Why Do Some Cheer The Yates Verdict? Andrea Yates Will Be Rotting In Hell.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

Cause that's what a mental institution is.

I don't get it. I see some replies as if this is a huge breath of relief or something or as if they're so thankful this woman can now get the help she needs.

Well firstly let me offer the disclaimer that I do believe this woman is and was in dire need of psychological help. I don't argue that she should reasonably fit the criteria for not guilty by means of insanity. But that's not my beef.

What gets me is how easy it is for some to proclaim victory as if Mrs. Yates now has some beautiful potential for a future instead of rotting away behind bars.

Reality check people! I've been in a mental institution AND I've served time behind bars. Given the choice between the two, I'd take the time behind bars! She doesn't gain any freedom from this. She is severely sick and the chance of her being released for years and years to come is slim to none. Mental hospitals are a living hell, I dare say even worse than prison. I'm not sure this is something to be overjoyed about, or thinking she's going to have this nice peaceful existance where she will get the help she needs.

I just felt the need to say that. Mental hospitals are fucking hell. She will be locked in this hell for years and years to come, all the while being experimented on with medication after medication while she forgets she even exists, all the while having a psychiatrist visit once a week to pretend to care but really only going through the motions while the patient suffers without any real help at all.

This will be hell for her. More hell I dare say than prison would've been. When someone is found not guilty by reason of insanity, especially to this level of it, it should NEVER be something to say "Yay!" about or "Good for her!" about, because that verdict means she is truly THAT sick and will now suffer locked behind the walls of a hellish mental institution. It is never a good thing for someone to be found to be that mentally incapable. That's all I have to say.

Peace,

OMC

[Liberal Veteran]

1. A lot of people, myself included, thought the original verdict....

...was a horrendous and vile miscarriage of justice.

Nothing will EVER undo the circumstances that led to a trial in the first place, but when a proper verdict is returned after such a heinous original verdict in a state not exactly known for a great justice system, then it is a victory.

[Malikshah]

58. Bravo. Damn, I'm shocked that this wasn't glaringly obvious

to the OP --especially w/ regard to the title of the thread.

Jail or treatment? which is better?

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

3. If You're Going To Respond, At Least Do So Without Complete Ignorance.

She wasn't facing the death penalty.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MichiganVote]

11. But there were some shenanigans involved in the case re: death penalty

Andrea Yates Verdict

by Alan M. Dershowitz

Ó2002

"The prosecutors in the Andrea Yates case never really expected, nor even wanted, the jury to return a death sentence. They manipulated the death penalty processing order to get a pro-prosecution jury, more likely to reject the insanity defense and return a verdict of guilt. This tactic, well known to those who practice criminal law, is becoming more widespread in states which authorize the death penalty. In most cases, this tactic is more difficult to detect and expose than it is in the Andrea Yates case. Here, one of the prosecutors practically invited the jury not to return a death sentence. It was either the most under-zealous prosecutor I have ever come across or he knew exactly what he was doing. The latter seems more likely.

The prosecutors knew full well that if Andrea Yates got the death penalty, her case - - including the merits of the conviction - - would probably be examined more scrupulously by the appellate courts. They also knew that a death sentence would be quite controversial and would lead to criticism. What they wanted was the certainty or conviction of 1st degree murder without the burdens of defending a death sentence. They got exactly what they wanted and what they had planned for.

The problem is that if my assessment is correct, their actions are highly questionable. By representing to the court that they were seeking the death penalty, if they in fact were not really doing so, they may have manipulated the system. Why would they, and so many other prosecutors, engage in this charade? The answer is that the legislatures and the courts have implicitly invited them to do so, by establishing rules that permit prosecutors to secure more favorable juries if they seek the death penalty. In cases in which the prosecutors are asking for the death penalty they have the right to challenge for cause any juror who would be unwilling to impose the death penalty. This insures the prosecution a skewed jury consisting exclusively of citizens who favor the death penalty and assuring the absence of any jurors who oppose the death penalty. How one stands on the death penalty may be relevant if the prosecutor is actually seeking to have that penalty imposed by the jury. But if the purpose of seeking the death penalty is simply to get a more law and order, pro-prosecution jury, then the practice is reprehensible. Yet the courts have generally refused to look behind the prosecutors’ claim that they are, in good faith, seeking the death penalty."

http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/dershowitz/Articles/yates.html
-----------------------------

I agree there will be no peace for this woman regardless of where she is installed. But I am glad that she was not judged guilty. It would have been a miscarriage of justice, IMHO.

