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

[Adalena935]

Jeana (DP)


Add Joseph Edward Duncan III to the list of mass-murderers I provided you with in my previous post in answer to your inquiry.

There is a mass-murderer with an extensive mental health history going back to his childhood years. The man who slaughtered the Groene family in Idaho. I believe his trial will be this year.

The public reaction to Duncan III is so polar opposite that of the reaction to Andrea Yates. (by some. I know probably the majority of people don't pay any attention to murder cases at all)

TO ME = One major determining factor is that A. Yates carried her victims in her womb and was their birth mother before she murdered them.

But when you think about it, that is only nature and takes no great skills from any female. I don't see why anyone should excuse a mass-murderer based on that. But, TO ME that is precisely the case with society's reaction to A. Yates v. society's reaction to Joseph E. Duncan III's respective crimes.

They're both mental patients. documented. Both tortured and murdered multiple underage children.

Yates was given a womb by nature.
Duncan III was not given a womb by nature.

Compassion exists in society for Yates.
Compassion does NOT exist in society for Duncan III.

Even men who murder their own offspring are NEVER shown compassion by society. Scott Peterson case is a good example of that.

I sincerely apologize for being so wordy. TO ME, my first post did explain what I was saying quite thoroughly. By my use of the term "TO ME...". I didn't want to be this wordy. I don't think it's necessary. But you DID ask. And frankly, I don't know how else to help you better understand what I DO mean by my use of the term TO ME, other than to be wordy as I have been. I've tried VERY hard to go out of my way to help make myself more clear to you.

I often think the more that's said, the less is understood. If a person can't understand my simple statement initially I doubt very much that 300 more words will help them very much.

However, I've sincerely tried. Because you asked me to.

Anyway, hope this helps you understand more clearly my opinion and how I came to formulate my opinion regarding what I said and your inquiry into me providing examples for you regarding what I said & why I hold the opinion that I do;

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35830&page=12&pp=25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adalena935 To me the message is clear on this case. If the murderer is the woman who spawned and gave birth to the victims, society will excuse the murders. ie; the killing of her own children by the birth mother will be tolerated.

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=987501#post987501

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeana (DP) I'd like for you to provide some examples of society excusing women who murder their own children please.

Joseph Edward Duncan III's EXTENSIVE mental health records in the Idaho Groene Murder case v. A. Yates menatl health records.

Society's diverse and polarized reactions to those two cases is a very good example of what I'm talking about.

one is given compassion by some
the other NONE

only 1 difference between yates & duncan. she has a womb and he doesn't.

TO ME that is no criteria on which to show anyone compassion who is a known and verified mass-murderer. ESPECIALLY of children.

I hope you now better understand what I meant by what I said in my post you've asked me to provide you examples.


http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=987501#post987501

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeana (DP) I'd like for you to provide some examples of society excusing women who murder their own children please.

I hope you do understand I did not literally mean all 7 Billion on the planet in my reference to society. I'd venture to say 99% of society could give a hoot less about any crime cases. My experience that most people don't follow any crimes or care a hoot about them. I was only referring to people who have told me how they felt re; these examples. but that seems to me to go without saying. but, just in case you're not clear on that. There's an added attempt at explanation in advance of your asking me about that word in the future.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

This is what you said:

To me the message is clear on this case. If the murderer is the woman who spawned and gave birth to the victims, society will excuse the murders. ie; the killing of her own children by the birth mother will be tolerated.


All of the cases you mentioned, the murderers happened to be men and unrelated. If you can't back up your statement, simply say so.

Society NEVER tolerates a woman murdering her children -- JUST THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE.

 

[booradley]

I have a question for those of you who have followed the Yate's case closely. On an A & E documentary that I saw last week during the day (an old american justice with a blurb at the end about original verdict being reversed), Rusty said in an interview that he and his mom had worked out a schedule where he left for work at 9 and his mom arrived at 10 to help out with the children. It was pointed out that she killed all 5 children in that one hour time period. Do you think this points to her consciousness of guilt or that Rusty and his mom were covering their bases as to why they allowed her to be home alone at all with the kids? If this was truly a pattern they had well established it really influences how I feel about her "knowing" what she was going to do was wrong which is the criteria Texas apparently uses in the insanity defense. Any thoughts?

 

[Jeana (DP)]

I have a question for those of you who have followed the Yate's case closely. On an A & E documentary that I saw last week during the day (an old american justice with a blurb at the end about original verdict being reversed), Rusty said in an interview that he and his mom had worked out a schedule where he left for work at 9 and his mom arrived at 10 to help out with the children. It was pointed out that she killed all 5 children in that one hour time period. Do you think this points to her consciousness of guilt or that Rusty and his mom were covering their bases as to why they allowed her to be home alone at all with the kids? If this was truly a pattern they had well established it really influences how I feel about her "knowing" what she was going to do was wrong which is the criteria Texas apparently uses in the insanity defense. Any thoughts?

