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

[MrsMush99]

I'm sorry but I'm a little lost. What exactly is the "twinkie" jury??

 

[Jeana (DP)]

I'm sorry but I'm a little lost. What exactly is the "twinkie" jury??

Twinkie defense
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

TwinkiesIn jurisprudence, a "Twinkie defense" is a criminal defendant's claim that some unusual factor entered into the causes or motives of the alleged crime. This biological defense is a so-called "innovative defense", through which defendants argue that they either should not be held criminally liable for actions which broke the law, or that the criminal liability should be mitigated to a lesser offense (e.g., from murder down to voluntary manslaughter), as they were suffering from the effects of allergies, stimulants (such as coffee and nicotine), sugar, and/or vitamins.

The case which gave rise to the term did not actually contain any defense meeting this description, but was widely misdescribed as doing so. Today, "Twinkie defense" is a derogatory label implying that a criminal defense is artificial or absurd.

Origins
The expression is derived from the 1979 trial of Dan White, a former San Francisco, California (U.S.) City Supervisor who fatally shot Mayor George Moscone and City Supervisor Harvey Milk on November 27, 1978. During the trial, a noted psychiatrist, Martin Blinder, testified that White had been depressed at the time of the crime, successfully arguing for a ruling of diminished capacity, and White was thus judged incapable of the premeditation required for a murder conviction; instead, White was convicted of voluntary manslaughter.

As part of this testimony, Dr. Blinder cited White's uncharacteristic eating of Twinkies and drinking of Coca-Cola (White was well known as a fitness fanatic) as evidence of this depression — briefly mentioning that this may also have worsened the depression. The unpopularity of the eventual manslaughter verdict (a lighter sentence which set off the White Night riots) gave rise to the interpretation that White's lawyers had used depression caused by Twinkies as his primary defense. Contrary to popular belief, however, White's defense in fact argued that this consumption was unusual for him and reflected already existing mental instability; White would later commit suicide.

The "twinkie defense" was described in detail in Massachusetts Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Woodall, 304 F.Supp.2d 1364, 1377 n. 7 (S.D.Ga. 2003).

As a result of the White case, diminished capacity was abolished in 1982 by Proposition 8 and the California legislature, and replaced by "diminished actuality," referring not to the capacity to have a specific intent but to whether a defendant actually had a required intent to commit the crime with which he was charged. [1] Additionally, California's statutory definitions of premeditation and malice required for murder were eliminated with a return to common law definitions.

more:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinkie_defense

 

[MrsMush99]

Thanks Jeana! I think I'm going to do some more reading on this case.

 

[Texana]

Jules, I agree, not bathing, scratching her head til it bled, practically catatonic. She had tried to kill herself twice before, so I don't understand why anyone would leave her alone with children. What if she tried to again? I think they basically equated "lack of normal action" with "unable to do anything at all."

Rusty said once that he offered to get "help" around the house for Andrea but "she didn't want that." The aunt said today that Andrea refused help as well because she felt it was further proof she was a bad mother. Why would you listen to the person who's obviously mentally ill? Couldn't they have phrased it in a way that would have made it easier for her to accept help, and if she said no, so what?

Dr. Saeed said that he told Rusty Andrea should not be left alone with the children, ever. But there's no written record to confirm that and Rusty denies it. It's a "he said/she said" argument with no way to know for sure.

A caller on a local talk radio show defended Rusty on the grounds that if Andrea was released from the hospital, it gave Rusty the impression she was doing well enough or doing better. However, it was pretty clear she was being dismissed because insurance wouldn't pay anymore. Anyone who has had a family member with a serious/chronic condition knows that being dismissed from a hospital often has more to do with what the insurance clerical employee at the end of the telephone line says, than what the doctors prescribe.

 

[Wudge]

SNIP

As a result of the White case, diminished capacity was abolished in 1982 by Proposition 8 and the California legislature, and replaced by "diminished actuality," referring not to the capacity to have a specific intent but to whether a defendant actually had a required intent to commit the crime with which he was charged. [1] Additionally, California's statutory definitions of premeditation and malice required for murder were eliminated with a return to common law definitions.

more:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinkie_defense

"Diminished actuality", now I need to do some homework on splitting hairs. ..lol

ETA: In the same way that the twinkie case caused California to review legal definitions, I would not be surprised to see Texas do the same as a result of this case.

 

[concernedperson]

Andrea's attorney Odom was in CTV chat a few minutes ago. I arrived late but he was being very direct...I like that. Anyway, he doesn't think too much of Rusty and described him as being part of the stew that led Andrea to where she is.

 

[Wudge]

The face of kids in law schools everywhere when that case is discussed:

(chuckle) Based on the liberal make-up of students attending law schools today, it would not surprised me if the majority of law students think the twinkie defense sounds perfectly obvious.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

(chuckle) Based on the liberal make-up of students attending law schools today, it would not surprised me if the majority of law students think the twinkie defense sounds perfectly obvious.

Maybe the ones in California.

 

[bakerprune64]

Name one person who was in their right mind when they flipped out and murdered another human being? Doesn't the mere fact that you took another life willingly and without provication sort of require one to be 'not in their right mind'? Not in your right mind because your child just broke a priceless vase or peed on the floor or threw spaghettios on the wall and you are pissed about it verses out of your mind insane....well, is that child no less dead?

Regardless of whether she was depressed, mad, outraged, insane, full of a demon, etc. she should never see the light of day again! The mere fact of what she did to her kids requires...IMHO....that she be kept somewhere until she dies. Period. If she was in her right mind...well, that's obvious. If not, what happens to the poor soul that she runs into with her car when she gets out...is she going to hack them up with a knife?

