TX - Five Yates children drowned, Houston, 20 June 2001 *Insanity*

[deanws]

Susan Smith had the same type of mental illness as Darlie Routier and Debbie Milke - narcassism.

OMGosh is that ever a TRUE statement!

 

[deanws]

I think that susan smith was and does have mental issues.....It was testified that she was severly depressed and she was on medications and then stopped so i dont think she was like darlie routier where darlie still says she didnt kill her kids and i think darlie was just plain selfish...IMO

Susan Smith killed her kids because they were in the way. Her boyfriend to be (she hoped) didn't want a long term relationship with her because he didn't want kids. She is an animal. :twocents:

 

[deanws]

I dont know really, i just think murdering your child, something isnt right....Now diane downs i dont know about her shes a tough cookie to figure out. I think she was just evil and sinister......And as far as darlie routier goes, i cant figure out if shes guilty or not....Be easy on me thats just my opinion....

DD is a cold murdering :silenced: . Another loser that murdered her kids for getting in the way of her social life. God is she a piece of work.

 

[deanws]

I love websleuths its nice to be able to disagree and not fight.......I on the other habd think susan smith was mentally ill, she has a long history of sexual abuse against her her daddy killed himself he was mental and so on....but any way i dont know too much about andrea yates, but was she ill as a child??

Yes she did. In high school her mother took her to be evaluated. It seemed to pass.

 

[deanws]

Some people who murder their kids are just down right mean - bottomline!

Exactly Bugs! Some are just creatures!:furious:

 

[deanws]

Yes, and that moron Rusty knew all this and continued to impregnate her and put her in impossible stressful situations. :furious:

I wish I would run into Rusty on the street one day in Houston. I think I'd spit in his eye.

I do too. He is a selfish fool.:banghead: And this loser will marry again and have more children. I usually NEVER wish bad things on a person...but in this case...I hope his wee-wee rots off. :crazy:

 

[deanws]

Rusty should IMO keep his dumb mouth shut, especially since a good chunk of the blame is on him. He never contributes anything worthwhile and only makes himself look bad every time. He divorced her and has moved on, he needs to butt out of her case regardless of any kind of "justice" or treatment for her. He had his chance to show concern when it counted and now it's a case of too little too late.



JMO

:clap: :clap: :clap: EXACTLY Shopper!

 

[deanws]

I don't know. I don't think Rusty Yates helped matters any by continuing to get his wife pregnant when he knew she was unstable after what, the 3rd? Now, I might catch some slack here and I'm only just voicing my opinion so keep that in mind. Those who defend Andrea Yates say that she is most likely not guilty of the murders of her children due to mental illness. And I guess that might be right. But this guy stood by this woman from day one of this tragedy. He testified in her defense and argued against the public's perception that this woman was a witch and a monster. I think he deseves a little better than to be blamed for the murders and to be vilified as a cruel, domineering husband. He might have his quirks but keep in mind, he loved his wife and he loved his kids. He tried to do what he could in a situation that you nor I could even imagine being in. Whether mental or not mental, it's Andrea Yates, not Rusty Yates, who killed their five children. I believe she belongs in jail and should never have the chance to see daylight again. I believe that because when I look at the pictures of the innocent lives she took, her own children, it turns my stomach and makes me cry just wondering what they went through at the hands of their own mother.

I think the only reason he did that was to PROTECT HIMSELF! There was talk about a charge of child endangerment on his part because he knew she was unstable. Rusty does only what makes him look good or makes him money. He had to protect his image so NASA wouldn't fire him. If charges would have been filed against him, his job would have been history. Yep, Rusty is all about Rusty.:furious:

 

[deanws]

I know. :sick:

I'm sure there's a desperado out there that would love to marry him, but I can't fathom such a woman.

If HB(Scooter) can get married again...anyone can! :doh:

 

[Kaly]

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Andrea_Yates_case/

Why would it be a horrible thing to put someone with such a severe mental illness into a hospital rather than a prison??

 

[concernedperson]

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Andrea_Yates_case/

Why would it be a horrible thing to put someone with such a severe mental illness into a hospital rather than a prison??

It wouldn't be. She of all crimes in the news needs to be in a hospital. She is clearly insane and never should have been alone with her children or even herself. I am usually opposed to the insanity defense as it is over used and mostly without merit but in her case it is what it is.

 

[Wudge]

In my book, Andrea most likely was nuttier than a fruitcake. A new trial is certainly what I expected would be ordered as her appeal process played itself out. This time, I believe she will be found to have been mentally ill.

Other convicted individuals who had varying high-profile levels associated with their cases and who deserve a new trial are: Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald, Darlie Routier, Michael Peterson and Scott Peterson -- who is almost certain to be given a new trial.

