I read somewhere that it is disastrous to use free to get rid of an object not created by calling malloc, is this true? why?
By the standard, it's "undefined behavior" - i.e. "anything can happen". That's usually bad things, though.
In practice: free'ing a pointer means modifying the heap. C runtime does virtually never validate if the pointer passed comes from the heap - that would be to costly in either time or memory. Combine these two factoids, and you get "free(non-malloced-ptr) will write something somewhere" - the resutl may be some of "your" data modified behind your back, an access violation, or trashing vital runtime structures, such as a return address on the stack.
Example: A disastrous scenario:
Your heap is implemented as a simple list of free blocks. malloc means removing a suitable block from the list, free means adding it to the list again. (a typical if trivial implementation)
You free() a pointer to a local variable on the stack. You are "lucky" because the modification goes into irrelevant stack space. However, part of the stack is now on your free list.
Because of the allocator design and your allocation patterns, malloc is unlikely to return this block. Later, in an completely unrelated part of the program, you actually do get this block as malloc result, writing to it trashes some local variables up the stack, and when returning some vital pointer contains garbage and your app crashes. Symptoms, repro and location are completely unrelated to the actual cause.
Debug that.