Insanity is a bleeding heart defense for the indefensible. I don't care about what was running through her mind when she did it, the justice system should only concern itself with the act itself.

If you look hard enough, you can find someone willing to justify raping a child and try their darndest to get that person out of jail.

Cal

Good post Cal. ANd even one step further, before she was ever be released...MANDATORY STERILIZATION. She has no bussiness having more kids/victims. If she is as insane as the jury feels, then she should never see the light of day.

 

[Texana]

KPRC news reporter says that he spoke to Harris County D/A Chuck Rosenthal, who is "strongly defending" the idea of trying Andrea Yates for the deaths of the two children she was not charged with. (Only charged with deaths of three children; I want to say it was Paul's and Mary's deaths she was not charged with, but I may be wrong.)

D/A Rosenthal says that "tax money" was not used to pay for ALL of the expert witnesses in this case. "Drug seizure" money was used to pay for some of it.

Prosecutor Joe Owmby was telling reporters that Yates could someday be released from a mental health facility. He says that is "untenable."

 

[BrendaStar]

We all know that Andrea Pia is insane. But I firmly believe that she also is a serial killer. I am shocked by the outcome of this. Obviously , children have no voice in our society.

Bash me if you want to. I'm shocked by this second verdict.

 

[PaperDoll]

Why wasn't she charged with the other two deaths? how come just the 3?

 

[BillyGoatGruff]

Jules, I agree, not bathing, scratching her head til it bled, practically catatonic. She had tried to kill herself twice before, so I don't understand why anyone would leave her alone with children. What if she tried to again? I think they basically equated "lack of normal action" with "unable to do anything at all."

Rusty said once that he offered to get "help" around the house for Andrea but "she didn't want that." The aunt said today that Andrea refused help as well because she felt it was further proof she was a bad mother. Why would you listen to the person who's obviously mentally ill? Couldn't they have phrased it in a way that would have made it easier for her to accept help, and if she said no, so what?

Dr. Saeed said that he told Rusty Andrea should not be left alone with the children, ever. But there's no written record to confirm that and Rusty denies it. It's a "he said/she said" argument with no way to know for sure.

A caller on a local talk radio show defended Rusty on the grounds that if Andrea was released from the hospital, it gave Rusty the impression she was doing well enough or doing better. However, it was pretty clear she was being dismissed because insurance wouldn't pay anymore. Anyone who has had a family member with a serious/chronic condition knows that being dismissed from a hospital often has more to do with what the insurance clerical employee at the end of the telephone line says, than what the doctors prescribe.

It's obvious that Rusty Yates suffers from the delusion 1) he's smarter than he really is, and B) he can do nothing wrong. It's also obvious from the way his aunt and mother stand up for him that he was raised to believe the sun shines out his butt.

 

[Nore]

Why wasn't she charged with the other two deaths? how come just the 3?

-----------------

If I remember right she was charged with 3 also in the first trial. At that time I remember I think the Prosecutor said she could be charged for the other two later if necessary.This was also mentioned on C.C. show today.I caught the tail end. If any move was made to release Andrea say in a few years,justice could still be done. Please someone correct me if I am wrong.I feel a bit better knowing this~she should never be released.If she were~maybe Rusty should watch his back..

 

[BrendaStar]

It's obvious that Rusty Yates suffers from the delusion 1) he's smarter than he really is, and B) he can do nothing wrong. It's also obvious from the way his aunt and mother stand up for him that he was raised to believe the sun shines out his butt.

He's delusional alright. He is just as much responsible for this tragedy as Andrea Pia. Why wasn't he ever charged for complicity?

Doesn't his eyes look like tooth pics are holding them up? He looks like he is haunted, the schmuck.

 

[Gabby]

Justice is served... she needs help and now she will get it. This poor woman is a true mental case... God Bless Her

 

[cinsbythesea]

Justice is served... she needs help and now she will get it. This poor woman is a true mental case... God Bless Her

You said it before I could - and probably much more succinctly. I totally agree. I hope that she in her long road ahead will provide the psychiatrists etc with information and knowledge that will educate and prevent such a tragedy from happening again.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Why wasn't she charged with the other two deaths? how come just the 3?

In this type of case, they hold back something they can bring the defendant to trial a second time if the first one doesn't go their way. That's why I was worried the prosecutor may try her again a third time. Its ridiculous in my opinion.

 

[concernedperson]

-----------------

If I remember right she was charged with 3 also in the first trial. At that time I remember I think the Prosecutor said she could be charged for the other two later if necessary.This was also mentioned on C.C. show today.I caught the tail end. If any move was made to release Andrea say in a few years,justice could still be done. Please someone correct me if I am wrong.I feel a bit better knowing this~she should never be released.If she were~maybe Rusty should watch his back..

Actually Nore, this is one of the things I remember from chat. According to Odom in this second trial the other 2 children's evidence was brought it. So it negates bringing forth new evidence. Jeana, correct this if it isn't accurate.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Actually Nore, this is one of the things I remember from chat. According to Odom in this second trial the other 2 children's evidence was brought it. So it negates bringing forth new evidence. Jeana, correct this if it isn't accurate.

I didn't follow this second trial as much as the first. What they decided was that they couldn't seek the death penalty in this trial because the jury didn't give her the death sentence in the first trial and no new evidence was introduced that would cause the court to allow it.