http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious%5Fmurders/women/andrea%5Fyates/
2006-08-03 08:39:49 · 11 answers · asked by lovemeacb4e 2 in News & Events ➔ Media & Journalism
I think they should change the way the sentence should read. Instead of not guilty by reason on insanity, it should be GUILTY BY REASON OF INSANITY. You should not get a "free" pass just because you went crazy. Heck, those are the people who should be locked up the most. I can understand someone who is motivated by greed and steals from you. You can, somewhat, protect yourself from those people. But folks who kill and have no idea why they do it are the true dangers to society. So she should go to a hospital and once deemed "sane" then sent to jail to serve out the rest of her term. John Wayne Gacy was insane, Jefferey Dahlmer was insane and so have many mass murderers. You kill your kids, you should go to jail, period.
2006-08-03 08:48:27 · answer #1 · answered by xolodnyj 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
She is and was. But was retried.
I am no bleed heart sympathizer. I have little pity for criminals. In Andrea's case, though, she was nuts and she knew she was nuts. She was asking the doctors to change her treatment and not send her home. This was a preventable, terrible tragedy. If there are any legitimate insanity defenses, this was one. She begged for help before it occurred, and help was denied.
She will never see complete freedom or be outside of an institution again. She will be institutionalized for life, just not incarcerated. That is probably the fairest "penalty" for this "crime" and it happens to be one the family is in agreement with. If it's good enough for the family, it's good enough for me. May she get the treatment she needs.
2006-08-03 08:46:49 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe that the jury found her not guilty by reason of insanity because not one of them could or wanted to believe that a mother could do that unless she was insane. With that said, I would have to say that the emotional side of me would say-YES she should have been found guilty, however, I honestly WANT to believe that any mother would HAVE to be insane to do that to her children. What I don't understand is this: if she didn't know right from wrong-then how why did she call the police-and why did she mention that she knew it was wrong in her taped conversations with the police? When I think about that aspect, the LOGICAL side of my brain believes that she isn't insane.
2006-08-03 08:52:06 · answer #3 · answered by Hestia 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
From all I know on this case, she has a mental illness and none of her family was to leave her alone with the children knowing this so...I think they need to get Andrea help and keep her in a facility where she can never get out. We should pray for her as well as her children. She is very sick. Thanks for bringing up this question and letting us share.
2006-08-03 09:54:25 · answer #4 · answered by yeppers 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes i do, when you have filled the bathtub days before, it should tell you it was premeditated, when you wait for your husband to leave for work first, it tells you she new right from wrong. the first jury found her guilty, they through it out because a law and order episode was suppose to have been too similar. is that not the most ridiculous thing you have ever heard? when they found that no episode actually existed, they should not have tried her a second time, the first conviction should have stuck. what horrible justice system is in place when you can be retried because of a fictional television show?
2006-08-03 11:02:30 · answer #5 · answered by thelogicalferret 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
I understand that people have sicknesses and all, but 5 kids. Come on. You know right from wrong. Killing one person is just crazy but to drown 5 of your own kids....
I think the insanity plea is bull. Murder is murder. No excuse. Just because you are found to be crazy doensn't give you the right to kill.
I dunno. Maybe I'm wrong...the world's crazy.
2006-08-03 08:49:44 · answer #6 · answered by HapyDay 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that anyone that would kill all her children must be mentally unbalanced. I only hope they keep her locked up somewhere until she's too old to have any more children.
2006-08-03 08:45:33 · answer #7 · answered by Sean 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Obviously a Texas jury felt otherwise. A TEXAS jury.
2006-08-03 08:43:20 · answer #8 · answered by Pseudo Obscure 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I believe she was very ill. I feel sorry for her children, and for her.
2006-08-03 08:44:51 · answer #9 · answered by Carol R 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
ya i do she is a sick cold hearted witch she had no right they were just kids not only that they were hers what a sick !@#$% email me if you belive diff
2006-08-03 09:27:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