Was found not quilty of murder becuase of insanity today .
http//www.courttv.com/trials/yates/072606_verdict2_ctv.html
Best thing for her she will be in a mental institution for a long long time .
the reporter said *rusty*her ex husband was sticking by her , In my mind he should have been in jail ALONG SIDE HER . seing her in pics she looked healther and fatter then when she was married to him , i think he believed in the old saying keep a wife well f**k*d and poorly shod
Hmm...........not very impressed with the final verdict.
As for her husband sticking by her thats strange as he divorced her and married again last year
The verdict seems OK to me, but I think she should be forcibly sterilized to be on the safe side. It seems she would only be a threat to herself or any future children.
The verdict seems OK to me, but I think she should be forcibly sterilized to be on the safe side. It seems she would only be a threat to herself or any future children.
As long as this doesn't set a trend to others who"murder" their children and then plead insanity :evil: Also it will be interesting to see how her remaining in a mental institution is decided. How often will she be reviewed? Who will decide if she should be allowed to be free again?
Our local news interviewed one of the jurors from the original trial when she was found guilty and it was interesting to hear her say how this trial was all about Andrea and not about the children. I totally agree with that statement.
I think the children are gone and nothing will bring them back.
Would it not be punishment enough that if the woman is not out of her mind, she now has to live in a mental institution indefinitely with the knowledge of what she did?
I think her life is to all intents and purposes over - whatever victory she had in court this week is somewhat hollow in the bigger picture. I doubt she is going to go off next month, remarry and then have more kids.
It has to be all about Andrea Yates since the act is admitted, how could it be about the children. Logically, there are two questions involved here
1. Was she insane at the time? If yes, figure out where and how to put her into a secure facility with mental health capability.
2. If not insane, what should be the sentence? thats where it moves to being about the children, at least, in part.
The verdict seems OK to me, but I think she should be forcibly sterilized to be on the safe side. It seems she would only be a threat to herself or any future children.
As long as this doesn't set a trend to others who"murder" their children and then plead insanity :evil: Also it will be interesting to see how her remaining in a mental institution is decided. How often will she be reviewed? Who will decide if she should be allowed to be free again?
Our local news interviewed one of the jurors from the original trial when she was found guilty and it was interesting to hear her say how this trial was all about Andrea and not about the children. I totally agree with that statement.
Insanity is an incredibly difficult defense to succeed on. Especially in front of a Texas jury.
Thousands, probably tens of thousands, or US residents with mental health conditions get sentenced to substantial prison terms every year.
As to the latter part - the case is about the accused - not the victim and should always be that way.
The State has to prove that each and every element of the crime was commited by the accused and thus they are the focus.
We should be wary of a system of 'victims justice' which would only lead to discrimination and feed prejudices.
Completely agree Rob, the trial process should be about the guilt or innocence of the accused no matter how haenous the crime maybe, problem is emotion on the part of the survivors family the enraged public at large and probably the jury contributes to the proceedings when it shouldn't.
We can all say "but what if it was your family" but that is the whole point, vengeance is a brief and empty emotion, the justice process has to carry on long after all involved with this case are dead and gone.
Completely agree Rob, the trial process should be about the guilt or innocence of the accused no matter how haenous the crime maybe, problem is emotion on the part of the survivors family the enraged public at large and probably the jury contributes to the proceedings when it shouldn't.
We can all say "but what if it was your family" but that is the whole point, vengeance is a brief and empty emotion, the justice process has to carry on long after all involved with this case are dead and gone.
Agreed, I state ideal, reality is different. This is one of the reasons we have strict 'sub judice' laws in the UK. However the opposite is often true here where the Prosecution and Defense will sometimes fight to see who can best taint the jury pool. The Duke University rape case is a topical example.
That poor woman has a long history of psychosis which was exploited be her 'dear' husband, who remarried, and that charlatan Woronieki who should be in prison. He told her her kids would go to hell if they didn't find Jesus by a certain age.
She was let down by those who were supposed to care for her.
Yes, of course its hard to prove insanity in the US, they're all insane.
Yes, of course its hard to prove insanity in the US, they're all insane.
Indeed.
The jury and the prosecution appear to take the line: "we're all mad. What makes you so special?" :shock:
Yes, of course its hard to prove insanity in the US, they're all insane.
Amazingly succinct, I completely agree, they are all completely mad. So this is how it feels to be the only sane patient in an Asylum.
Surely sanity is a normative value. I think that belief in some benificient extra terestrial entity creating the world is a symptom of some deep and untreated psychosis.
Listening to said entity and following its instructions is clearly a symptom of this psychosis.
However in somewhere like Kansas or 1600 Pensyvania Avenue, not hearing the voices or following their instructions would be a classic symptom of the disease of independent thought.
I think this should have been done four years ago.
I also think her husband should be up on some charges.