rid of her. Yet others believe Betty had Munchausen by Proxy, which, according to Very Well Mind, can be defined as:
- A mental health disorder in which a caregiver, usually a mother, routinely makes up fake symptoms or causes real symptoms in a child or adult victim to make it appear that the victim has a true physical or mental health issue.
- In addition to being a disorder, Munchausen by Proxy is also considered a very serious form of child abuse.
- It is classified as a ‘factitious disorder imposed on another’ or FDIA. It represents the belief that this disorder describes a behavioral pattern rather than an underlying psychiatric syndrome.
- Although FDIA is rare, the mortality rate is concerning Between 6–10% of all FDIA cases will result in death, which makes it a very lethal form of abuse.
In other words, Betty longed for and sought the attention and sympathy that Mary’s alleged accidents brought her.
Mary would later tell people that by the time she was 4-years old, Betty was already selling her “services” to clients. However, all these accusations have remained unfounded. There is one thing for certain though: her young life was marred by tragedy and loss. She was a witness to her 5-year-old friend when this child was run over and ultimately killed by a bus.
With all these things happening to her and around her, does it really surprise anyone by the time Mary hit puberty she was what others would label as strange? Not to mention she was also quite withdrawn and extremely manipulative.
Walking along the brink of violence. You might say she was far from “Maybe, maybe not” with her actions. She was more like, “it’s only just a matter of time.”
An Obsession with Death Develops a Pattern of Violence
In the weeks that led up to her committing that first murder, some people noticed Mary acting stranger than usual. For instance, on May 11, 1968, while she was playing with a 3-year-old boy on top of an air raid shelter when he fell, becoming badly injured. His parents and everyone else simply assumed it was a horrible accident.
But the events of the following day had people doubting the complete accident theory. On May 12, three separate mothers came forward, telling authorities Mary sought to choke their daughters. The accusations were enough to have the police talk to her, but in the end, they simply admonished her and let her go. No paperwork or charges were filed and nothing further was done.
Precisely 24 hours prior to her 11th birthday, on May 25, Mary strangled a young boy named Martin Brown to death in an abandoned house in the area. He was only 4-years old. After committing the murder, she left the scene to find her friend Norma Bell, who is of no relation, and bring her back to show her what she had done. When the two girls returned to the scene, they found that two boys who had been playing in another part of the house had discovered the body.
When the police shared up on the scene to investigate, they were mystified. There was absolutely no sign of violence. All they could find was some trace amounts of blood and saliva on his little face. The only thing that really stood out to them was an empty bottle of painkillers laying on the floor in the body’s vicinity.
With no obvious answers or sign to the contrary, they assumed young Martin had gotten ahold of the pills somehow, and not knowing any better, ingested them. They ruled his death an accident.
Then something happened that would cause Martin’s family, especially his mother, to question that theory. According to witnesses, a couple of days after she killed little Martin, Mary went to his house and asked if she could see him. His grieving mother told her gently that Martin had died and could no longer play.
Mary looked at her and stated she knew Martin was dead. She simply wanted to see his lifeless body in the coffin. The distraught woman was so shocked all she could do was slam the door in Mary’s face and sob even harder.
It wasn’t long after that Mary, along with her friend Norma, broke into a nursery school. They vandalized it, leaving handwritten notes lying around that claimed responsibility for the little boy’s death. They also warned that they intended to kill again. Since the notes were crude and childlike, police assumed they were just part of a sick prank.
The nursery school, however, installed an alarm system, because this happened to just be the latest in a string of break-ins. It was this security system that caught Mary and Norma there again a few nights later. When police arrived on the scene, the girls were only loitering outside, so they were just given a warning and let go.
Other than the notes claiming to be the murderer, Mary also bragged to her classmates about what she had done. Yet nobody believed her – until another boy was found dead.
Giving in to the Urge to Kill Again
Two months after she killed little Martin, on July 31, Mary and Norma killed Brian Howe by asphyxiating him. He was only 3-years old. Initially, at the time of the murder, Norma took a sharp object and carved the letter “N” into his torso. They then left him there and went to go play.
But Mary couldn’t leave it at that. As with the case of the first murder and the vandalism the urge to return to the scene came over her. So she went back to his lifeless body and took a pair of scissors with her. When she came upon his body, she took the scissors and mutilated him even more. She changed the “N” to an “M” and then used the scissors to scratch up his thighs and carve up his genitalia.
When we first presented this case and reported about the scissors and mutilation Mary caused, we each had our own idea about what type of scissors they were. Scott assumed she used a pair of poultry shears, which have a long sharp blade and a unique grip. Tammy apparently assumed she used a pair of crafting scissors, similar to the Fiskars brand that is very common. Yet our researchers discovered something that shocked us all. The type of scissors she actually used was some suture scissors.
This type of scissor is used by medical professionals for removing stitches from the body. The only part that is sharp is the tip, which is curved to lift the stitch away from the body before cutting it. The suture scissor is specifically designed not to cause abrasions on the skin.
Discovering this bit of information gave us a different perspective on Mary and the acts she committed. We feel we could finally comprehend the level of evil that she possessed.
When Brian didn’t return home like he was supposed to, his sister went out to look for him. It wasn’t long before Mary and Norma offered to help her. All three girls searched throughout the neighborhood. At one point Mary even indicated they should check around the concrete structure where she knew his little lifeless body lay.
