Yates- murder found guilty in Texas

K

Kalista

New Member
Premium Member
Joined
May 20, 2003
Messages
7,926
Reaction score
4
A Texas appeals court in Houston Thursday reversed the capital murder convictions of Andrea Yates, the woman who drowned her five children in a bathtub, citing the false testimony of a prosecution witness.

According to a report from The Associated Press, Yates' lawyers argued last month before a three-judge panel of the First Court of Appeals in Houston that psychiatrist Park Dietz was wrong when he said he consulted on an episode of the TV show "Law and Order" involving a woman found innocent by reason of insanity for drowning her children.

After Yates was convicted, attorneys in the case and jurors learned no such episode existed, the AP reported.

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.

Yates told authorities that Satan told her to kill the children. Despite a documented history of mental illness, a jury rejected her plea of innocent by reason of insanity and convicted her of murder in 2002. She was sentenced to life in prison but will be eligible for parole in 40 years.


MOD: I could not find old thread to be merge this.
 
Sabrina said:
A Texas appeals court in Houston Thursday reversed the capital murder convictions of Andrea Yates, the woman who drowned her five children in a bathtub, citing the false testimony of a prosecution witness.

According to a report from The Associated Press, Yates' lawyers argued last month before a three-judge panel of the First Court of Appeals in Houston that psychiatrist Park Dietz was wrong when he said he consulted on an episode of the TV show "Law and Order" involving a woman found innocent by reason of insanity for drowning her children.

After Yates was convicted, attorneys in the case and jurors learned no such episode existed, the AP reported.

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.

Yates told authorities that Satan told her to kill the children. Despite a documented history of mental illness, a jury rejected her plea of innocent by reason of insanity and convicted her of murder in 2002. She was sentenced to life in prison but will be eligible for parole in 40 years.


MOD: I could not find old thread to be merge this.
Click to expand...

Whoa! I had a feeling her conviction would be overturned. Don't know why, but just had a feeling. In a way, I'm glad. I know I'm probably in the minority here, but I don't think this woman deserves to be in prison. She deserves to be away from society, yes, but not in a prison. Personally, I like to see her put into a mental facility for the remainder of her life where she can be properly treated for her illnesses. That's just my opinion, though. :dunno:
 
Last edited:
Conviction was overturned based on a "Law & Order" episode that was never aired.

What kind of justice are we getting if people are getting convicted with bullshit rap from prosecution witness.

Richard
 
Nesmuth said:
Conviction was overturned based on a "Law & Order" episode that was never aired.

What kind of justice are we getting if people are getting convicted with bullshit rap from prosecution witness.

Richard
Click to expand...

Agreed! You know what else? The more I know about the case, the angrier I get. A week or so ago, Rusty Yates (AY's hubby), was on Larry King Live talking about his feelings about the overturned verdict. In hearing him, one might have sympathy for him. However lat night, Andrea Yates' Mother and brother was on LKL, and they were talking about the case. The more I heard what they had to say, the more I felt "snowed" by Rusty.

This man KNEW his wife was mentally ill. This man also didn't do enough to get her the proper help she needed and deserved. That was very clear to me after listening to the Mom and brother. I also think Rusty should have been charged with the deaths of those kids, and was puzzled by the lack of investigation into his culpability. But, I guess, they figured they got the person responsible, so why bother? But, they SHOULD have bothered! In my mind, Rusty is just as responsible for his kid's deaths as she is. In fact, he is MORE responsible, because, he's the SANE ONE!
 
Cheri said:
Now back on topic: I agree with you Oceanbreeze about her husband is more responsible for her action because he was aware of her problems and did not assist her some help, before it went too far. And there nothing they can do now to bring those boys back, It's too late and the Husband should be charge too for neglect the problems she was having.
Click to expand...

