She took quite a bit of time preparing to perform this horrible thing. Timed it just right, lied to her husband, even tied the dog up.
If this jury finds her not guily by reason of insanity, i feel like the jury needs to be put on trial, because that would be a very insane thing. How do you feel about this, and if you were a member of the jury...and since this has been going on for years, had all this evidence...how would you find her?
2006-07-18 06:16:33 · 6 answers · asked by whoanelly00 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
If I were a member of that jury, I would fry that beotch. She is guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty.
Personally, I am NOT a fan of the insanity defense. But anyone who is insane long enough to drown her own children in an order that prevents the older ones from stopping her, is sane enough to be put to death or at the very least to rot in prison for the rest of her life. If she is insane, what does that matter? As far as I'm concerned, I don't want to live in a society that lets a monster like that loose on the streetes EVER.
2006-07-18 06:23:50 · answer #1 · answered by Goose&Tonic 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Personally I feel like she and her husband should be locked away forever...she knew what she was doing the time that she did it...it takes a lot of force and thought to drown a 12 year old child in a bathtub..and if you actually had to chase them down and fight them...I don't think that is insanity...but I do believe that her hubby should be right there with her...
She is Guilty..100%..and shouldn't be treated any more special than any other murderer.
2006-07-18 13:23:37 · answer #2 · answered by Bevin M 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree. In my opinion, the law should be changed so an insanity plea is a guilty plea. As it is, if a person pleads insanity, then it's like the real criminal is still at large.
2006-07-18 13:21:21 · answer #3 · answered by Jim T 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think she needs to be locked up in Prison for the rest of her life.
I find the whole insanity defense rather strange, in my opinion anyone who could kill another living being is OBVIOUSLY insane, so where do you draw the line?
That defense needs to be taken out of any trial.
2006-07-18 13:21:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
"Although Andrea Yates tried to commit suicide twice and was diagnosed with five mental illnesses, she never acted "grossly psychotic" until she drowned her five children, Dietz told the jury last week."
i don't know how this guy can say this with a straight face.
she honestly looks crazy enough to me. i feel sorry for her, sorrier for her kids, but i do feel sorry for her:
"Dietz also said it's unclear if Yates' depression in 1999 was postpartum, because her suicide attempts came four and five months after Luke was born. After she was released from the mental hospital, she didn't take her medication and she and her husband ignored another psychiatrist's advice not to have more children, Dietz said."
because her husband knew she was dangerous and did not try to protect his kids. i don't hold him responsible... but she does seem honestly crazy for a few years and that didn't stop him from having more kids with her.
"However, her husband and her doctor did not recognize the seriousness of the situation. Apparently, her husband, Russell, said to a friend, "I'm not going to coddle her, I'm not going to hold her hand. She needs to be strong, she needs to help herself."
good one... do you tell a diabetic person to suck it up and make insulin? i'm a fan of individual responsibility, and i am more shocked that he doesn't care to make sure his wife is capable of caring for the children he leaves her with.
2006-07-18 13:33:12 · answer #5 · answered by uncle osbert 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
have not been watching
2006-07-18 13:20:33 · answer #6 · answered by idontkno 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