[jerry611]

5. She was NOT facing the death penalty in this trial!!!!!!!!!

In this trial, the worst she could get is life in prison!

[Redstone]

4. I haven't heard any cheering. At the bar today when the verdict came in,

I heard a bunch of stupid, simpleminded vitriol like "Yeah, when she was in jail she was teaching the other inmates how to work the system" and other crap.

My wife had to step on my foot really hard to keep me from kicking some ass.

Redstone

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

7. I Guess I Mean It In The Way That Some Have Such A Simplistic View Of What

it means. Her life will be hell whether she's in prison or the mental facility. I'm not sure why some were pushing so hard for this outcome or why some feel that this is better for her somehow, and that the original verdict was a 'travesty'.

I do agree that this new verdict was appropriate, but I feel nothing short of absolute sorrow and fear for her. As I had said, I think this is the worse of the two options. I'm not sure others who think this is somehow a victory for her truly understand an iota of how much hell one of those places are.

I feel for her dearly and pray the Lord will be with her for years to come.

[Redstone]

19. Very well said. Very. I'm damned impressed with both your thinking

and your expression of your thoughts.

Looking at her face (which I was), you could damn sure see that SHE didn't see it as any kind of victory.

There is no victory for her. Only a life of suffering.

And it's sad that there's no justice for her kids, because her monster of an ex-husband walks the streets a free man.

Redstone

[SPKrazy]

52. She Has A Better Chance Of Getting Help

in a mental institution, and I don't know where, or why you were in a mental institution, but there are many worse places to be than a mental institution.


It's a victory for mental illness in that it sets a precedent for people who are mentally ill who commit crimes that qualify for the insanity defense to have a chance to use it in cases where they might instead have ended up behind bars for life with no treatment, or on death row (not in Andrea's case I know)

Also it is a vindication of sorts in that she is found "not guilty" by reason of insanity. Before she was found guilty. The kids are still dead, but at least the court found that she was not in a state of mind where she is legally responsible. That is some possible relief, although I think this woman is in hell because of what she did to her kids, and where she is will matter less to her than to others.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

56. Just For The Record,

I had signed myself in as a last resort. But I left with the understanding that I was farrrrr from being in need of help enough to belong there. The people there were truly sick, and I learned what that really means. I'm not going to get into the experience, but let me assure you that there are far better places to be then a mental institution as well. They can be sheer hell.

[Gatchaman]

6. it's a "victory" in the sense that

vicious law and order rethugs (you know them, the ones who would have taken her out and executed her without a trial) were denied their holy vengence today.

Ultimately, though, there is no happy ending to this tragedy.

Personally, I think there should be another term for verdicts like this, as "not guilty" usually equals "innocent", and too many people are unwilling (albiet completely able) to differentiate between the insanity verdict and "getting off".

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

15. In some states, there is a possible verdict of "guilty but insane."

In other words, the person committed the crime but was too mentally ill to be sent to prison for it.

In most states, though, the verdict would be "not guilty by reason of insanity." A lot of people, unfortunately, think a successful insanity defense (which is actually fairly rare) means the person "got off." Not so, as the OP points out. Instead of going to prison they go to a mental hospital, which, at least in some states, is no improvement over prison. And normally that sentence is indefinite (that is, you stay in the mental hospital until you are "cured," which might be never).

You also have to be *very* crazy for your insanity defense to be successful. Under the M'Naghten rule, still used in many states, a person isn't legally insane, even though we might consider him batshit crazy, unless he either doesn't realize the nature of his act (e.g., he thinks he's smashing a pumpkin instead of somebody's head), or doesn't think it was wrong (e.g., Jesus told him to do it). Jeffrey Dahmer, as deranged as he was, was legally sane.

[rug]

8. As she recovers her sanity she will recover knowledge of what she did.

It is beyond sad.

[Warren Stupidity]

9. I believe she has a better chance of getting out of

the nuthouse than she would getting paroled from a life term in texas, so yes at least the sad Mrs. Yates has some hope left.

Not guilty by reason of insanity means not guilty, and if she is ever declared not insane she can go home.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

12. But Don't Hold Your Breath On That One.

She may have had a better chance at parole then she does at release from the 'nuthouse'. If someday, years and years from now, she does have the rare fortune of being released with an illness this deep, then she will be a shell of a human being anyway and nothing like what a 'healthy' person would be. You don't almost EVER become normal in atmospheres like that.

