Brentwood - The possibility that Sheila LaBarre may have killed at least one more man on her Epping farm has been raised after it was revealed yesterday that toes from an unidentified man were found on her property.

LaBarre, 49, admitted to killing Kenneth Countie and Michael Deloge on her farm, but she is claiming she was insane when she committed the murders. Yesterday, Rockingham County Superior Court Judge Tina Nadeau ruled that an FBI profiler who specializes in serial killer cases cannot testify for the state.

According to Nadeau's ruling, the profiler, Mark Safarik, analyzed the case, and based on evidence, including "toes discovered at the defendant's property belonging to an unidentified male whom the defendant murdered" all point to LaBarre being a classic serial killer -- and sane.

Prosecutor Jim Boffetti declined to comment on the toes, whose toes they are or the report. Using forensic techniques, including DNA testing, investigators already identified remains of Countie and Deloge.

Nadeau's ruling makes no mention of when or where the toes were found, only stating that introducing the toes during trial would be more prejudicial than it would be helpful for the jury.

Attorney Brad Bailey, who represents LaBarre, did not return a call for comment yesterday afternoon. Bailey had fought the introduction of Safarik's report, arguing that the techniques used by FBI profilers are based on flawed methodology.

In the report, which was only quoted in Nadeau's ruling, Safarik concluded that "by definition, the homicides of Countie and Deloge would be captured under the "definition of a serial killer."

Safarik wrote that serial killers are aware that what they are doing is wrong, as demonstrated by the way they take steps to avoid being caught. LaBarre's murders fit into patterns of behavior common to serial killers, and specifically the type of serial killer who is sane, Safarik wrote.

While the defense had argued that Safarik's methods were flawed, Nadeau found that he was an expert in some aspects, but his area of expertise was only relevant to guilt or innocence, not LaBarre's psychology when she committed the crime. Allowing Safarik to testify during the insanity portion of the trial would just confuse the jury, Nadeau wrote.

Nadeau also wrote that LaBarre fails to meet several standards Safarik lays out as key to defining a serial killer -- specifically, she lacked the ability to blend into society. Also, Nadeau found that LaBarre was similar to other female serial killers only in the sense that her victims were dependent on her, but differed in her methodology and alleged motive.

Both Countie and Deloge were in relationships with LaBarre and living with her. Witnesses reported seeing her act abusively toward both men, and in Deloge's case, actually saw her beating him. The case against LaBarre began to build steam after two Epping police officers went to her farm at the request of Countie's mother and saw a large human-sized bone, with flesh still attached, sticking out of a fire on LaBarre's front lawn.

Jury selection for the insanity portion of LaBarre's trial begins Monday. In New Hampshire, the burden is on the defense to prove a defendant's insanity, but there is no set definition, and the decision is left entirely to the jury.

If LaBarre is found to have been insane at the time of the murders, Nadeau will rule on whether she is a danger to the community. If it is determined she is, LaBarre will be sent to the secure psychiatric ward of the state prison, and every five years will have the opportunity to argue she is no longer dangerous.

If the jury finds she was sane when she committed the murders, she will automatically receive a sentence of life in prison, with no chance of parole.