I think that she knew that killing the kids was "legally" wrong and that they would try to stop her. I think she had the ability to know that she had a small window of opportunity in which to commit the murders and planned it with that knowledge.

 

[Sally]

I don't know how to provide examples of my opinion. But, I can try to make myself more clear.

To me

the message is clear on this case. If the murderer is the woman who spawned and gave birth to the victims, society will excuse the murders. ie; the killing of her own children by the birth mother will be tolerated. "

I understand that some people may find my opinion extreme. It is nonetheless what *I think*
[/color]

Adalena, I didn't copy your entire post to save some space. But I think you raise a very good point. The examples you gave of mass murderers are surely also examples of extreme mental illness. Is the mental health of these sick S.O.B's disregarded because their victims were strangers? Irregardless and mental illness aside, murder is murder.

 

[bugs]

This is what you said:

To me the message is clear on this case. If the murderer is the woman who spawned and gave birth to the victims, society will excuse the murders. ie; the killing of her own children by the birth mother will be tolerated.


All of the cases you mentioned, the murderers happened to be men and unrelated. If you can't back up your statement, simply say so.

Society NEVER tolerates a woman murdering her children -- JUST THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE.

I think Adalena is playing dodge ball. She has quoted something she cannot back up.

Andrea Yates is mentally ill and it is so sad. She honestly in her mind, which was not functioning correctly, thougth she was doing the right thing for her kids to protect them. We as normal functioning moms do what is right for our kids (in our minds) to keep them safe, healthy, etc. She is not evil as most think, she is sick. Get over it!!

 

[Jeana (DP)]

I think Adalena is playing dodge ball. She has quoted something she cannot back up.

Andrea Yates is mentally ill and it is so sad. She honestly in her mind, which was not functioning correctly, thougth she was doing the right thing for her kids to protect them. We as normal functioning moms do what is right for our kids (in our minds) to keep them safe, healthy, etc. She is not evil as most think, she is sick. Get over it!!

"Get over it"?? Get over what? I don't like your tone.

 

[bugs]

"Get over it"?? Get over what? I don't like your tone.

It upsets me that people call her evil. She is not evil, she is sick. We have compassion for cancer patients and so forth so why not mental illness. It really hurts my feelings to hear that. Sorry, if my tone is harsh, I just feel strongly about it.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

It upsets me that people call her evil. She is not evil, she is sick. We have compassion for cancer patients and so forth so why not mental illness. It really hurts my feelings to hear that. Sorry, if my tone is harsh, I just feel strongly about it.

Well don't blame me for what other people do. If you read my post on this topic, you'll see that I'm just about the only one here who doesn't feel she belongs in prison for the rest of her life.

 

[bugs]

Well don't blame me for what other people do. If you read my post on this topic, you'll see that I'm just about the only one here who doesn't feel she belongs in prison for the rest of her life.

I never meant for the "get over it" to be directed to you - I am on your side. I meant if for the folks that feel Andrea is evil and should be in prison on death row. I have read your post and I support your thoughts and views. Sorry if I upset you. I am the one who started this post and was happy that Andrea was being sent to a hospital.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

I never meant for the "get over it" to be directed to you - I am on your side. I meant if for the folks that feel Andrea is evil and should be in prison on death row. I have read your post and I support your thoughts and views. Sorry if I upset you. I am the one who started this post and was happy that Andrea was being sent to a hospital.

Sorry, didn't mean to jump down your throat. I'm just having one of those "feeling dumped upon days." Sorry.

 

[bugs]

Sorry, didn't mean to jump down your throat. I'm just having one of those "feeling dumped upon days." Sorry.

Not a problem at all!! :blowkiss:

 

[Adalena935]

I think Adalena is playing dodge ball. She has quoted something she cannot back up.

Andrea Yates is mentally ill and it is so sad. She honestly in her mind, which was not functioning correctly, thougth she was doing the right thing for her kids to protect them. We as normal functioning moms do what is right for our kids (in our minds) to keep them safe, healthy, etc. She is not evil as most think, she is sick. Get over it!!

Jeana misconstrewed what she read from my post - just like she misconstrewed yours.

dodging as you say would have been a simple matter. All I would have had to have done is not answer her. But I didn't ignore her querry, did I?

Is it the writer's fault if someone misunderstands their explanation? I don't think so. I think it's the reader's problem. Expecially after two lengthy explanations have been offered in goodwill.

Is it possible the two of you are displeased toward me because you see that my opinion of andrea yates doesn't comply with yours?

Consider this. My opinion is not important.

I don't think even God puts so much credence into what I *think* as the two of you have here.

