Yates- murder found guilty in Texas

Whoa..
What make judge thinks she is not guilty.. How come her children drowned the water?

Impossible... who did to the young children? *puzzled*
 
A jury found Andrea Yates not guilty

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- 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.

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.

The jury 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.

In both trials, Yates, 42, pleaded innocent by reason of insanity. Under Texas law, a person can be found insane if, because of a severe mental illness, he or she does not know the crime is wrong.

The jury earlier asked to review the videotape of Yates' July 2001 evaluation by Dr. Phillip Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist who testified for the defense that she did not know killing the children was wrong because she was trying to save them from hell.

Resnick told jurors that Yates was in a delusional state and believed 6-month-old Mary, 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old Paul, 5-year-old John and 7-year-old Noah would grow up to be criminals because she had ruined them.

Jurors later asked to review Yates' November 2001 videotaped evaluation by Dr. Park Dietz, the state's expert witness whose testimony led an appeals court to overturn Yates' 2002 capital murder conviction last year.

Dietz, a forensic psychiatrist, testified in her first trial that an episode of the television series "Law & Order" depicted a woman who was acquitted by reason of insanity after drowning her children. But no such episode existed. State District Judge Belinda Hill barred attorneys in this trial from mentioning that issue.

On Tuesday, after jurors asked for the trial transcript involving defense attorney George Parnham's questioning of Dietz about the definition of obsessions, the judge brought the jury back into the courtroom.

The court reporter then read the brief transcript, in which Dietz said Yates "believed that Satan was at least present. She felt or sensed the presence." Dietz had testified that Yates' thoughts about harming her children were an obsession and a symptom of severe depression -- not psychosis.

Earlier Tuesday, jurors reviewed the slide presentation of the state's key expert witness, Dr. Michael Welner, a forensic psychiatrist who evaluated Yates in May. He testified that she did not kill her children to save them from hell as she claims, but because she was overwhelmed and felt inadequate as a mother.
 
GalaxyAngel said:
Whoa..
What make judge thinks she is not guilty.. How come her children drowned the water?
parody.abortion_tshirt.andrea_yates.jpg


Impossible... who did to the young children? *puzzled*
Click to expand...

they think, she is insane to kill those children.

paula-yates.jpg


The children are so beautiful and adorable !

top.yates.children.jpg


It breaks my heart !
 
GalaxyAngel said:
Whoa..
What make judge thinks she is not guilty.. How come her children drowned the water?

Impossible... who did to the young children? *puzzled*
Click to expand...

A jury found her innocent by reason of insanity. The evidence proved that she believed that Satan was in her, and she thought she had to kill the children to save them from hell.
 
Kalista said:
they think, she is insane to kill those children.

paula-yates.jpg


The children are so beautiful and adorable !

top.yates.children.jpg


It breaks my heart !
Click to expand...

It is heartbreaking, Sabrina, but she is insane.
 
That is still no excuse to murder her own children. She could have requested prayers from spiritual praying warriors from church who will help her fight satan in the spirit. If she did not feel safe with her kids with the ongoing battle with satan then she could have had her family or relatives look after the kids while she prayed and fasted to cast out the demons in Jesus Christ's name. I also think the insanity defense is over-rated. You have to be truly insane in order to have an insane defense. I think she knew the difference and if she felt she was a unfit mother then she could have enjoyed going to mothering classes and talking with another moms on how to improve and become a better mom for herself and the kids. I do believe satan did attack Andrea but that is still no excuse to murder her own kids. Remember satan decieveth the whole world. Real Christian moms do not do those kinds of things.
 
Kalista said:
HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- 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.

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.

The jury 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.

In both trials, Yates, 42, pleaded innocent by reason of insanity. Under Texas law, a person can be found insane if, because of a severe mental illness, he or she does not know the crime is wrong.

The jury earlier asked to review the videotape of Yates' July 2001 evaluation by Dr. Phillip Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist who testified for the defense that she did not know killing the children was wrong because she was trying to save them from hell.

Resnick told jurors that Yates was in a delusional state and believed 6-month-old Mary, 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old Paul, 5-year-old John and 7-year-old Noah would grow up to be criminals because she had ruined them.

Jurors later asked to review Yates' November 2001 videotaped evaluation by Dr. Park Dietz, the state's expert witness whose testimony led an appeals court to overturn Yates' 2002 capital murder conviction last year.

Dietz, a forensic psychiatrist, testified in her first trial that an episode of the television series "Law & Order" depicted a woman who was acquitted by reason of insanity after drowning her children. But no such episode existed. State District Judge Belinda Hill barred attorneys in this trial from mentioning that issue.

On Tuesday, after jurors asked for the trial transcript involving defense attorney George Parnham's questioning of Dietz about the definition of obsessions, the judge brought the jury back into the courtroom.

The court reporter then read the brief transcript, in which Dietz said Yates "believed that Satan was at least present. She felt or sensed the presence." Dietz had testified that Yates' thoughts about harming her children were an obsession and a symptom of severe depression -- not psychosis.