You really have no idea how horrible life can be behind those walls...

[TomInTib]

13. You are so correct, OMC

I have been both inside-looking-out from jail and outside-looking-in at a mental institution.

I remember hanging around the psych wards at the VA and thinking that I would trade my time visiting those Hell-holes for some equal time in jail.

But what that evil woman did is inexcusable. She knew what she was doing. The prosecution blew the appeal.

I hope someone at whatever hospital in which she ends up shows her what horror drowning is. And I hope she has 20 or 30 terror-filled minutes while trying to run away before it happens.

I have no sympathy for her, whatsoever.

And that is just the way it is.

[Marie26]

14. You don't believe she was psychotic?

If not, why not?

[TomInTib]

21. I believe she was psychotic.

And I believe she deserves to die. I do not believe being crazy should be a free pass.

My sister is the craziest person I (or anyone else I know, including the Head of the Psychiatric Dept at the Texas Dept of Corrections) know.

She has committed multiple violent crimes and is out on the streets (well, not the streets - she lives very well) today, in spite of my testimonies against her. She, in Court, threatened to kill me. But money talks and she has plenty of it.

If she lived next door to you I guarantee you would have a slightly different view on the insanity defense.

[kestrel91316]

24. Executing true psychotics/schizophrenics and the retarded is BEYOND

barbaric. It's truly evil.

And yes, I do have a severely mentally ill close family mamber. By the grace of God she has neve hurt anybody. She might have, and then have to face justice at the hands of the ignorant.

[TomInTib]

33. I am a pretty barbaric motherfucker.

And I have zero sympathy for a killer of children. Zero. And I care not about personal circumstances.

I, personally, have ended many lives and I pay for it in my own way. Every day.

And I don't mind. Everything has a cost and a price.

Actually, I believe her husband shares equal blame.

[bling bling]

60. Are you a cop or a war veteran?

I don't understand what you mean when you say you've personally ended many lives.

[TomInTib]

66. Vet

I was caught up in the moment.

Wish I hadn't posted that.

Tom

[bling bling]

67. You shouldn't regret posting that. It is what it is.

And your first hand experience in such matters gives you a unique perspective that others can learn from. Thanks for sharing your opinions, I appreciate your comments.

[TomInTib]

68. Thank you, bling bling..

I am just looking for a soft place to fall...

Tom

[Marie26]

29. "Free pass?"

It sounds like you have some personal issues that you are projecting here. If someone is declared "not guilty by reason of insanity," they aren't put out on the streets - they are put in a mental institution, often permanently. The institutionalization often lasts much longer than an actual prison sentence, and the patient can't be released until the mental illness is cured & they are no longer considered a possible danger. You're spinning this like a insanity defense means the person just goes free & moves next door - and that isn't what happens at all. So, it sounds like you'd like to eliminate the insanity defense completely & instead execute people who are schizophrenic or psychotic & had no control over their actions. I find that inhumane & appalling.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Marie26]

35. Niiiicceee. nt

[Liberal Veteran]

36. So having a psychotic break is something you believe we should kill people

....for?

IMO, that mindset isn't really much of a stretch from Andrea Yates' mindset at the time of her crime.

I feel sorry for her (and moreso for her children). I guess you and I exhibit the difference between passion and compassion.

[TomInTib]

38. You are right.

We are all different, aren't we?

I have a little bit different take on life than most people here.

See #40

[Liberal Veteran]

39. What would killing her accomplish?

From my viewpoint, it would just compound an incomparable tragedy. Everything I have read and understood about this case indicates that this is not something she did out of malice, but instead did it out of a very disturbed mental state.

If vengeance is really your thing, then look at it this way: With proper mental care, she will spend the rest of her life in a mental hospital haunted by what she did.

There aren't ANY resolutions that are good. The best we can hope for is a resolution that is just. IMO, this latest verdict goes so much further toward justice than vengeance.

[Sparkly]

42. Were you sane when you killed people? nt

[lonestarnot]

16. Well Hinkley gets out on weekend passes now and again., maybe

even regularly now?? Don't know. That does not say anything about the condition of mental institutions. She killed a bunch of kids, hers in particular. If that isn't nuts, I don't know what is. She doesn't deserve to win a fucking prize. But I know some good people who work in a mental institution. They do nice things for the people who are there. I wouldn't want to be her for sure. Do you think she can be cured?

[jerry611]

18. Hinkley shot the president to impress Jodi Foster...

He didn't drown 5 kids in the bathtub...