I think so, too, Cheri. I really think they should have charged him with some type of negligent homocide or child endangerment. In my mind, he is just as responsible for what happened to those kids. And, I really believe, moreso than she is. Granted, I don't think she is innocent. She did kill five innocent human beings, and should be locked away for it. But, I think she needs treatment for her illnesses moreso than a prison sentence. She has been locked away in the psychiatric wing of the prison she is at, which is something. However, she also needs therapy along with the meds she is getting. Shw won't get comprehensive mental care unless she is placed in a hospital setting.
 
Well, I think the problem with legal jurisdictions that allow the insanity plea (some states do not allow it) is that the defendant runs the risk of staying in a mental institution for life vs maybe getting parole if imprisoned. Then, too, if the defendant who is remanded to a mental institution who is declared "cured" and released, won't this be a potential sticky issue? Who knows how this person will conduct him/herself once back in society?
 
Cheri said:
That is different with someone who was and is suffering mental illness, Prison isn't the answer for her help at all. She is just physically and mentally exhausted and should belong in the hospital not in prison. You have to look at the whole evidences not the crime she commit. Understood?

And for her husband Russell should be charge involuntary manslaughter, Doesn't matter if he wasn't there during the time his children were drown in the bathtub he knew his wife suffered mental illness, He should have gotten her help or have a responsible adult to watch over her, He did not do that he put his children in a position of dangerous, and look what happened? His children died. He should take the blame for it also.
Click to expand...

:werd: Cheri, I was gonna come back with this, but you said it first. So, :bowdown:

Thank you!! :)

She is mentally ill. She would have never killed those kids had she been in her right mind. Being liberal or conservative has absolutely nothing to do with this. It's Texas's laws in regards to this that needs to change.
 
Last edited:
Banjo said:
Actually, I recall the reason John Kinkley had shot Reagan was to impress Jodie Foster. At least, that's what I think I remember.
Click to expand...

That is very correct!
 
I heard about these story. I have read about them.

Yes, she is a sick woman and has a lousy husband & bad father. He treat her bad and have no support her with children which it's tooooo much burden for her. He drive her to physical. Nobody pay the attention how sick she is. She's upset and say that she love her children soo much and has to kill them to save their "suffering" in the future. She plan to kill herself after kill her children but she didnt. I dont know what happened to her until I read your posts here.

Yes, I'm agree that she belongs to physical hospital, not prison.
 
Andrea Yates leaves jail for treatment

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060202/us_nm/crime_mother_dc

Andrea Yates, the Texas mother awaiting retrial for drowning her five children, was released from jail on $200,000 bail on Thursday on condition she goes directly to a mental health facility for treatment.


I thought, State of TX has pentaily death.

The former nurse pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, but was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to life in prison.

The case became a cause celebre for mental health advocates who say postpartum depression is a serious, but often neglected illness. They said she should have received treatment, not prosecution.
 
Oceanbreeze said:
Whoa! I had a feeling her conviction would be overturned. Don't know why, but just had a feeling. In a way, I'm glad. I know I'm probably in the minority here, but I don't think this woman deserves to be in prison. She deserves to be away from society, yes, but not in a prison. Personally, I like to see her put into a mental facility for the remainder of her life where she can be properly treated for her illnesses. That's just my opinion, though. :dunno:
Click to expand...

Do they really have such facilities, and can they really keep people there for life? And would the legal system actually be willing to do that? Only on that condition would I be willing to agree with you.
 
Kalista said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060202/us_nm/crime_mother_dc

Andrea Yates, the Texas mother awaiting retrial for drowning her five children, was released from jail on $200,000 bail on Thursday on condition she goes directly to a mental health facility for treatment.


I thought, State of TX has pentaily death.

That is because Texas is less willing to send women to death row. That can happen but that is very rare...

I agree she should be sent to death row.

There is no excuse for drowning her own kids.

Texas has no problem sending the guys to death row

Sending women to death row has and will always be a controversial issue.
Click to expand...
 