However, Norma was quick to protest, stating he couldn’t possibly be there, so Brian’s sister moved on to search in other areas. It’s as if Mary couldn’t wait for him to be discovered so she could revel in the panic that was sure to spread and the thrill of taking another life.
The neighborhood was in a complete panic once his body was finally discovered not long after. There were two young boys, brutally murdered in just as many months. They knew then Martin’s death was no accident Police began talking with the local children.
Not because they thought one was responsible, they were just hoping one or more could tell them anything that led them to a suspect before they could kill again.
However, when they received the autopsy report from the coroner, they were flabbergasted by the information it contained. Because of his body being exposed to the scorching summer sun, the marks on his torso weren’t visible until his blood cooled down.
It was at that point they discovered the “M” carved into his skin. There was also another alarming fact that could not be ignored. The sheer lack of force displayed in the little boy’s attack left no doubt. Their murderer was another child.
During their interviews with the police, Mary and Norma couldn’t hide their interest in the investigation’s course. Although they were both said to be acting weirdly, Norma seemed more excited whereas Mary came across as evasive. That was even more clear when they indicated she had been seen with him on the day he died.
What’s even more disturbing is Mary was caught skulking around Brian’s house on the day of his funeral. Witnesses say she was seen laughing and rubbing her hands together, like a cartoon villain, once she spotted his little coffin.
Investigators brought her in for a second interview. As she felt them closing in on her being the killer, Mary attempted to deflect the suspicion. She fabricated a story about a local 8-year-old boy being seen with Brian that day. She even said she saw him with a pair of broken scissors. That was when they knew she killed him.
Her biggest mistake was mentioning the scissors. That was the little detail withheld from the press and community. The only people to have knowledge of that fact were the police and the killer.
Both girls finally confessed to everything with further questioning. They each told officers they were only present with the other actually committed the murder. The police promptly arrested them and then their trial dates were set.
The Killer & Her Accomplice Go on Trial
During her trial, the prosecuting attorney stated Mary committed the murders “solely for the pleasure and excitement of killing” while the British press simply referred to her as “evil born” Either way, the jury believed she committed both murders and found her guilty in December 1968.
However, court-appointed psychologists convinced them Mary showed all the classic signs of psychopathy and thus could not be held fully accountable for her evil actions. Despite the guilty verdict, she was only convicted of manslaughter instead of murder. Norma was acquitted because they felt she was the unwilling accomplice of a controlling bad influence.
At the end of the trial and during sentencing, the presiding judge determined Mary was a treacherous person and a major threat to other children around her. He issued a sentence of “At Her Majesty’s Pleasure” — which is a British imprisonment term that has an indefinite time frame.
Essentially, a person who’s sentenced to this will remain incarcerated until the powers of authority deem they are fit to re-enter society.
A Killer is Free & Protected by the Government
Evidently, these determining powers were convinced the treatment she received while she was incarcerated rehabilitated her enough to allow her to be released from prison. Mary was released in 1980 at 23 on a license.
This meant that even though she was no longer in an institution and living in the community, she was essentially serving out her sentence under strict probationary terms. But her story doesn’t end there. The authorities felt she deserved a new chance at life with protection from any sort of media attention, so they provided her with a brand new identity.
Despite all the provisions she was given to conceal her identity, people somehow tracked her down frequently, forcing her to move and change her identity yet again. It got even worse after she had her daughter in 1984. Her daughter was completely unaware of her past until she was 14 years old.
In 1998, a British tabloid tracked down Mary’s common-law husband which led them to her new residence. The press surrounded her house, forcing the family to flee with their heads covered to avoid having any photos taken.
To this day, Mary is in protective custody at an undisclosed location She, along with her daughter, is protected under a court order granting them complete anonymity.
There are certain people who do not feel she should be granted such protection. Martin Brown’s mother said it best, “It’s all about her and how she has to be protected. As victims, we are not given the same rights.” Regardless, she will continue to receive protection from the British government. Not to mention, court orders that grant protection rights to certain convicts today are unofficially called “Mary Bell Orders.”
We Want You to Weigh in on the Issue
We want to leave you with some “food for thought” and let you weigh in on the issue. Please use the comment section below to answer the questions.
- What do you think was Mary Bell let off too easily?
- Do you feel like the punishment truly fits the crime?
- Does the British government have an obligation to protect her identity? Her daughter’s?
- Is it really possible that she has changed? Or is she still doing nefarious things?
Additional References
Brutal Nation. (2021, June 30). Episode 3: Mary Bell. Twisted Blue LLC. https://open.spotify.com/episode/6p3eFNWOm52v59GJbL69tE?si=Rvqw0shPRG29pEs-P2hmPg
Becker, R., True Crime Seven, & Veysey, N. (2019). Mary Flora Bell: The Horrific True Story Behind An Innocent Girl Serial Killer. KDP Print US. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Mary_Flora_Bell/wePdwAEACAAJ?hl=en (Original work published 2019)
Davis, C. A. (2004). Children who Kill: Profiles of Pre-teen and Teenage Killers. Allison & Busby. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Children_who_Kill/2vMnOAAACAAJ?hl=en
Smith, K. (2020). Mary Bell. BookRix. https://www.google.com/books/edition/MARY_BELL/m5EMEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0 (Original work published 2020)
Woldfogel, J. (2001). The Future of Child Protection: How to Break the Cycle of Abuse and Neglect. Harvard University Press. https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Future_of_Child_Protection/qbZcPwAACAAJ?hl=en
Your articles are very helpful to me. May I request more information?