It is a bit different...

[lonestarnot]

26. Just a bit. No shit the acts were different. She killed her own

damn kids. Nuttier than a fruit cake.

[kestrel91316]

27. Both were acts of severly delusional, untreated psychotics.

Both were more a failure of our mental health system than anything else.

Have you ever tried to convince a schizophrenic or other delusional person of the errors in their thinking??? It CANNOT be done. Heaven knows I have spent years trying. Only medication helps, and NO ONE can be forcibly medicated without due process. And due process can only come about in special circumstances. Like after the ill person finally commits a very serious crime and a judge declares them incompetent - NOT BEFORE.

There is absolutely no way to help these people until AFTER they commit a serious crime, maybe even killing someone.

[guinivere]

17. The whole thing is a tragedy of epic proportions.

You won't hear any "yay" from me. An entire family was destroyed, and it probably could have been prevented.

I don't think that she is ever going to get out of the institution.

[Qanisqineq]

20. I've been in a mental institution, too

Pure hell. I was put in the ward that was completely locked down because "someone said you'll go AWOL" if I was in the ward for those that had some privileges! I came out of there so fucked up and pissed off at the world. I never saw my doctor but was told that the state would tell the judge I needed to be there for at least 90 FUCKING DAYS at my hearing. My parents got a lawyer and threatened to sue the fucking place and I was finally released. I would have to spend an hour typing just to give you a brief glimpse of the shit I went through.

To this day, I am still so angry at that whole incident I can't forgive anyone involved -- this was 11 years ago. I only spent 1 day in jail so I can't really speak to that experience.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

28. Don't Spend The Hour.

You don't need to. I already know, friend, I already know.

[Qanisqineq]

40. Unless she went into some private institution

and not a state institution, I really can't imagine how it would be much of an improvement over jail, if at all. And why would she go into a private institution? I was with other people that had been in other state institutions and thought the one I was in was great comparatively. From my experience and what I witnessed, there is no real hope of her being "cured" and then released, the doctors don't give a damn. She'll be thrown in there and ignored; given drugs that the orderlies won't know what they are (supposedly) if she asks and made to swallow them. Here, swallow these pills in front of me, drink the water, now open your mouth and move your tongue around so I can see that they are gone. Open your hands and show me you aren't hiding them. Oh, and if you start shaking and can't breathe later, it won't be because of the drugs -- it'll be some lame attempt at getting attention and we won't do anything but make you take the same drugs the next day.

:grr:

[pitohui]

22. she wanted this chance

i respect your opinion that it's not a very good chance, but she wanted it, she fought for it, she got it

there was never any chance the woman was going to be freed, her disease caused her to kill 5 people, these were her options -- suicide, prison, or the mental institution

[fishnfla]

23. Is there any chance that her new institutional status

can be used to prevent this type of crime from happening to some other poor kids?

Lets just say, for the sake of speculation, that the mental institution in which she ends up is used as a teaching facility. Say a whole generation or 2 of psychiatric interns ends up studying and reviewing her case. What if one of them uses their knowledge to prevent the death of some other children? This would never have the chance of happening in a prison.

Perhaps, the authorities will use the experience of their knowledge gained. Kinda like you are doing now.

Then it would be a victory of sorts

[lumberjack_jeff]

49. Yeah, like organ donation - but trading in evil psychoses. n/t

[porphyrian]

25. That's an excellent argument for adequately funding mental health...

...and treating it at least equally to the rest of the health care industry with regards to insurance coverage, accessibility and again, funding. Sorry for the tangent and lack of sweeping generalization.
;)

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

31. Absolutely. There Is Such A Need For Better Mental Health Services.

And one of these days, I'm gonna get off my lazy ass and finish writing my mental help book. (And by finish, I mean going past page 12 LOL)

[porphyrian]

32. Hey, most writers get stuck on the first page.

You're practically a novelist by comparison.

[lumberjack_jeff]

48. Sorry, I just had an image.

I hope you're in a mood to appreciate the humorous spirit in which this is intended, but after reading this thread, and your post about the self-help book, the subject matter gave me a vision of Shelley Duvall pulling page after page of manuscript from a stack: "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and ...."

:D

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

54. LOL

:evilgrin:

[surfermaw]

30. He husband should have been on trial with her

He had to have known she was in trouble with her health, yet he kelp on having babies, letting her raise them, teach them. He should be held responsible for not taking care of her and should be held responsible for her having children when she was in bad health, one neighbor stated she was so dirty she smelled.. He had to have known.