One down, four to go.

 

[Jules]

Wudge, I may regret asking this, but why do you feel MacDonald, Routier, Peterson and Peterson deserve new trials?

MacDonald, who I believe is guilty, is probably the one I would most agree with you on - only because I believe the Army screwed up LOTS of stuff.

Routier - GUILTY

M. Peterson - don't know anything about this case.

S. Peterson - why on earth do you think he is entitled to a new trial?

 

[deanws]

Wudge, I may regret asking this, but why do you feel MacDonald, Routier, Peterson and Peterson deserve new trials?

MacDonald, who I believe is guilty, is probably the one I would most agree with you on - only because I believe the Army screwed up LOTS of stuff.

Routier - GUILTY

M. Peterson - don't know anything about this case.

S. Peterson - why on earth do you think he is entitled to a new trial?

MP is way guilty. In fact, he killed TWO people. He got away with the first, so he tried the same method the second time. Killed both women, pushing them down the stairs. The last lady(wife) he hit over the head with a blow poke.

 

[NaNaRosebud]

I guess I'm just a skeptic, but I think Andrea knew what she was doing. She knew she was killing her children and no matter what excuse she comes up with she should be in prison.


Her defense is insanity. Well, isn't it insanity to kill anyone at anytime? I think that the moment that someone pulls the trigger or puts poison in someone's food is an insane act. Anyone who kills someone else other than self defense is insane at the moment they do the deed.

Her religious and depression defense could be just a made up story that her lawyer used to get her off. Lawyers twist facts and get people to testify to things that they want them to testify to inorder to do anything to win the case.

She's in a prison hospital now. Let her stay there. She doesn't need another trial. She needs to pay for what she did to her kids.

How do we know that she just wanted to get away from the responsibilty of taking care of her kids and so she decided to kill them? This "she did it to save them" is just an excuse in my opinion. She was a Christian. She knew the 10 Commandments. Thou shalt not kill is a biggie!

Depressed or not, she knew she was killing them!

 

[ravenmad]

I guess I'm just a skeptic, but I think Andrea knew what she was doing. She knew she was killing her children and no matter what excuse she comes up with she should be in prison.


Her defense is insanity. Well, isn't it insanity to kill anyone at anytime? I think that the moment that someone pulls the trigger or puts poison in someone's food is an insane act. Anyone who kills someone else other than self defense is insane at the moment they do the deed.

Her religious and depression defense could be just a made up story that her lawyer used to get her off. Lawyers twist facts and get people to testify to things that they want them to testify to inorder to do anything to win the case.

She's in a prison hospital now. Let her stay there. She doesn't need another trial. She needs to pay for what she did to her kids.

How do we know that she just wanted to get away from the responsibility of taking care of her kids and so she decided to kill them? This "she did it to save them" is just an excuse in my opinion. She was a Christian. She knew the 10 Commandments. Thou shalt not kill is a biggie!

Depressed or not, she knew she was killing them!

Nanarosebud,
I think I understand what you are saying here, and I agree that she needs to be held accountable, however, having said that, I believe she is mentally ill. I had a friend that was mentally ill, she "functioned" in life to a degree, she drove, kept her bills paid things like that. But, one day I went to her house and she had boarded all her windows shut! When asked why she told me that she was keeping the IRS from spying on her. I know this is not the same thing, but my point is that mental illness is a wicked thing. I had NO CLUE that my friend was ill until that day. It went down hill fast. She ended up in a mental institution for over six months, had electric shock treatments and will never ever be "normal" again. I think AY went over the deep end, she heard the same voices my friend hears and they believe them! What AY did was the most horrid of horrid acts. But I don't think she had the ability to prevent herself from those acts. I know my friend could not. I hope this helps in understanding how mental illness affects ones judgment and actions. I am not excusing AY she needs to be in a mental ward for the rest of her life. Because if she ever realizes what she has done she will commit suicide.
raven

 

[Jeana (DP)]

I guess I'm just a skeptic, but I think Andrea knew what she was doing. She knew she was killing her children and no matter what excuse she comes up with she should be in prison.


Her defense is insanity. Well, isn't it insanity to kill anyone at anytime? I think that the moment that someone pulls the trigger or puts poison in someone's food is an insane act. Anyone who kills someone else other than self defense is insane at the moment they do the deed.

Yes, she did know - she's said that. And no, it isn't insanity to kill anyone at anytime. There's greed, jealousy, passion and just plain evil. Mental illness can strike at anyone's family at any time. I would hope those who are too angry at the crime of Andrea to see that she truly was mentally ill and needs hospitalization are never forced to see things from her side.

