|
Post by faithful on Jan 6, 2005 9:20:27 GMT -6
HOUSTON -- A state appeals court has overturned the capital murder convictions against Andrea Yates and ordered a new trial in the drownings of her children. The Texas First Court of Appeals issued its ruling in Houston today in a 12-page opinion signed by court Justice Sam Nuchia. A three-judge panel found that the Harris County trial jury might have been prejudiced against Yates by the false testimony of a prosecution expert. Park Dietz testified he consulted on an episode of the NBC-TV show "Law and Order" about a woman with postpartum depression acquitted by reason of insanity in the drowning of her children. It was later revealed that no such program existed. The Houston mother was serving a life sentence for the 2001 drownings of three of her five children. All five children were drowned in a bathtub at the family's home. Jurors in 2002 sentenced Yates to life in prison in the 2001 deaths of three of her children. She was not tried in the deaths of the other two. Copyright 2005 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. www.nbc5.com/news/4054252/detail.html?treets=chi&tml=chi_natlbreak&ts=T&tmi=chi_natlbreak_4774_08460201062005
|
|
|
Post by guest on Jan 6, 2005 12:03:14 GMT -6
maybe this time she will get the death penalty
|
|
|
Post by faithful on Jan 6, 2005 12:19:34 GMT -6
maybe this time she will get a FAIR trial and get the psychiatric help she needs instead of a lynch mob
|
|
Loretta not logged in
Guest
|
Post by Loretta not logged in on Jan 6, 2005 15:51:39 GMT -6
maybe this time she will get a FAIR trial and get the psychiatric help she needs instead of a lynch mob She murdered her own children, one by one. Sick or not, she knew what she was doing. Rather than take her OWN life, she snuffed out her childrens lives......How much sense does that make? She will be retried, convicted, and hopefully this time she'll get what she really deserves....The death penalty. 5 lives came to a screeching hault that day. That has to matter in this case......... She should have killed herself instead.
|
|
|
Post by jamie on Jan 6, 2005 16:07:06 GMT -6
Joy-Thank for being the voice of reason on this thread.
Guest and Loretta:
I really don't think they will even attempt to get the death penalty. It would be a waste to do for all involved.
She killed her children instead of herself because she thought she had already made tehm dirty with sin and was setting them up to be non-religious and sinful. She thought that if she killed them they would be spared in heaven. If she killed herself her children would not have been saved. She was not thinking of the earth bond law but was completly immersed in the Bible not to mention her husband and some freaky cult preacher.
Its called altruistic killing.
|
|
Loretta not logged in
Guest
|
Post by Loretta not logged in on Jan 6, 2005 20:40:38 GMT -6
Regardless; she still kill her children and broke Earth's/man's law. Doesn't matter what she 'thought' she was doing. She had NO right whatsoever to do this even if she was being threatened or bullied by a freaky preacher or husband ......... she always had the option to ASK for help. Tell someone what was going on. Ignorance is no excuse for not knowing the law. She broke the law. She should and will pay for her crimes.
This little set back with a new trial is just the results of some bleeding heart(s) do gooders who found a loop hole........that's all. Nothing more. She will be convicted all over again so who the hel-l wins? How does this help her? She is a murderer no matter how you dress her up. Lot's of battered and bruised, neglected, sadistically treated people sitting in our prisions for doing exactly what miss yates did.......... She is responsible for the loss of 5 INNOCENT lives. It matters, Jamie.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2005 20:49:39 GMT -6
Joy-Thank for being the voice of reason on this thread. Guest and Loretta: I really don't think they will even attempt to get the death penalty. It would be a waste to do for all involved. She killed her children instead of herself because she thought she had already made tehm dirty with sin and was setting them up to be non-religious and sinful. She thought that if she killed them they would be spared in heaven. If she killed herself her children would not have been saved. She was not thinking of the earth bond law but was completly immersed in the Bible not to mention her husband and some freaky cult preacher. Its called altruistic killing. You are wrong Jamie. This may have been many things, but it was not an alturistic killing. These children were violently murdered. Held down in a tub of water until drowned and the oldest child saved for last, the one who best understood what was going on. He was the eldest son left floating in the tub. This woman was a trained professional nurse, and a psych patient. She had access to drugs and could have used them to painlessly put her children "to sleep". She didn't. She selected a time slot between the departure of her husband for work and the arrival of her mother in law who came to help with the kids to terrorize and drown them, one-by-one. The eldest son was left floating in the tub for her husband to find after she called him to come home. Don't deceive yourself. Andrea Yates is certainly mentally ill, but she knew what she was doing, that it was wrong, and yet she chose to terrorize and murder five children and leave the eldest for her husband to find floating in the tub. The planning, timing, and display of victims means an agenda. The method of death bespeaks anger. If we cannot agree on her moral capability, lets agree that she must never be released from confinement.
