Yates found not guilty by reason of insanity...

Bozo Erectus

Master Baker
Joined
Jan 22, 2003
Messages
22,389
...Of murdering her five children.
HOUSTON - A jury found Andrea Yates not guilty by reason of insanity in the drowning deaths of her young children in the bathtub of their suburban home.
ADVERTISEMENT

Yates will be committed to a state mental hospital, with periodic hearings before a judge to determine whether she should be released. If convicted, she would have faced life in prison.

Yates' attorneys never disputed that she drowned 6-month-old Mary, 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old Paul, 5-year-old John and 7-year-old Noah in their Houston-area home in June 2001. But they said she suffered from severe postpartum psychosis and, in a delusional state, thought Satan was inside her and was trying to save them from hell.

This is the second trial for the 42-year-old suburban mother.

The jury had spent 11 hours Monday and Tuesday trying to determine if Yates was legally insane. Wednesday morning, they reviewed the state's definition of insanity and then asked to see a family photo and candid pictures of the five smiling youngsters. After about an hour of deliberations, they said they had reached a verdict.

In Yates' first murder trial, in 2002, the jury deliberated about four hours before finding her guilty. That conviction was overturned on appeal.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060726...lQB_gKs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OTB1amhuBHNlYwNtdHM-

I have two things to say about this:

1. If she had been a man, she would have been found guilty.

2. How can she possibly want to live? Theres no death penalty involved, but why hasnt she hanged herself in her cell?:confused:

How can a mother allow herself to live after doing such a thing?
 
But even the craziest people have moments of lucidity, dont they?
 
You'd be surprised at the will to live, not everyone is willing to die like you are ...

I suspect it's because she can blame her sins on someone who was not her.
 
El_Machinae said:
You'd be surprised at the will to live, not everyone is willing to die like you are ...
Wow. Let me get this straight. A woman drowns her five babies, but you seem to imply that Im the crazy one, because I cant understand how she can remain alive? OT never ceases to amaze me.
I suspect it's because she can blame her sins on someone who was not her.
Just for the record, I have nothing but sympathy for this woman. I wont even pretend to understand the torment she has to live with, because of what she's done. I just cant understand how she can live with it. The death penalty would have been more merciful in her case, IMO.
 
Bozo Erectus said:
Just for the record, I have nothing but sympathy for this woman.
Gee, I don't. While fully agreeing with your original comment - how can she stand to live with herself? - I have not a shred of sympathy for her. Five young children were held under water and drowned by their own mother. I really, really, really cannot grasp the terror those children must have felt. I'd use the crying "smilie," but in context, it would look comical, and this was as far from comic as Hell is from Heaven. I have no sympathy - nada - left over for Andrea. It is all spent on the real victims, and I feel that, though overdrawn, I still have not paid them nearly enough.
 
Stegyre said:
Gee, I don't. While fully agreeing with your original comment - how can she stand to live with herself? - I have not a shred of sympathy for her. Five young children were held under water and drowned by their own mother. I really, really, really cannot grasp the terror those children must have felt. I'd use the crying "smilie," but in context, it would look comical, and this was as far from comic as Hell is from Heaven. I have no sympathy - nada - left over for Andrea. It is all spent on the real victims, and I feel that, though overdrawn, I still have not paid them nearly enough.
I know and understand exactly what you mean. However, you know the horror you feel thinking of that? Now just try, even though you cant possibly, imagine the horror youd feel if you were their mother, and you had to live with the knowledge that it was you who did that to them. That sort of pain has to be literally hell on Earth.
 
a woman
kills
her five children
and she isn't insane?
woah, if you are that "insane" you should kill youself!
 
I'm more interested about her husband, geez I don't know how i could still find the will breath after such a horrible thing.
 
Yeeek said:
I'm more interested about her husband, geez I don't know how i could still find the will breath after such a horrible thing.

I actually think he bares (sp?) some complicity in this.

Though, she's guilty and should be in prison for life.

I agree w/ Bozo that a man would've been found guilty.
 
Bozo Erectus said:
. . . imagine the horror you'd feel if you were their mother, and you had to live with the knowledge that it was you who did that to them. That sort of pain has to be literally hell on Earth.
To which I can only say: "Good." She should suffer Hell on Earth. That's the point of a conscience. That still doesn't mean she merits sympathy: she is the cause of her own suffering. By contrast, her children deserve the greatest outpouring of our sympathy because they were innocent victims. (And all the more so because they were victimised by one who should have been their chief defender.)

Sorry, Bozo, but imo, your desire to sympathize with Yates is a perversion of what sympathy should be. (Which is perhaps a worthy evolution of topic for this thread.)
 
Yeeek said:
I'm more interested about her husband, geez I don't know how i could still find the will breath after such a horrible thing.

I agree with Shane in that he holds some responsibility for this.

Let's see: Your wife has severe post (childbirth) depression after the 3rd
child and even worse problems after a fourth. Tries suicide and is warned about NOT having anymore kids. What do you do?: have another kid and throw her completely insane.
 
MobBoss said:
Call me funny, but I think insane people who kill people should still get the death penalty where it is allowed. What if 20 years down the road she gets released somehow and does it again? Ugh.

Torture her to death in the same way that she slaughtered her children.

Only the government has the right to kill senselessly.

This woman should have been dead immediately after the case was opened. Shows you how corrupt our legal system is. Disease/insanity is no excuse for crime.

Should I be allowed to kill some people, and have my defense team say that it was insanity's fault?
 
dgfred said:
I agree with Shane in that he holds some responsibility for this.

Let's see: Your wife has severe post (childbirth) depression after the 3rd
child and even worse problems after a fourth. Tries suicide and is warned about NOT having anymore kids. What do you do?: have another kid and throw her completely insane.

I understand but after such an event i can't have any strong feelings against him, i mean i'm trying put myself in his shoes it must be horrible. I would probably just jumped out of a bridge or something. Anything that could let me escape this world and end the suffering.
 
Well, perhaps some good can come out of this. The publics awareness of this problem is raised and perhaps some study into this case can be done to prevent this from happening in the future. This might require Andrea Yates alive.
 
The death penalty would be insane here. Her life still has value. I recommend a penalty of prison equivalent to that of manslaughter with release contingent on a tubal ligation.
 
Stile said:
The death penalty would be insane here. Her life still has value. I recommend a penalty of prison equivalent to that of manslaughter with release contingent on a tubal ligation.

I'm anti-death penalty. But, to me, her life has no value. Lock her up, throw away the key and kick her ex-husbands butt good and hard.
 
MobBoss said:
Call me funny, but I think insane people who kill people should still get the death penalty where it is allowed.
Agreed! That gives two reasons to punch their ticket.
 
Top Bottom