The release of Monster: The Ed Gein Story on Netflix has reignited one of the darkest debates in true-crime history: did America’s most infamous grave robber and murderer also kill his older brother, Henry? The series, which dramatizes the life of Ed Gein through actor Charlie Hunnam’s chilling portrayal, wastes no time in presenting the idea that fratricide was part of Gein’s horrifying legacy. But historians, criminologists, and forensic experts caution that the truth is not so clear-cut.
The Origins of the Gein Brothers’ Tragedy
Ed Gein was born in 1906 in La Crosse County, Wisconsin, to a family dominated by an overbearing, deeply religious mother, Augusta, and an alcoholic father, George. His older brother Henry, born in 1901, grew up under the same roof but developed an outlook far less dependent on his mother’s grip. By the early 1940s, both brothers still lived on the family’s isolated Plainfield farm, caring for their aging mother after their father’s death.
According to court and police records, tensions between the brothers were common. Henry reportedly disapproved of Ed’s devotion to Augusta, considering it unhealthy and stifling. This tension would become crucial in theories surrounding Henry’s mysterious death.
The Death That Raised Eyebrows
On May 16, 1944, a brush fire broke out on the Gein property. Both Ed and Henry were involved in trying to extinguish the flames. Later, Ed told authorities that he lost track of his brother in the smoke. Henry’s body was discovered lying face down, not burned by the fire, but with bruises on his head.
The local coroner listed “asphyxiation” as the official cause of death, citing smoke inhalation. However, the bruises raised suspicions. Why were they present? Were they accidental injuries sustained during the chaos of the fire—or evidence of foul play?
At the time, police did not investigate further. The case was quickly closed, and Henry’s death was ruled accidental.
Why Netflix Chose to Portray Murder
The new Monster series takes creative license by showing Ed Gein actively killing his brother. It’s a dramatic decision that aligns with Gein’s later crimes, where his grotesque acts inspired fictional killers in Psycho, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, and The Silence of the Lambs. For screenwriters, portraying Henry’s death as a murder provides narrative consistency. It makes Gein’s descent into monstrosity appear inevitable, rather than leaving space for ambiguity.
But dramatization doesn’t equal fact. True-crime scholars emphasize that while Ed Gein’s later confessions revealed grave robbing and at least two confirmed murders (Mary Hogan in 1954 and Bernice Worden in 1957), he never admitted to killing Henry.
The Case for Accident
Skeptics of the murder theory argue that Henry’s death could have been exactly what the coroner said: an accident. Brush fires in rural Wisconsin were notoriously dangerous. Thick smoke, poor visibility, and exhaustion could easily disorient someone.
The bruises, according to some forensic pathologists, may have been the result of falling debris or collapsing undergrowth. Others note that Henry was 43 years old, in good physical shape, but not immune to the risks of overexertion in fire suppression.
It’s also important to consider the context. In 1944, local authorities in a small farming community were not equipped with today’s forensic tools. Without advanced autopsy techniques or toxicology, many accidental deaths carried unanswered questions.
The Case for Murder
On the other side, many criminologists argue that the circumstances were too suspicious to ignore. Henry’s bruises were described by some witnesses as “unnatural.” Reports also suggest Ed was the one who led police directly to his brother’s body, raising suspicions about how he knew where Henry was in the smoke-filled woods.
Further complicating the story is the dynamic between the brothers. Henry reportedly confided to friends that he worried about Ed’s obsession with Augusta. Some speculate that Henry intended to distance himself from both his brother and his mother, possibly even leaving the farm altogether. If Ed felt threatened by the potential abandonment of the one person who tethered him to his mother, motive could have been established.
What Experts Say Today
Modern criminology tends to view Henry’s death as “suspicious but unproven.” Harold Schechter, author of Deviant: The Shocking True Story of Ed Gein, points out that while Gein’s later crimes were beyond dispute, there is no hard evidence connecting him to Henry’s death. In fact, Schechter suggests that pinning Henry’s death on Ed is more a matter of narrative neatness than forensic certainty.
Forensic anthropologists who have revisited the case note that unless Henry’s body were to be exhumed—a highly unlikely event given the passage of more than 80 years—conclusive evidence will remain elusive.
Why It Still Matters
The ambiguity around Henry’s death illustrates a larger issue in true crime storytelling: the tension between fact and dramatization. Viewers of Netflix’s Monster are drawn to the idea of uncovering hidden truths. Yet the danger lies in conflating speculation with reality.
Media portrayals often push toward definitive answers because audiences crave closure. But in real cases, especially those involving decades-old deaths, uncertainty is often the only honest outcome.
Public Fascination With Gein
Part of what fuels continued speculation is the cultural weight of Ed Gein’s crimes. His grotesque acts—digging up graves, fashioning household items from human remains, and murdering women—were so shocking that they permanently changed the horror genre. Villains like Norman Bates, Leatherface, and Buffalo Bill all trace roots back to Gein’s twisted legacy.
Because of this notoriety, even the murky details of his biography attract scrutiny. The possibility that he killed his brother adds another layer to the mythos. Whether true or not, the story reinforces Gein’s place in American folklore as more than just a murderer, but as a figure of enduring horror.
The Netflix Effect
Netflix’s decision to frame Henry’s death as murder is not unique. Streaming platforms have increasingly blurred the lines between documentary and dramatization in their true-crime content. Shows like Monster, while based on real events, are also entertainment products designed to keep viewers engaged.
Critics warn that audiences should approach such series with a discerning eye. Fact-checking against historical records, biographies, and court documents is essential to separating dramatized speculation from reality.
Lessons for the True-Crime Audience
The Gein brothers’ story highlights why responsible consumption of true-crime media is so important. Experts recommend that viewers:
- Cross-reference sources: Always check multiple accounts, including biographies and historical reports.
- Distinguish fact from dramatization: Recognize that scripted series may take liberties for storytelling purposes.
- Accept uncertainty: Understand that not every question, especially in historical cases, has a definitive answer.
Conclusion: A Mystery That Won’t Die
Did Ed Gein kill his brother Henry? The answer remains buried in the smoke of history. Netflix has chosen to dramatize the event as murder, cementing it in pop culture imagination. But in reality, the case was never investigated as a homicide, and no conclusive evidence has ever surfaced.
What persists is the uneasy space between speculation and fact. For Ed Gein, the man who became a legend of horror, that ambiguity may be just as haunting as the crimes we know he committed.
Sources:
Schechter, H. (1989). Deviant: The Shocking True Story of Ed Gein, the Original “Psycho.” Pocket Books.
Gollmar, R. H. (1981). Edward Gein: America’s Most Bizarre Murderer. Praeger.
Winters, S. (2016). Notorious Murders and Serial Killers of Wisconsin. Badger Press.
Wisconsin Historical Society Archives – Plainfield Police Reports (1944–1957).