 

[Adalena935]

Adalena, I didn't copy your entire post to save some space. But I think you raise a very good point. The examples you gave of mass murderers are surely also examples of extreme mental illness. Is the mental health of these sick S.O.B's disregarded because their victims were strangers? Irregardless and mental illness aside, murder is murder.

Yes. I think she was mentally ill and depressed. (depression IS listed as a mental illness). I think she wanted to be dead herself for a long time but feared committing suicide due to her Roman Catholic upbringing that taught her if she did that her soul would burn in eternal damnation in the fires of hell. Therefore, she devised a plan to commit a crime SO BAD as to force her home state of Texas to execute her.


"It always comes down to what the jury believes." - Vincent Bugliosi

 

[bugs]

Jeana misconstrewed what she read from my post - just like she misconstrewed yours.

dodging as you say would have been a simple matter. All I would have had to have done is not answer her. But I didn't ignore her querry, did I?

Is it the writer's fault if someone misunderstands their explanation? I don't think so. I think it's the reader's problem. Expecially after two lengthy explanations have been offered in goodwill.

Is it possible the two of you are displeased toward me because you see that my opinion of andrea yates doesn't comply with yours?

Consider this. My opinion is not important.

I don't think even God puts so much credence into what I *think* as the two of you have here.

Can you provide me a list of cases wherein the mother was excused of the murder?

Still waiting the answer to the question at hand becuase you are "dodging" the question by writing long post. Your opinion is important. We all don't have to agree.

 

[Adalena935]

I have a question for those of you who have followed the Yate's case closely. On an A & E documentary that I saw last week during the day (an old american justice with a blurb at the end about original verdict being reversed), Rusty said in an interview that he and his mom had worked out a schedule where he left for work at 9 and his mom arrived at 10 to help out with the children. It was pointed out that she killed all 5 children in that one hour time period. Do you think this points to her consciousness of guilt or that Rusty and his mom were covering their bases as to why they allowed her to be home alone at all with the kids? If this was truly a pattern they had well established it really influences how I feel about her "knowing" what she was going to do was wrong which is the criteria Texas apparently uses in the insanity defense. Any thoughts?

Yes, the mother in law said she called andrea every morning (that rusty worked) to notify andrea that she was; "..on my way.." to let her know she'd be there in about the 1 hour time.

Andrea waited for that prescribed phone call that morning before she began murdering the poor children. The mother in law testified to that in the 1st trial.

Yes, my understanding of TX law is what you described. The criteria used for insanity defense is whether the defendant knew right from wrong at the time of the commission of the crime.

This quote is from another case I found on the net, but it tells about that criteria as per TX law.

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/13962142.htm

The trial centered on whether Schlosser knew right from wrong during the killing, a legal criterion of the insanity defense in Texas.

 

[Adalena935]

Can you provide me a list of cases wherein the mother was excused of the murder?

Still waiting the answer to the question at hand becuase you are "dodging" the question by writing long post. Your opinion is important. We all don't have to agree.

it's what I think.

it's my personal opinion of this case.


that's in my other lengthy explanations/posts.

 

[Adalena935]

Can you provide me a list of cases wherein the mother was excused of the murder?

Still waiting the answer to the question at hand becuase you are "dodging" the question by writing long post. Your opinion is important. We all don't have to agree.

I knew you weren't really telling Jeana GET OVER IT, in your post.

and I think you know I'm saying THIS IS WHAT I'M GATHERING, TAKING AWAY FROM THIS CASE AND SOCIETY's REACTION TO IT. (I did explain what I mean by my use of the broad sweeping term "society" also)

If you tell me you don't understand what I'm saying I don't believe you.

I done explaining myself. I don't want to argue with anyone. I'm just here sharing my thoughts on this case like you, Jeana and others.

 

[bugs]

I knew you weren't really telling Jeana GET OVER IT, in your post.

and I think you know I'm saying THIS IS WHAT I'M GATHERING, TAKING AWAY FROM THIS CASE AND SOCIETY's REACTION TO IT. (I did explain what I mean by my use of the broad sweeping term "society" also)

If you tell me you don't understand what I'm saying I don't believe you.

I done explaining myself. I don't want to argue with anyone. I'm just here sharing my thoughts on this case like you, Jeana and others.

:silenced:

 

[Jeana (DP)]

I knew you weren't really telling Jeana GET OVER IT, in your post.

and I think you know I'm saying THIS IS WHAT I'M GATHERING, TAKING AWAY FROM THIS CASE AND SOCIETY's REACTION TO IT. (I did explain what I mean by my use of the broad sweeping term "society" also)

If you tell me you don't understand what I'm saying I don't believe you.

I done explaining myself. I don't want to argue with anyone. I'm just here sharing my thoughts on this case like you, Jeana and others.

Good.