HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Mar. 3, 2006 Andrea Yates, the Texas mother who, in June 2001, murdered her five children by means of drowning and was found guilty of murdering three of them (the state did not charge her in two of the children’s murders) will face a new trial. The first verdict was overturned in January 2005, by an appeals court because of testimony given by psychiatrist (Park Deitz). He erroneously stated that the television program “Law & Order” aired an episode about a woman who had drowned her children and was found innocent by reason of insanity not long before the murders by Yates when no such episode existed or aired. And so her with her former conviction overturned and the next trial scheduled to begin on March 20, 2006, those following the case will have a chance to see how Yates and her attorneys will approach their insanity defense. One by one Andrea Pia Yates murdered her four boys and one daughter. The last child to be murdered by Yates was the oldest, Noah. Andrea recounted to law enforcement that seven-year old Noah ran from her and had to be dragged to the bathroom to be murdered. In all five children, ranging from ages six months to seven years old were systematically executed at the hands of their mother. Central to Andrea Yate’s defense is the claim of insanity via postpartum depression/psychosis (some readers may recall this touchy subject recently arising from the Tom Cruise scientology comments about mental health and actress Brooke Shields’ attempted tongue lashing). Yates had been treated for what was diagnosed as postpartum depression after the birth of two of her children. During the first trial the prosecution did not and still does not contend that Andrea Yates does not have some form of mental illness. However, the defense claims that the degree of postpartum depression was so severe that it led to a form of psychosis, which is rare but occurs in about 1-2% of postpartum cases. Supplementing the claims of the defense’s insanity bid is the history of Yates treatment, the testimony of various mental health professionals on her behalf, her husband and her best friend who went as far as keeping a journal because of the deteriorating mental and emotional condition she believed she saw in Andrea months before the murders. The prosecution will be pressed, once again, to override the social sentiment and difficulty it seems to have in viewing women, particularly mothers who murder their own children, as murderers but instead seek alternative explanations for such outrageous behavior such as mental impairment or external contributors. In the prosecution’s favor is the stark fact that the requirement that a person be demonstratively impaired so that they do not know right from wrong is contradicted by Yates own 911 call when she admitted that she had murdered her children. Obviously she knew that she had murdered and said so, hence she called law enforcement and reported her own crimes. Again it will be the prosecution’s duty to make evident that though a person may indeed believe some peripheral force is compelling them to do something (Yates claims in an interview with Deitz that Satan was giving her directions to harm her children and so to avoid their take over by Satan she murdered them so they could be with God), this is not the threshold or the determining factor whether they realize what they are doing is right or wrong. The Yates case is intriguing to say the least. The characters and events that culminated into the life of Russell and Andrea Yates is worth more than a light read. It is a complex and fascinating case that, in the end, might provide additional weight or legal precedence for the continued employment of the insanity defense. But more than that is the main character, Andrea Pia Yates and the life she chose to live and the personalities in her life that are at times, jaw dropping. Some disturbing issues have also arisen regarding this case. The fact that Yates knew, quite clearly, she had murdered her children and then, in the summer of 2004, when Russell Yates was visiting her while she was in prison, she asked Rusty why he had not brought the children to visit. Repeatedly Yates had detailed conversations with her attorneys and family about her case over the two years before this but suddenly seems to feign ignorance about the children’s deaths. As well there are the recent reports that by an inmate that Yates gave her advice on how to beat the system by acting mentally ill and convincing mental health professionals that she suffered from a severe disorder. The inmate also had information about the nature of the death of the children that was not available to the public that gave a great deal of credibility to her statements. For a second time a jury of her peers will be summoned in the interest of justice to render a verdict in this case. And once again they will be given the opportunity to wade through what many consider a case of a woman simply taking the most devious road to relieving herself of the tremendous responsibility of being the mother or 5, choices that were all part of her life. Or they will empathize and sympathize and be convinced that Andrea Yates is a person that could not and did not know right from wrong when she murdered her five children. ------------ About the author: Guy Arthur Thomas was born an Air Force brat and raised mostly in South Carolina. He has traveled and lived in the Middle East and the Pacific Islands but makes his home in Virginia. Guy has a Bachelor’s degree in Biblical studies and enjoys social, political and religious discussions. Email: Guyarthurthomas@yahoo.com Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com. Please link to this article rather than copying and pasting it onto your site (which would be unauthorized and illegal). |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