Earlier Tuesday, jurors reviewed the slide presentation of the state's key expert witness, Dr. Michael Welner, a forensic psychiatrist who evaluated Yates in May. He testified that she did not kill her children to save them from hell as she claims, but because she was overwhelmed and felt inadequate as a mother.
Click to expand...

This is a repost. Could you not click the link I provided?
 
JohnnyE said:
That is still no excuse to murder her own children. She could have requested prayers from spiritual praying warriors from church who will help her fight satan in the spirit. If she did not feel safe with her kids with the ongoing battle with satan then she could have had her family or relatives look after the kids while she prayed and fasted to cast out the demons in Jesus Christ's name. I also think the insanity defense is over-rated. You have to be truly insane in order to have an insane defense. I think she knew the difference and if she felt she was a unfit mother then she could have enjoyed going to mothering classes and talking with another moms on how to improve and become a better mom for herself and the kids. I do believe satan did attack Andrea but that is still no excuse to murder her own kids. Remember satan decieveth the whole world. Real Christian moms do not do those kinds of things.
Click to expand...

You must not understand psychosis.

The defintion of psychosis:

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001553.htm

Alternative names

Psychotic
Definition Return to top

Psychosis is a loss of contact with reality, typically including delusions (false ideas about what is taking place or who one is) and hallucinations (seeing or hearing things which aren't there).

Causes, incidence, and risk factors Return to top

Psychosis is a severe mental condition characterized by a loss of contact with reality. There are numerous potential causes:

alcohol and certain drugs can induce psychosis
bipolar disorder (manic depression)
brain tumors
epilepsy
psychotic depression
schizophrenia
dementia (Alzheimer's and other degenerative brain disorders)
stroke
Symptoms Return to top

loss of touch with reality
seeing, hearing, feeling, or otherwise perceiving things that are not there (hallucinations)
disorganized thought and/or speech
emotion is exhibited in an abnormal manner
extreme excitement (mania)
confusion
depression and sometimes suicidal thoughts
unfounded fear/suspicion
mistaken perceptions (illusions)
false beliefs (delusions)

Signs and tests

Psychological evaluation and testing are used to diagnosis the cause of the psychosis.

Laboratory or radiological testing may not be essential, but sometimes can help pinpoint the exact diagnosis. This may include:

MRI of the brain
tests for syphilis
drug screens
Treatment Return to top

Treatment varies depending on the cause of the psychosis. Care in a hospital is often needed to ensure safety of the patient. Drugs that diminish auditory hallucinations and delusions and stabilize thinking and behavior (antipsychotic drugs) are helpful. Group or individual therapy can also be useful.

Expectations (prognosis) Return to top

The expectations for the outcome vary with the specific disorder. Many of the symptoms can be controlled with long-term treatment.
 
Oceanbreeze said:
You must not understand psychosis.
Click to expand...

I do understand pyschosis, it is when a person can't control her thoughts and act upon them but that still does not excuse her murdering those kids. She still has to take responsiblity for herself even if she is having a pyschotic eposide.
 
JohnnyE said:
I do understand pyschosis, it is when a person can't control her thoughts and act upon them but that still does not excuse her murdering those kids. She still has to take responsiblity for herself even if she is having a pyschotic eposide.
Click to expand...

It doesn't work that way for the mentally ill. Check the post above again. I edited to include the definition of psychosis for you.
 
FreedummyRing said:
they are going to release her.
Click to expand...

I would not let her get near my kids if I have any. :nono:

She may be a nutcase but she is still responsible for what she did to those kids. :mad:
 
since Oceanbreeze is so happy about this, maybe she will
let Andrea moves in with her. :whistle:

Just kidding. :)
 
FreedummyRing said:
they are going to release her.
Click to expand...

They are going to commit her to an institution and treat her. If she is deemed safe, then, they may let her out. But, trust me when I tell you, she's not going to be free to walk amongst us for a very long time. She's clearly a danger to herself and others. She'll be placed on a locked ward and treated for her illness.

In the future, she may be released, but that's hypothetical.
 
JohnnyE said:
I would not let her get near my kids if I have any. :nono:

She may be a nutcase but she is still responsible for what she did to those kids. :mad:
Click to expand...

I wouldn't let her near any child, either. I never said she should be allowed out. I just believe she should be sent to a mental facility and treated for her illnesses.
 
Oceanbreeze said:
I wouldn't let her near any child, either. I never said she should be allowed out. I just believe she should be sent to a mental facility and treated for her illnesses.
Click to expand...


After all of this, it just isn't worth it.... all the stress from court and prison.

If the children were still alive today, Noah would be 12 years old, John would be 10 years old, Paul would be 8 years old, Luke 7, and Mary 6.

And by the time Andrea come out of the mental facility, her kids
would have been grown....

And plus all the money spent on this trial and so many heartache, trying to help Andrea stay out of jail.

If she didn't want those kids, she should have put them in foster homes or something.

SMH
 
Back
Top