My latest book had been out for 2 weeks, a little before Halloween. I had included 2 female serial killers. Rare, sure but there have been many.

In the wee hours of November 7, I watched a biography of H.H. Holmes, a Doctor that sometimes went by the name of Henry Mudgett. Of course I had read the books and known the story.

What I didn't realize was that they claimed him to be the first American Serial Killer. He killed in the 1890's, upwards to 200, but has 9 confirmed kills.

For whatever reason the Harp brothers are considered first by some and not by others. They killed in the late 1700's. The only discounting fact is they killed before there was a United States. 

There are books claiming them first and more claiming H.H. Holmes as the first.

With this in mind the first female serial killer was said to be Jane Toppan who began her career experimenting on patients in 1885.

Belle Gunness was also thought to be the first, she is known as the Bluebeard Killer or the Black Widow.

The list is long and the numbers and dates are revolving. If Jane Toppan began killing sometime after 1885, then she is the claim to beat right?

So why does that mean H.H. was first. What disqualifies the Harp Brothers?  These are all questions that nag at me, because why yes, my first Serial Killer included in the new book began killing in 1884.

1884 you say? Mad Mary killed her 3 daughters, 2 of her 3 husbands, 1 stepson and 1 infant son. Her first daughter Gracie was murdered on March 18, 1884.

Why, that would mean she started killing before even the known First Female Serial Killer Jane Toppan, by at least a year. That would also mean she killed almost a decade before H.H. Holmes.

Discounting what ever the Harp Brothers were up to, that could possibly make Mad Mary, the First American Serial Killer. Certainly the First Female Serial Killer.

Never one to make claims without backing, I can say this, if the Harp Brothers weren't the first, then Mad Mary was. 
Did I mention the proof is in the book?