|
|
|
Post by cynthiak on Jan 6, 2005 21:11:34 GMT -6
maybe this time she will get a FAIR trial and get the psychiatric help she needs instead of a lynch mob Why is there always an excuse as to why someone killed another human being?
|
|
|
Post by Tozzie on Jan 6, 2005 22:27:10 GMT -6
Joy-Thank for being the voice of reason on this thread. Guest and Loretta: I really don't think they will even attempt to get the death penalty. It would be a waste to do for all involved. She killed her children instead of herself because she thought she had already made tehm dirty with sin and was setting them up to be non-religious and sinful. She thought that if she killed them they would be spared in heaven. If she killed herself her children would not have been saved. She was not thinking of the earth bond law but was completly immersed in the Bible not to mention her husband and some freaky cult preacher. Its called altruistic killing. No the waste was 5 innocent little lives taken by this creature, by the person they trusted the most, the person they always thought would protect them. The oldest was 7 and he died knowing his mother killed him, I was watching my 4 year old nephew and 3 year old niece yesterday and watching how innocent they are and how trusting of the people they know, the people they run to for help with something, there is one thing that I can say, there is no valid excuse for hurting let alone murdering a child and anyone who does deserves the death penalty. Nope no sympathy for her, just prayers for her poor children who died at her hands.
|
|
|
Post by faithful on Jan 6, 2005 22:34:36 GMT -6
Why is there always an excuse as to why someone killed another human being? not an EXCUSE but an EXPLANATION. There is a difference. It would be better to find out why she did what she did so that others might be diagnosed BEFOR they get to that point.
|
|
|
Post by cynthiak on Jan 7, 2005 0:32:27 GMT -6
quote author=Joy link=board=cases&thread=1105024827&start=9#0 date=1105072476]
not an EXCUSE but an EXPLANATION. There is a difference. It would be better to find out why she did what she did so that others might be diagnosed BEFOR they get to that point. [/quote]
I quess that I am not understanding here. As long as someone explains why they killed someone, it is ok? We (as society) should feel for this woman because she WAS diagnosed yet decided NOT to take her meds? It makes no sense. So, if I (who was diagnosed with PTSD) were to stop taking my meds and go out and kill someone, I should just get a slap on the wrist and free housing, meals, medical care, and all for the rest of my life? No bills to pay, no job to work, nothing to do but live off the hardworking citizens of this country? Not to mention, she chased her oldest down when he tried to run. CHASED HIM DOWN! When he was crying and begging his mother-HIS MOTHER, the woman who is supposed to protect at all costs-not to kill him, he was fighting for air, she knew exactly what she was doing. She was plotting this for 2 years. How many times did she stop and think, no, correct that, KNOW that what she was going to do was wrong?
She was obviously a very smart woman. Valedictorian of her graduating class AND an officer in the National Honor Society. She also was an RN. She was smart enough to know what is right and what is wrong. Her mental condition is just an excuse. There are too many people who have mental issues and don't murder thier own children.