 

[NaNaRosebud]

I think I get what you are trying to say Jeana. I have had depression in my family. If that person decided to kill someone because he/she was depressed, that does not give them the excuse to kill, imo.


I think that people can be insane with greed, insane with jealousy, insane with passion, insane with grief, or insane with any human emotion there is. Just because someone is overcome with that emotion/feeling, doesn't give them a pass to kill someone. As you can probably tell, I'm not big on the "not guilty by reason of insanity" defense.

Anyone who decides to kill someone, especially one who plans the event, is insane. AY clearly planned when and how to kill her children. She even had a "run through/rehersal" once, IIRC.

At the point/split second that someone kills someone, they are insane, because sane people don't kill other people unless they are threatened with being killed themselves.

Should we give the terrorist the insanity by religion defense? How about a child killer who rapes and kills a precious child? Should they be given an insanity defense because someone clearly has to be insane to be that evil.

IF AY is put into a mental hospital and then funds run out for that hospital, will she be released onto society so that she can be insane once more and do harm to people?

She killed her kids. She knew what she was doing at the time. She planned it. She practiced it. She called the cops after.

 

[deanws]

I think I get what you are trying to say Jeana. I have had depression in my family. If that person decided to kill someone because he/she was depressed, that does not give them the excuse to kill, imo.


I think that people can be insane with greed, insane with jealousy, insane with passion, insane with grief, or insane with any human emotion there is. Just because someone is overcome with that emotion/feeling, doesn't give them a pass to kill someone. As you can probably tell, I'm not big on the "not guilty by reason of insanity" defense.

Anyone who decides to kill someone, especially one who plans the event, is insane. AY clearly planned when and how to kill her children. She even had a "run through/rehersal" once, IIRC.

At the point/split second that someone kills someone, they are insane, because sane people don't kill other people unless they are threatened with being killed themselves.

Should we give the terrorist the insanity by religion defense? How about a child killer who rapes and kills a precious child? Should they be given an insanity defense because someone clearly has to be insane to be that evil.

IF AY is put into a mental hospital and then funds run out for that hospital, will she be released onto society so that she can be insane once more and do harm to people?

She killed her kids. She knew what she was doing at the time. She planned it. She practiced it. She called the cops after.

It isn't that simple Rose. Yes, she knew she was killing the children. Yes, she did plan it. Yes, she did wait until no one was around. In the first trial she was deemed to be "sane" because of those reasons. However, I think we all agree that Andrea is ANYTHING but SANE! The reason she killed the children was because the "cult" guy that was giving her religious instruction said it was her responsibility to make sure her kids were all going to heaven. She, in her insane mental state, believed that she was a horrible mother and was dooming her children to hell because she couldn't make them holy. Thus, she thought she had to end their lives before the age of accountability approached. In her sick mind, she was saving their souls. So very sad. If she is put into a mental hospital the funds won't run out. She will be placed on the welfare system in Texas for the mentally ill. She will probably spend the rest of her life in the "system". Unless her family has changed their minds, this is what they want. Her attorney, as well as her family have NEVER asked for her release into the general population. They are very well aware of her need to be institutionalized.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

I think I get what you are trying to say Jeana. I have had depression in my family. If that person decided to kill someone because he/she was depressed, that does not give them the excuse to kill, imo.


I think that people can be insane with greed, insane with jealousy, insane with passion, insane with grief, or insane with any human emotion there is. Just because someone is overcome with that emotion/feeling, doesn't give them a pass to kill someone. As you can probably tell, I'm not big on the "not guilty by reason of insanity" defense.

Anyone who decides to kill someone, especially one who plans the event, is insane. AY clearly planned when and how to kill her children. She even had a "run through/rehersal" once, IIRC.

At the point/split second that someone kills someone, they are insane, because sane people don't kill other people unless they are threatened with being killed themselves.

Should we give the terrorist the insanity by religion defense? How about a child killer who rapes and kills a precious child? Should they be given an insanity defense because someone clearly has to be insane to be that evil.

IF AY is put into a mental hospital and then funds run out for that hospital, will she be released onto society so that she can be insane once more and do harm to people?

She killed her kids. She knew what she was doing at the time. She planned it. She practiced it. She called the cops after.

There's a BIG difference between an "excuse" and an explanation. Everyone around Andrea knew that she was a danger to herself and to those kids. She was screaming out for help like no one I'd ever heard of. She was let down by her family and by her doctors and so were those children. The brain is a very complex thing. Too complex for me to understand certainly. I'm not soft on criminals and this is the FIRST person that I've EVER in my entire life said deserved to be not guilty by reason of insanity. Does that mean she gets a free pass? Hell no. But she needs to be in a hospital for the rest of her lift NOT a prison. THAT, darlin, should be the only difference in her life sentence, in my opinion.