MySpace


Wednesday, July 26, 2006 

Current mood:  confused
Category: Blogging
hate to ruin the ending, but andrea yates has been officially found not guilty by reason of insanity.

i have to say that my overly opinioned ass is really torn by this verdict. 

on one hand i think it's pretty evident that anyone who can calmly kill all five of their children probably isn't running on all cylinders.  that's not the issue.  the question is, can extensive therapy really change that?

i get the whole point that she will probably feel guilty enough for the rest of her life that any punishment that might be doled will pale in comparison as to the one she gives herself, but really, it was murder.

it's not like she just slapped her kids around or locked them in closets taking away their hot wheels and barbies, she took their lives.

her claim was that she believed that she had messed up her children beyond repair.  one was a serial killer if i remember correctly, was her thought.

well, isn't that what parents do?  mess up? 

it's all part of the deal.  you don't get a magical 'do over' card in the mail.

raising a child is not like building a model car, you can't go out and just buy a new kit just because now you don't like the color, or the engine isn't what you thought it would be.

ok, so really i don't know where exactly i'm going with this.  i just have this nagging feeling that something isn't right here.
Bob

 
True!
 
Posted by Bob on Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - 5:27 PM
[Reply to this
nathan

 
nothing is right anywhere.

i get that she was absolutely batshit insane.

but that isn't an excuse.

did she do it for christ?

that would make sense.

 
Posted by nathan on Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - 5:28 PM
[Reply to this
Tazzio

 

Damn right something isn't right.  It should be guilty by reason of insanity.  Insanity is too broad of a loop hole for murderous individuals to get off.  I understand applying the not guilty part to mentally deficient people, but come on... who really knows how to determine one's sanity? 

She should be punished.  She will never be right and may go off again.  I only hope if she cracks again it involves a really big kid that kicks the shit out of her.


 
Posted by Tazzio on Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - 5:30 PM
[Reply to this
Wendy

 
Why is it NOT guilty by reason of insanity.  I never thought of GUILTY by reason of insanity before.  That is much more accurate, and that nagging feeling I get seems more appeased with that terminology.  One way or another, she is locked up for life, but I want that word guilty out there.  She did it, "crazy" or not.
 
Posted by Wendy on Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - 5:55 PM
[Reply to this
just angie

 
exactly
 
Posted by just angie on Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - 5:59 PM
[Reply to this
Ruthie

 
the jury was not able to give her death penalty, because of previous ruling, so they had to pick life in jail or life in therapy.  since jail is not really intended to make anyone sane, or healthy, but just to prove to the rest of the world that whichever criminal is not 'on the loose' anymore....seems relatively sensible?  doesnt it?
 
Posted by Ruthie on Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - 6:18 PM
[Reply to this
just angie

 
that's what i mean.  i'm torn on where she should be.

isn't the person that chopped up little boys to dine on for thursday's dinner a little crazy too?  but they go to prison to be beaten with sticks.  not to therapy. 

i just wonder where it is we draw the line.

 
Posted by just angie on Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - 6:26 PM
[Reply to this
Justin Charge

 
i don't know how true this all is but I heard that she didn't want to have more kids, b/c she didn't think she could take it, her husband said no.  Also I heard that he made them live in a school bus like home for awhile and wouldn't give her emotional outlet.  From my understanding she told him that she was crazy but b/c of their faith he didn't want to use protection.  Of course this was on a radio show so who knows whats true or not.  If it is true then she deserves the insanity. 
 
Posted by Justin Charge on Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - 8:18 PM
[Reply to this
Chuck Blast

 

What really makes me wonder is why the Husband is still with her after she killed all his kids.

If he got a divorce, pity lays left and right.


 
Posted by Chuck Blast on Thursday, July 27, 2006 - 12:34 AM
[Reply to this
Dizig
Diane spitzig

 
I don't get it.

You held your kid under water until they died.

Not just once, but five times.

I can't imagine it.

If someone were holding one of my kids underwater, I would do everything in my power to KILL them.

Once you have a child, life has no meaning without them.

She doesn't deserve to live and someone should make sure that it doesn't happen.

 
Posted by Dizig on Thursday, July 27, 2006 - 8:21 AM
[Reply to this
just angie



Last Updated: 9/14/2009

Send Message
Instant Message
Email to a Friend
Subscribe

Gender: Female
Status: In a Relationship
Age: 28

Who Gives Kudos: