|
|
Post by Rob on Dec 14, 2004 15:23:24 GMT -6
'Law and Order' at heart of Andrea Yates' appeal. Andrea Yates' capital murder convictions for drowning her children should be overturned because the state's expert witness falsely testified during her trial, her attorneys argued today. www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2946481 |
|
Macklin
Inactive
The more clearly we see the sovereignty of God, the less preplexed we are by the calamities of men.
Posts: 1,701
|
Post by Macklin on Dec 16, 2004 0:29:33 GMT -6
Well who knows Rob....sounds like she is not insane to me. with statements like:
"The type of things that a person would have to do in order to carry out these crimes would have required logic, organization, determination a great deal of strength and a great deal of will on her part," Curry said.
He cited Yates' telling psychiatrists that she had thought about using a knife to kill her children, but determined that would be "too bloody." He also pointed to a tape-recorded police interview in which Yates said she had thought about killing her children for two years, and in the weeks leading up to the drownings had filled the bathtub with water but "didn't do it that time."
"She decided not to do it then because she knew it was wrong, she knew it was illegal," Curry told the panel.
Yup sounds like it was, premeditated to me. She is mentally able to file an appeal, maybe if she gets another bite at the apple, she could get the DP....if she gets ahold of a jury that won't buy the insane crap. Thats what she should have gotten in the first place.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2004 16:25:22 GMT -6
Yates Lawyer, George Parnam, is going to have his hands full of appeals. I believe he's appealing Clara Harris' conviction also (ran over her cheating Orthodontist hubby while on video tape).
I don't think Yates has a prayer. She confessed. Trying to blow that "Law and Order" mistake, which was incidental at best, into a critical issue sounds like a loser.
|
|
|
|
Post by ttwomey on Jan 6, 2005 13:37:45 GMT -6
As a woman who suffered from Postpartum Psychosis and DID NOT get help BECAUSE I knew that if I sought help and failed to get adequate help and then killed my child, any statements that I might make about hurting my child could be used against me to show premeditation thereby opening up the possibility of the Death Penalty!!!
I realize that may sound cruel and self-serving to many - chosing my life over that of my child. Yet what a cruel circumstance to be in to be faced with such a choice.
I remember thinking that if I were in England at least I could safely seek help.
But Andrea Yates did a much more honorable thing than I. She sought help time and time again. And the help was inadequate. Now there are people who want to use what she said in order to seek help as justification for the Death Penalty.
Ironic, no?
And yet, I can understand the posts of others on this site. If I were still ignorant of the nature of mental illness. If I had not been there myself, I might very well be in complete agreement with you.
I thank God regularly for saving myself and my child from the ravages of this disorder. I am continually grateful that my daughter is alive. There is a very thin line between myself and women who killed their children in the grip of postpartum psychosis. It could just as easily be me you would want put to death.
I pray that instead of imprisoning and killing women like Andrea, we begin to aggressively screen for, diagnose and adequately treat this awful awful disorder.
May God bless you and bring you to a greater understanding. (Although hopefully not through as traumatic an event as it took for me!)
|
|
|
|
Post by ttwomey on Jan 6, 2005 13:58:15 GMT -6
I suffered from postpartum psychsosis and DID NOT get help BECAUSE I knew that if I sought help and that help was inadequate and then I killed my child, the statements that I would've made about hurting my child could be used against me as premeditation and would open the possibility of the Death Penalty.
I realize that may sound cruel, choosing my life over that of my child. Yet what a cruel circumstance to be faced with such a choice. I remember thinking that if I were in England at least I could tell someone and seek help without fear of retaliation.
Andrea made a more honorable decision than I. She sought help. That help failed. I feel there is a thin line between myself and women who suffered postpartum psychosis and are in prison for infanticide.
However, I also understand the feeling of those whose postings are on this site. If I had not experienced this illness first-hand I would probably feel the same way.
I thank God for sparing myself and my child. I pray that we will someday be more aggressive about screening for, diagnosing and treating this horrible disorder. That when we learn of an Andrea Yates we are OUTRAGED at the system that failed her, instead of at her. For as long as our energy is focused on blaming and punishing her, little will be done about the conditions that allowed this to occur.
Even month or so I learn of another woman who kills others or herself or both who is suffering AND has sought help for a postpartum mood disorder. These are all tragedies! As tragic for the woman as for anyone else involved. I invite anyone who is passionate about this loss of life to join the fight in preventing future tragedies.
God bless.
|
|
|
|
Post by ttwomey on Jan 6, 2005 14:01:31 GMT -6
Sorry about the double post. My computer crashed as I tried to post 1st time so I thought it did not "go."
|
|
|
|
Post by MrCoffee on Jan 16, 2005 5:28:32 GMT -6
Well who knows Rob....sounds like she is not insane to me. with statements like: "The type of things that a person would have to do in order to carry out these crimes would have required logic, organization, determination a great deal of strength and a great deal of will on her part," Curry said. He cited Yates' telling psychiatrists that she had thought about using a knife to kill her children, but determined that would be "too bloody." He also pointed to a tape-recorded police interview in which Yates said she had thought about killing her children for two years, and in the weeks leading up to the drownings had filled the bathtub with water but "didn't do it that time." "She decided not to do it then because she knew it was wrong, she knew it was illegal," Curry told the panel. Yup sounds like it was, premeditated to me. She is mentally able to file an appeal, maybe if she gets another bite at the apple, she could get the DP....if she gets ahold of a jury that won't buy the insane crap. Thats what she should have gotten in the first place. Well, I'm hoping that her biggest mistake was winning the new trial. Perhaps the ultimate sentence can be handed down by a less sympathetic jury this time. MrCoffee |
|
|
|
Post by snowy111 on Jan 16, 2005 16:53:55 GMT -6
Well, I'm hoping that her biggest mistake was winning the new trial. Perhaps the ultimate sentence can be handed down by a less sympathetic jury this time. MrCoffee If you're talking about the dp, she doesn't qualify this time. The reason the first jury voted against it. I heard that on television. |
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Feb 26, 2005 5:46:28 GMT -6
I agree fully with Twomey, the point is this Mack, regardless of how organised she was, you need to exaMINE WHAT WAS DRIVING THOSE ACTIONS, HER RELIGIOS IDEATION AND BELIEFS WHICH WERE OUT OF LINE WITH WHAT MOST RELIGIOUS PEOPLE BELIEVE. eVIDENCE TO ME SUGGESTS this woman was indeed unwell to a nature and degree which made it impossible for one person to surmount what she was dealing with ON HER OWN< AND WITHOUT THE HELP SHE SOUGHT> It is sociaty which should be on trial in this case.
|
|
|
|
Post by fmk on Mar 23, 2005 17:52:23 GMT -6
I agree fully with Twomey, the point is this Mack, regardless of how organised she was, you need to exaMINE WHAT WAS DRIVING THOSE ACTIONS, HER RELIGIOS IDEATION AND BELIEFS WHICH WERE OUT OF LINE WITH WHAT MOST RELIGIOUS PEOPLE BELIEVE. eVIDENCE TO ME SUGGESTS this woman was indeed unwell to a nature and degree which made it impossible for one person to surmount what she was dealing with ON HER OWN< AND WITHOUT THE HELP SHE SOUGHT> It is sociaty which should be on trial in this case.  |
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Mar 24, 2005 8:25:31 GMT -6
and your point? FMK (if you have one?)
|
|
|
|
Post by fmk on Mar 24, 2005 19:47:53 GMT -6
My point is , were you high on drugs or plastered with the drink when you wrote that?
I know you come on here drunk and in fairness you have never denied it ,a lot of people relax with a drink on line , most don't let it rule their thoughts though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Mar 25, 2005 4:34:00 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by fmk on Mar 25, 2005 4:38:49 GMT -6
you must admit , its a shocking debacle of a post , quite a mess
|
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Mar 27, 2005 10:54:11 GMT -6
yes, there are typo's in the post, am I to assume this is your "pot at me"?
My gosh, was that all it was? Get more frequent OPA's until you are level again.
|
|
|
|
Post by fmk on Mar 27, 2005 15:47:27 GMT -6
no no , not a pop at you , even though the top 3-4 threads here last posts are shots at either myself or another i won't retaliate outside of Armegedden.
I just had had a flash of the investigating officers face when you hand in one of your reports , that was all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Mar 29, 2005 10:21:02 GMT -6
Either I or my job or both really bothers you does'nt it. The IRA are great, deal with it!