|
|
|
Post by faithful on Jan 7, 2005 8:57:00 GMT -6
quote author=Joy link=board=cases&thread=1105024827&start=9#0 date=1105072476] I quess that I am not understanding here. As long as someone explains why they killed someone, it is ok? . No, it does not give someone a reason to go out a kill. What it means is that people just don't one day say "hey, I think I will do this" and go do it. It is usually years and years of events that lead up to that killing and we, as a society, need to learn what happened in that case so that we can prevent others from going down that road. It's an EXPLANATION, which means if society, doctors, clergy or whoever were to notice someone that may display certain behaviors that someone else had befor a murder, then maybe we could help that person befor another murder happens. I'm not very good with words, I hope you understand what I am trying to say.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2005 0:04:47 GMT -6
No, it does not give someone a reason to go out a kill. What it means is that people just don't one day say "hey, I think I will do this" and go do it. It is usually years and years of events that lead up to that killing and we, as a society, need to learn what happened in that case so that we can prevent others from going down that road. It's an EXPLANATION, which means if society, doctors, clergy or whoever were to notice someone that may display certain behaviors that someone else had befor a murder, then maybe we could help that person befor another murder happens. I'm not very good with words, I hope you understand what I am trying to say. Actually, I do not understand what you are trying to say. I am concerned that you are trying to subordinate the vicious murder five children to the anger of an adult who could not deal with her own issues. I do understand this woman had problems. You need to understand she also had choices and problems or not, she made very rational choices about the timing and method of murdering her five children and leaving her eldest son floating in the tub as a message to Randy. She is not the victim, five children are the victims. A simple fact of life the left is incapable of understanding.
|
|
|
Post by guest on Jan 8, 2005 22:18:29 GMT -6
"maybe this time she will get a FAIR trial and get the psychiatric help she needs instead of a lynch mob " Who cares about her??? She chased down her children & drowned them. Think about that for a second? Doesn't that make you sick to your stomack? How do you justify killing 5 children? I could give a crap about her & her feelings.
|
|
|
Post by guest on Jan 8, 2005 22:45:09 GMT -6
Joy wrote: "maybe this time she will get a FAIR trial and get the psychiatric help she needs instead of a lynch mob"
That is the most idiotic commet I have ever read. She did it. She called 911. I am suprised she even had a trial. A lynch mob??? Are you so in denial that you don't even get the fact she murded 5 of her own children? I understand you have a husband on death row & might be a little jaded. Hello...Children murdered by the person that they trusted the most. Reality check...Fair trial...she did it and even she knows it.
|
|
|
Post by MrCoffee on Jan 9, 2005 5:18:07 GMT -6
I once suffered from Depression, and I once took medications for it. At one point, I was even psychotic. So what did I do? Rather then contimplate hurting another human being, I decided to do the right thing. I had my parents drive me to the emergency room to get help. I spent a week in a psychiatric ward, and for a good reason. And yes, I cooperated with the treatment they gave me.
This of course, drives my point. A person who sufferes from severe depression is indeed capable of checking themselves into a hospital. And, consequently, getting some sort of help. Why didn't Andrea voice concerns over her thoughts before she acted? When she was headed toward that downward spiral, why didn't she take the responsibility to check herself in so she could tell someone about it? She lied to everybody when she neglected to check herself into the hospital. She lied to her kids, to her husband, her family, and to all of Society.
Oh, but for want of the luxury of not getting adequate treatment. There is a bit more freedom when you are not confined to a hospital, where you can come and go as you please and can murder 5 kids without restraint.
For such malice, and such wreckless disregard for human life, and for such insurrection of the very profession that tried to help her. In order for the good reputation of the people who work to improve themselves and their own psychiatric conditions be kept, Andrea Yates must not be allowed to live. The appeal was a good thing, and now let us hope that the rightful punishment is upheld and followed through on this most thoughtless and cruel of persons.
MrCoffee
|
|
|
Post by jamie on Jan 9, 2005 15:46:43 GMT -6
She was in a hosptial and was accepting of treatment matter fact they had changed her meds before this happened.
Obviously you weren't as mentally ill as this woman. Be thankful. I wasn't as mentally ill as this woman because I didn't go on to kill. For this I am thankful.
One day though you may take that step where you will not return, do you want some mercy or would you rather a lynch mob? If this were you daughter what would you do? And don't get righteous with the "I never would have let it get to her killing her kids"
With regards, Jamie
ps. this is not an atatcking post just a post where I strongly encourage thinking outside of yourself
|
|
|
Post by MrCoffee on Jan 9, 2005 17:09:18 GMT -6
It was obvious that the incident happened outside of a hospital. Believe it or not, I have been around people with a psychiatric illness MUCH more profound and severe then that of Andrea Yates. They were still able to decide for themselves whether to break the law or not.
