The historical evidence on Báthory fundamentally contradicts your source(s). I will start with the claims where the evidence is clearest:

• No, Báthory did not keep a list of her victims/“patients”.
• No, Báthory was not a doctor/scientist/midwife.
• No one living in Báthory’s century alleged she was a vampire or a witch.

A couple of your points raise more complex discussions. First, was the evidence against Báthory just gossip? No, there was a ton of believable evidence against her that weighed in favor of her guilt. There is also a lot of evidence that the proceedings against her mostly followed applicable Hungarian law.

Finally, did the Habsburgs try to take her land unlawfully? This one is the hardest to answer. The evidence is mixed: the Habsburgs had political/religious motives to prosecute her maliciously, but even if they did so, they failed to seize her land or money.

There was no list of Báthory’s victims

“They say that other than a couple random bodies with ambiguous causes of death and her “list of victims” (seized from her desk when a mob stormed her castle) there is no hard proof....”

I have written previously on AskHistorians about this exact question. The short version: there is no evidence that Báthory kept a list of her victims.

Was Báthory an herbalist/midwife/doctor? No, she was not.

“Allegedly, she was into medical science - lists of her “victims” were actually of tenants on her land, and her “torture methods” had things in common with new (for the time) medical procedures. She may have been helping local young women escape forced marriages or acquire reproductive healthcare.”

To the contrary, there is no evidence that Báthory was a doctor, herbalist, midwife, or scientist.

I first encountered this argument in attorney Irma Szádeczky-Kardoss’ 1993 piece, Báthory Erzsébet igazsága (“Elisabeth Báthory’s Truth”). Szádeczky-Kardoss argued that Elisabeth was a healer and that she kept trained herbalists at every estate to help heal her tenants. “If we examine the testimonies [of Báthory witnesses] side by side with contemporary medical texts, the descriptions of alleged torture by Erzsébet’s servants will show a remarkable correspondence with medical and surgical instructions for specific diseases.” This argument has also leaked into pop culture depicting Báthory. The most expensive Slovak movie ever made, Báthory: Countess of Blood, made this argument. It also depicted another detail from Szádeczky-Kardoss: Báthory relaxing in a tub full of water reddened by healing herbs, not blood.

Elisabeth’s letters

I have not read the sixteenth-century medical textbooks to which Szádeczky-Kardoss refers, but I am certain that neither Báthory’s own letters nor the accomplice trial testimony makes any reference to providing such health care. For anyone interested in this subject, I highly recommend reading The Private Letters of Countess Erzsebét Báthory by Kimberly L. Craft. It is 142 pages consisting entirely of primary sources that the Countess herself wrote. Across several dozen letters, Báthory clearly demonstrates that she was smart, sane, and a very competent administratrix of her estates. She was a little bit of a micromanaging nightmare, too: she tells her castellans exactly what letters to write and when to send them. She tells her agents to transfer exactly three wreaths of onions, or exactly one stone of wheat. I joked to myself while reading that the most common phrase across all her letters seemed to be “and nothing more” (in the context of “[g]ive Lord Imre Parnas one acre of wheat and nothing more”, p. 21).

Here is the key, though: never at any point during any of her letters did Báthory discuss concepts related to healing or science. Although many of her letters deal with purchase orders (game, wheat, onions, etc.), she never ordered any ginger, feverfew, valerian, bandage cloth, or other healing-related items. She never wrote to any doctors with questions about scientific concepts; she never wrote to her noble neighbors to inquire about hiring a maid who had a reputation for healing.

Accomplice testimony

Note: in this section, I have covered graphic descriptions of torture and murder with spoiler tags so that redditors may choose whether to read them. Click on the covered text to read the gory details.

Just as Báthory’s personal letters do not mention midwifery or treating patients, her 4 accomplices were also completely ignorant of such alleged motivations.

Here is some of their testimony, which I copied from my previous AH essay:

The accomplice Ficzko testified that he/she/they killed 37 girls. How did they die? Anna Darvulia >!beat girls “until their body was opened up.” It took as many as 500 blows to kill a girl. A different servant pricked victims with needles and heated an iron rod red hot to burn girls on the mouth, nose, and lips. He/she/they dunked a naked girl in a creek during the bitter mountain winter and left her outside until the victim froze to death. He/she/they stabbed the girls’ lips, mouths, and tongues with needles!< within the Lady’s carriage while travelling. (Summarized from the testimony of Ficzko in Infamous Lady, pp. 224-230.)

The second accomplice, Helena Jo, testified that "she knows 50 or more who were murdered.” (Infamous Lady, pp. 231.) >!When the Lady and her accomplices beat serving girls en masse in the victims’ sleeping quarters, the blood was so thick on the floor that the accomplices had to spread ashes to soak it up. Jo also testified to the freezing water torture that Ficzko mentioned. One summer, the Lady bound a naked girl outside, smeared her all over with honey, and let wasps, flies, and ants sting/bite the victim to death. The Lady herself heated keys and coins until they were red hot and placed the metal pieces against the flesh of victims until they had first-degree burns. The Lady used candles to burn the genitals of girls and stabbed their vulvas with needles!< . (Summarized from the testimony of Helena Jo, in Infamous Lady, pp. 230-233.)

The third accomplice, Dorothy Szentes, stated that she, Countess Báthory, and the other accomplices would beat victims, and >!burn them with red hot spoons and fire irons. She would pinch their flesh with tongs and tear it from her victims' bodies. A different translation of the same excerpt states that the Countess and her accomplices used their teeth, not tongs, to tear victims’ flesh!<. (Summarized from the testimony of Dorothy Szentes, in Infamous Lady, pp. 234-236.)

The fourth and final accomplice, Kate Beniczky, was the only one not sentenced to death because the judge determined that she was more of a reluctant observer than a participant in the atrocities. Beniczky testified that the other accomplices beat five girls to death and stored the corpses under a bed. The smell of decomposition became so strong that “everyone [throughout the castle] became aware of it.” Beniczky independently described the other horrors the first three described. (Summarized from the testimony of Kate Beniczky, in Infamous Lady, pp. 236-238.)

It is obvious from the accomplice confessions that they had absolutely no idea that these crimes allegedly constituted healing or medieval surgery. They knew they were punishing these girls, not healing them. Indeed, there is no type of medieval or modern medical treatment that requires beating girls, dunking them in freezing water, stinging them with flies, or storing corpses under a bed until the entire castle smells like death.

The only responsible conclusion here is that Báthory was not a healer.