|
|
|
|
Post by sunshine on Mar 29, 2005 17:48:42 GMT -6
Well who knows Rob....sounds like she is not insane to me. with statements like: "The type of things that a person would have to do in order to carry out these crimes would have required logic, organization, determination a great deal of strength and a great deal of will on her part," Curry said. I agree, I was just sick when that all came out! I cannot even imagine WHY she would want to live, nor how she could live with that. He cited Yates' telling psychiatrists that she had thought about using a knife to kill her children, but determined that would be "too bloody." He also pointed to a tape-recorded police interview in which Yates said she had thought about killing her children for two years, and in the weeks leading up to the drownings had filled the bathtub with water but "didn't do it that time." "She decided not to do it then because she knew it was wrong, she knew it was illegal," Curry told the panel. Yup sounds like it was, premeditated to me. She is mentally able to file an appeal, maybe if she gets another bite at the apple, she could get the DP....if she gets ahold of a jury that won't buy the insane crap. Thats what she should have gotten in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Mar 31, 2005 19:47:45 GMT -6
I agree fully with Twomey, the point is this Mack, regardless of how organised she was, you need to exaMINE WHAT WAS DRIVING THOSE ACTIONS, HER RELIGIOS IDEATION AND BELIEFS WHICH WERE OUT OF LINE WITH WHAT MOST RELIGIOUS PEOPLE BELIEVE. eVIDENCE TO ME SUGGESTS this woman was indeed unwell to a nature and degree which made it impossible for one person to surmount what she was dealing with ON HER OWN< AND WITHOUT THE HELP SHE SOUGHT> It is sociaty which should be on trial in this case. You can be mentally ill and still be held responsible for your actions. Psychotic or not, she freely elected to kill. She had the presence of mind to call police because she knew what she had done and that it was wrong. All religious beliefs are by definition irrational. Hers are more so only to a degree. If we make comparisons to mainstream religion, we are going to find ourselves eventually acquitting anyone with a strong religious belief in murder. The crime of murder is universal and secular. |
|
|
|
Post by abby on Apr 8, 2005 11:55:53 GMT -6
It is sociaty which should be on trial in this case. Oh no, you did NOT just say that. 
|
|
|
|
Post by fmk on Apr 12, 2005 5:18:55 GMT -6
It's a typical anti-US statement commen from this type of poster.The poster obviously hasn't thought it out well and judging by the use of fonts was probably intoxicated or "high".
|
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Apr 12, 2005 6:16:27 GMT -6
Albeit the typo's, the post still stands, respond to the points if you are able FMK.
|
|
|
|
Post by fmk on Apr 12, 2005 20:43:31 GMT -6
I would if i could read it..hurts the eyes to even look at.
|
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Apr 13, 2005 5:56:57 GMT -6
I would if i could read it..hurts the eyes to even look at.  ??FMK I suggest opticians or failing that, literacy classes? |
|
|
|
Post by fmk on Apr 13, 2005 16:38:41 GMT -6
I agree fully with Twomey, the point is this Mack, regardless of how organised she was, you need to exaMINE WHAT WAS DRIVING THOSE ACTIONS, HER RELIGIOS IDEATION AND BELIEFS WHICH WERE OUT OF LINE WITH WHAT MOST RELIGIOUS PEOPLE BELIEVE. eVIDENCE TO ME SUGGESTS this woman was indeed unwell to a nature and degree which made it impossible for one person to surmount what she was dealing with ON HER OWN< AND WITHOUT THE HELP SHE SOUGHT> It is sociaty which should be on trial in this case. look at it again ba'jaws , now who needs an optician and a literacy class ? |
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Apr 13, 2005 16:51:00 GMT -6
You dont half go on about it, dont you? Why not move on man, there must be something else you can latch onto. Typo's do happen, even to me, and yes, even the bad one you refer to. OK? Lets leave it and not let it distract from the point.
|
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Apr 13, 2005 17:23:51 GMT -6
Sloppy writing is very disrespectful to the reader, Felix. You are indicating that your thoughts and arguments are not worth being clearly understood by anyone. You are forcing the reader to take extra time sifting through your mistakes to find meaning. Your mistakes are such that this is often not possible.
Is this also how you communicate at work, Felix? Are you this sloppy on a job application? Is this how you want your children to communicate? Do your business or professional e-mails reflect this casual attitude toward the written word?
George Bulwer Lytton said the pen is mightier than the sword. What you seem to be writing with, Felix, is a crayon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Apr 20, 2005 8:45:01 GMT -6
Sloppy writing is very disrespectful to the reader, Felix. You are indicating that your thoughts and arguments are not worth being clearly understood by anyone. You are forcing the reader to take extra time sifting through your mistakes to find meaning. Your mistakes are such that this is often not possible.
Is this also how you communicate at work, Felix? Are you this sloppy on a job application? Is this how you want your children to communicate? Do your business or professional e-mails reflect this casual attitude toward the written word?
George Bulwer Lytton said the pen is mightier than the sword. What you seem to be writing with, Felix, is a crayon. JosephPhilips.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
You know Joe, until you just posted that, I really thought the kicking and humiliation you had the other night had been like water off a duck's back next morning. Guess it struck right home, did'nt it? BTW, do you or have you ever worked in a morgue? The reason is that your personality seems to fit a certain profile. Do you want to know more?
|
|