Rose Immortal said:
Do they really have such facilities, and can they really keep people there for life? And would the legal system actually be willing to do that? Only on that condition would I be willing to agree with you.
Click to expand...

Yes they have the Texas State Hospital Forensic Unit where people can be locked up for life but there is no death row on the state hospital grounds.

If a death sentence is passed upon that person in Texas then that person will spend his/her time in the big house ( prison ) where there is a death row unit.
 
Last edited:
Rose Immortal said:
Do they really have such facilities, and can they really keep people there for life? And would the legal system actually be willing to do that? Only on that condition would I be willing to agree with you.
Click to expand...

They have mental facilities equipped to handle illnesses like Andrea Yates has, but housing them for life? I agree it's unlikely to happen. The only case I know of that has anything to do with this is John Hinkley. He was found innocent by reason of insanity for the attempted murder of President Reagan back in 1981. Since that time, he has been committed to St Elizabeth's mental hospital in Washington DC. He's been there for 26 yrs now, but that has more to do with politics than anything. If he had attempted to kill anyone else other than a president, than he probably would be out by now. Sad.

Here's the thing, though. I agree Andrea Yates should NOT be in society, but to commit her to prison for life doesn't do any good. She is mentally ill. She is also unlikely to kill again regardless of whether she is in a hospital or a prison, so I say commit her and treat her. It's a lot less expensive this way, too.
 
Miss*Pinocchio said:
Whatever. Husband can get $200,000 from bank's personal loan.
Click to expand...

They are no longer married. Besides that, her lawyer put up the $200K for her bail.
 
Inmate Says Andrea Yates Said to Copy Her

Inmate Says Andrea Yates Advised Her to Fake Mental Illness to Escape Prosecution

HOUSTON Feb 24, 2006 (AP)— Andrea Yates once advised a fellow inmate that she could escape prosecution by pretending to be mentally ill and persuading a psychiatrist she suffered from serious disorders, according to court documents filed Thursday by prosecutors.

Felicia Doe, who spent four days in a jail block with Yates in 2002, told prosecutors last year that Yates instructed her not to eat, not to speak properly and not to be friendly or open in front of people if she wanted to "beat her case."

Yates, who is awaiting a new trial in the drowning of her young children, allegedly told Doe that if she could get the jail psychiatrist on her side, they could testify to her mental health, and they couldn't prosecute her if she was sick, according to the documents, which describe interviews with witnesses who could be called during Yates' trial.

"According to the witness, the defendant basically told her, 'Do what I'm doing,'" prosecutor Kaylynn Williford wrote.

Yates' defense attorney, George Parham, called the account "sad and ludicrous."

"That is absolutely so bogus, it doesn't even deserve a response," he said. "That discounts the medications that this woman was on, the mental illness she suffers from."

Yates, 41, has pleaded innocent by reason of insanity.

During her 2002 trial, psychiatrists testified Yates suffered from schizophrenia and postpartum depression, but expert witnesses disagreed over the severity of her illness and whether it prevented her from knowing right from wrong.

A jury rejected Yates' original insanity defense and sentenced her to life in prison for the drowning of three of her five children ages 7, 5 and 6 months. Evidence was presented about the drowning of two others, ages 3 and 2, but Yates was not charged in their deaths.

Her convictions were overturned last year based on false testimony by an expert witness.

Doe, who could not be reached for comment by the AP, also told prosecutors that Yates disclosed details of the slayings, explaining that she locked a door so her oldest son, 7-year-old Noah, could not escape the house and describing him as crying so hard he vomited.

"She hit his head against the bathtub several times in an effort to incapacitate him," Doe told prosecutors.

Another inmate, Lynnette Licantino, told prosecutors Yates said her children "were just too much" and that her husband at the time, Russell Yates, would not let her put them in day care, according to the documents.

A phone listing for Licantino could not be found Thursday.

Judge Belinda Hill is scheduled to hold a hearing Friday to consider pretrial requests from both sides. The trial is set to begin March 20.
 
Back
Top