Crimes by people with a mental illness don't take place because they're "not accountable for their actions". They are committed by criminals who simply do not care about the law, or someone else's life for that matter. Most of them commit crimes because they are upset with society, and the supposed "bad deck of cards" that life has delt them. They only care about themselves, or their own liberties at someone else's expense. This really makes people who legitimately seek help for their illnesses look bad. Sorry, but I will uphold by beliefs in this matter.
MrCoffee
|
|
|
Post by jamie on Jan 9, 2005 23:18:44 GMT -6
I guess the coffee you are brewing isn't strong enough for you to see that every person with or w/out mental illness is different and to lump everyone up causes a very large lump and that lump causes people to get tripped up there by getting past the bump.
Hopefully you are not in a position to decide treatment and or punishment.
|
|
|
Post by ttwomey on Jan 28, 2005 13:22:03 GMT -6
From what I understand, Andrea Yates and her husband sought help several times. But the system failed them. Of course, their benefits may have run out... And from what I remember, her Doctor's advice TWO DAYS before the killing was to essentially "buck up" and take care of her children. (Her husband took her to the doctor because she was CATATONIC!) If this story did not have such a tragic ending, it would almost be comic! Recently I laughed at the irony of a friend of mine with a history of depression who went to her doctor about it and her doctor's response? That she "looked great"!! There you go ladies - if you look good that is all that matters! Perhaps Andrea just needed to see a hairdresser! Seriously, until we address these problems as societal issues, until we stop putting all the blame on the ill, we as part of this society will be guilty of complicity. Furthermore, it is so easy to see things only from our own point of view and then declare that as truth. In fact, that is probably a universal human tendency. So here is my point of view -- I was ill with various mood disorders postpartum, including psychosis. I was unable to seek help. (Well, I did tell my health care provider that I felt terrible and I was unable to cope - but I did not specifically request a mental health examination or self-diagnose my condition.) I am BLESSED that I still have my daughter. But it could easily have been otherwise. And but for a stroke of luck I would be demonized for one moment of madness. It is a humbling thought. -ttwomey
|
|
|
Post by Texas Native on Feb 23, 2005 15:37:58 GMT -6
People with psychiatric illnessess that cause them to Murder, whether they are aware of it or not, are Clearly Dangerous.
It doesn't matter WHY they are dangerous. It only matters THAT they are dangerous.
And the ones who kill unpredicatbly, and unknowingly, unfeelingly, are PARTICULARLY dangerous.
And should be put down.
That's just common, responsible duty.
|
|
|
Post by robzerr on Feb 24, 2005 0:33:53 GMT -6
From what I understand, Andrea Yates and her husband sought help several times. But the system failed them. Of course, their benefits may have run out... And from what I remember, her Doctor's advice TWO DAYS before the killing was to essentially "buck up" and take care of her children. (Her husband took her to the doctor because she was CATATONIC!) If this story did not have such a tragic ending, it would almost be comic! Recently I laughed at the irony of a friend of mine with a history of depression who went to her doctor about it and her doctor's response? That she "looked great"!! There you go ladies - if you look good that is all that matters! Perhaps Andrea just needed to see a hairdresser! Seriously, until we address these problems as societal issues, until we stop putting all the blame on the ill, we as part of this society will be guilty of complicity. Furthermore, it is so easy to see things only from our own point of view and then declare that as truth. In fact, that is probably a universal human tendency. So here is my point of view -- I was ill with various mood disorders postpartum, including psychosis. I was unable to seek help. (Well, I did tell my health care provider that I felt terrible and I was unable to cope - but I did not specifically request a mental health examination or self-diagnose my condition.) I am BLESSED that I still have my daughter. But it could easily have been otherwise. And but for a stroke of luck I would be demonized for one moment of madness. It is a humbling thought. -ttwomey I'm a bit dismayed by the number of women who seem to be "sympathetic" to these child killers indicating "understanding". I really reeeeally am major bent out of shape by this "motherly" attitude. I'm sure glad none of you were my mom. Hey I know it's tough, you stressed out moms! I raised two children myself from age 7, girl, and age 5, boy, who was severely handicapped as well. Not once did I EVER even consider harming either of them...AND I worked full time all those years. Sorry ladies but I'm not buying the "STRESS drove me to do it" defense, post partum or other newly defined "excuse". Andrea has proven she is not fit to live among the rest of civilized human beings to be sure. The DP, if she gets it this time around, (poster girl for mental illnes that she is, she won't) would be perfectly okay by me. And as an added bonus it might just send a message that these murderous mothers will face the same penalties as the male of the species who will get the needle without any handy "female related" excuse to use in his defense.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyUK on Feb 24, 2005 5:27:23 GMT -6