[soothsayer]

59. And he moved her into a tiny trailer with them kids, too. Bastard

psycho

[Sparkly]

37. To me, it wasn't cheering for her "freedom" exactly...

I was glad the jury recognized psychosis as a level of insanity that meets the legal definition.

If psychosis doesn't warrant an insanity defense, NOTHING does.

Hopefully, it'll also make people more aware of mental illness as an ILLNESS requiring care, not people banging the sick person over the head with Bible verses showing how "BAD" she is...

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

53. Methinks You Should Re-read The OP. Both Your Comments Show A Lack Of

comprehension as to what the OP was about.

[lumberjack_jeff]

46. oooo-kay

:yoiks:

[ecstatic]

43. lock her up, throw away the key

Well my 2 cents--- insane or not, she is still a threat to society and I don't want her in the general public. She needs to be locked up somewhere, whether in jail or in an asylum.

[lumberjack_jeff]

45. The thing that bugs me the most about the reaction is the transferrence

There's something psychological in people, I guess. When Andrea was guilty, Randy was treated as something of a persona non grata, his behavior was considered probably not ideal, and perhaps he didn't take her to enough psychiatrists, and wanting a really big family was kinda wierd.

Now that Andrea is "innocent" the murders must be the fault of that rat bastard Randy. We all know that men are scum and there must have been something that he did to make her crazy enough to drown their kids. "forced" to homeschool! "forced" to have kids! The poor woman!

I'm getting fed up with the man-bashing. The fact that she is legally innocent of having drowned each of her five kids does not mean that he is now guilty of, and accountable for, her actions.

BTW OMC, I hope your wife is feeling better. Try to not let the spittle-flecked diatribes® get you down.

:pals:

[Liberal Veteran]

50. Expecting a mentally ill person to behave rationally is irrational.

And I (as a guy myself) think he failed as a husband and father and shares a burden of guilt in this.

In a situation like this, one expects a measure of responsibility from the half of this marriage that wasn't mentally ill. He blew it.

[lumberjack_jeff]

55. A guy whos children are murdered by his wife gets an f'ing break from me.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

57. She's Loopy On Percocets And Hangin In There. Thanks For The Kind Wishes.

She said thanks as well, followed by a "now get your ass bed" followed by a wink hehe.

Nite bro. :)

[conflictgirl]

62. She was not found innocent, exactly

It's not like anyone thinks someone else did it. She did commit the crimes. She just won't be punished the same as anyone else who might have been in a more normal mental state.

BTW, from the very beginning, I was one of the people who was upset with the husband. It's not a new reaction for me just because she was found not guilty by reason of insanity, and I suspect the same is probably true of many others here. She was still the only one who committed the actions, but I do believe that he created a situation that made her more likely to snap. When you have a psychotic or depressed wife who is left at home all day in almost total isolation, I have no idea WHAT he was thinking having more kids.

[lumberjack_jeff]

64. Everyone's a product of their environment.

But terms like "morally responsible" and "legally culpable" are being thrown around too carelessly when describing someone who came home to find that his wife had murdered his children.

I sure as hell wouldn't want the family relationship that has been described about the Yates' but in my mind, one thing is certain: he is a victim.

It disturbs me a great deal that I'm apparently alone in this view.

[antigone382]

51. "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" is NOT the fiction we'd like it to be.

The state of our publically run mental-health facilities is disastrous. They're underfunded, understaffed, often sadistically run places where the primary objective is "patients" who are compliant and under control, not happy or healthy. I am glad for this verdict, because I believe it would be unjust to declare her guilty when she clearly had no control over her actions. But I have no illusions that this woman will suddenly be in a sanctuary where all her needs will be met. It's a tragic situation all around.

[conflictgirl]

61. I don't think being in a mental institution will be anything good

I am actually very critical of the mental health industry in its modern incarnation and think that there are much more effective treatment methods for mental illness, that will likely never come into widespread use in our society.

However, I did say that I was glad about the verdict, because considering the fact that she lives in TX, if she had been found guilty, she probably would have been executed. She may never be free (nor do I necessarily think she should be), she may never be helped, but at least she won't be killed.

[Recursion]

63. OK, I'll be devil's advocate here...

... I mean, she did kill her kids, right? I mean... maybe "good things" happening after that just ain't in the cards?

[lumberjack_jeff]

65. Yes, and perhaps that is as it should be. n/t