From what I understand, Andrea Yates and her husband sought help several times. But the system failed them. Of course, their benefits may have run out... And from what I remember, her Doctor's advice TWO DAYS before the killing was to essentially "buck up" and take care of her children. (Her husband took her to the doctor because she was CATATONIC!) If this story did not have such a tragic ending, it would almost be comic! Recently I laughed at the irony of a friend of mine with a history of depression who went to her doctor about it and her doctor's response? That she "looked great"!! There you go ladies - if you look good that is all that matters! Perhaps Andrea just needed to see a hairdresser! Seriously, until we address these problems as societal issues, until we stop putting all the blame on the ill, we as part of this society will be guilty of complicity. Furthermore, it is so easy to see things only from our own point of view and then declare that as truth. In fact, that is probably a universal human tendency. So here is my point of view -- I was ill with various mood disorders postpartum, including psychosis. I was unable to seek help. (Well, I did tell my health care provider that I felt terrible and I was unable to cope - but I did not specifically request a mental health examination or self-diagnose my condition.) I am BLESSED that I still have my daughter. But it could easily have been otherwise. And but for a stroke of luck I would be demonized for one moment of madness. It is a humbling thought. -ttwomey Mental illness is such a diverse illness its hard to compare cases. My Nan developed PND after having her 4th child. This triggered manic depression and she was in and out of hospital, always after being sectioned, until she died 2 years ago. I struggle to believe Andrea Yates. My Nan couldnt even get to the shop in the height of her depression let alone plan anything. If she was as you say catatonic why was she left alone to care for her children? Those children died because of her actions. She planned and timed there deaths. She must pay in whatever way is decided. Me personally I would like to put her in such terror before her death so she knew just how her 7 year old son felt.
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Feb 24, 2005 7:19:54 GMT -6
I find this post interesting because my occupation is mental health. A few point/observations:
T-Rex says she knew what she was doing, and I agree she did, she obviously had the end in mind of killing them, but what you miss is what was driving these actions, which to all accounts was a serious delusional belief. To pretend that is not significant nor a mitigating factor is frankly unfair.
Insight varies from one individual to another. MR Coffee speaks of his experience and it displays that he thankfully has insight, sees the connection between appropriate medication and good mental health and well being. Mr Coffee unfortunately assumes everyone is like himself and the people who happened to be present at the time of his admission to that ward, which is really only a snapshot. People are individuals, some never see the connection because they do not have the insight he is fortunate to have.
Texas Native says it does not matter why, what matters is what happened. Perhaps this overly simplistic black and white attitude explains why Texas is the leader in executions. My question is that if Texas Native cannot see the wider ramifications of this case, why do they assume people with sever illnesses should? His/response is frankly without mercy, compassion, or human understanding at any level. This unfortunate woman has lost her children because of an illness, she was the mere agent. She is not culpable. In any decent and fair analysis of her actions it will ALWAYS matter why, it will always matter what was driving her actions, to suggest otherwise makes you the idiot.
Becky UK, like Mr Coffey uses her exoerience of a near relative to make predictions as to what this woman ought to ahve known and done. People are individuals first Becky. You can have identical twins with the same mental illness who will have different benefits from the same dose levels of the same medication. I hope this woman is not punished for what happened, but a comprehensive assessment takes place as to the settings she would be safe within, after a period of proper input and support around events that have happened. I do not think this neccessarily means she must stay in hospital ad infinitum because she will become well, the key is assessment and supervision to ensure that in the future in a community setting she remains well. The question for me seems one of whether society will invest the neccessary resources to provide the levels of suppot and monitoring she clearly stands in need of.
Lastly I must commend Faithfuls expressed views, they seem level, appropriate and fair in response to what has been a tradgedy moreso than a simplistic case of someone not caring for their children. Some people in this thread purport to be shocked because of their strong feelings for children, and go on to argue the harshest penalties for the mother. I am sure her children today would want nothing more for Mum other than she has the appropriate helps rather than the condemnation of society from this point.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyUK on Feb 24, 2005 8:07:12 GMT -6
Hi Felix2.
I was not trying to 'make predictions' as you say. I mentioned my experience simple because I have it.
Who do we hold responsible for the murder of these children? Do we blame the doctors for not realising the depth of her illness? Do we put her husband and mother-in-law up for trial because they allowed a gap when she was alone with the children? Or should we just say Andrea Yates should stand trail because she didnt take her meds, knew she'd be alone at the time and one by one drowned her 5 young children. Im sick of hearing the 'she will have to live with what shes done for the rest of her life' statement. It's a dam sham her children dont have the rest of there lives.
|
|
|
Post by jamie on Feb 24, 2005 8:18:13 GMT -6
robzerr- Postpartum depression and to a greater extent PP Psychosis is nothing new in the medical community. Hippocrates observed and noted on this mania that strikes mothers.
Becky UK- Your Nan suffered but she thankfully didn't hurt her children. The fourth pregnancy set something off in her brain was she in control of that process? PPD and PPP are as varied as the individuals who get this. Cancer is not the same for every person. Treatment is even done passed on the individual. I personally suffered PPP but didn't hurt my children or myself. I had 5 out of the six "symptoms" but what kept me from killing myself or my children? I don't know.
One persons blues is anothers depression. One persons happiness is anothers mania.
|
|
|
Post by jamie on Feb 24, 2005 8:32:18 GMT -6
Historically, the connection between childbirth and psychiatric illness has been well-recognized. In 460 BC, Hippocrates described "puerperal fever," theorizing that suppressed lochial discharge was transported to the brain, where it produced "agitation, delirium and attacks of mania."1 The 11th century writings of the gynecologist Trotula of Salerno speculated: "if the womb is too moist, the brain is filled with water, and the moisture running over to the eyes, compels them to involuntarily shed tears."2 Attempts to describe and classify postpartum mental illness became more systematic in the mid-19th century, when Esquirol wrote of the "mental alienation of those recently confined and of nursing women."2 Additionally, accounts of puerperal psychosis and depression are specifically delineated by Marce in his 18th century Treatise on Insanity in Pregnant and Lactating Women.2 www.obgyn.net/femalepatient/default.asp?page=leopoldThe first two paragraphs shows some history of PPD and the link is to the full article.
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Feb 24, 2005 9:16:10 GMT -6
Becky, you seem to be asking me who do we blame, who is responsible? Permit me to reframe the question. This woman was vulnerable by virtue of the illness she has which is not the result of a choice she has made. I suggest society as a whole is the real agent which has coices to make. Do we resource properly the expertise available to supervise and support vulnerable people in the community, or do we say we deplore the death of these children and avoid what I think is the real issue by looking for individual doctors or relatives to blame? If pro's are to be believed on this board, they react to events like this, I have yet to hear them focus on the way Regan emptied the mental institutions into the community without diverting those resources into the community to monitor and support those previous patients. In my view the blame for such untoward tradgedies goes all the way to the top and involved sociaty and our attitudes to genuinely vulnerable individuals as a whole. I do hope this answers your question but if not please post back.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyUK on Feb 24, 2005 9:50:12 GMT -6
Perhaps I am looking at the case in very simple terms. I do understand and agree to a point with what you say. To be honest I dont know all the facts but I just don't believe her. I really shouldn't comment on cases like these because I have children and tend to be very one sided with my views.
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Feb 24, 2005 10:02:19 GMT -6
I should also make the point Becky that normally my time is spent assessing people trying to feign mental illness and ensuring they are made to take the responsibility for their actions. I am not a bleeding heart liberal by any means but believe people are responsible for their actions UNLESS there are genuine reasons in fairness and humanity why they cannot be. In this womans case the tradgedy is that she appears to ahve been unsupported appropriately. The good old US pro's cannot have it both way!
|
|