Andrea Yates gets new trial

[JNC458]

She chases down her 5 kids like dogs & drowns her them in a bathtub & she gets a new trial? If I was her husband, I would have killed her without a second thought. Even if with the new trial they decide she was insane, she still should be locked up forever. She makes me sick.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by: JNC458
She chases down her 5 kids like dogs & drowns her them in a bathtub & she gets a new trial? If I was her husband, I would have killed her without a second thought. Even if with the new trial they decide she was insane, she still should be locked up forever. She makes me sick.

What good would killing her really do? Serve as a deterrent for other mothers not to drown their families?

She was nuts, and she needs to receive health care. Executions should be reserved for the most dangerous criminals, not the obviously mentally unwell.

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: JNC458
She chases down her 5 kids like dogs & drowns her them in a bathtub & she gets a new trial? If I was her husband, I would have killed her without a second thought. Even if with the new trial they decide she was insane, she still should be locked up forever. She makes me sick.

What good would killing her really do? Serve as a deterrent for other mothers not to drown their families?

Yep - it changes nothing whether she's dead or not. Her kids aren't coming back.

 

[DaShen]

Uh Oh... FLAME ON. Runs and hides from P&N trolls.

 

[MrChad]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: JNC458
She chases down her 5 kids like dogs & drowns her them in a bathtub & she gets a new trial? If I was her husband, I would have killed her without a second thought. Even if with the new trial they decide she was insane, she still should be locked up forever. She makes me sick.

What good would killing her really do? Serve as a deterrent for other mothers not to drown their families?

She was nuts, and she needs to receive health care. Executions should be reserved for the most dangerous criminals, not the obviously mentally unwell.

Agreed. She is obviously not well mentally and needs to receive treatment.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by: Ryan

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: JNC458
She chases down her 5 kids like dogs & drowns her them in a bathtub & she gets a new trial? If I was her husband, I would have killed her without a second thought. Even if with the new trial they decide she was insane, she still should be locked up forever. She makes me sick.

What good would killing her really do? Serve as a deterrent for other mothers not to drown their families?

Yep - it changes nothing whether she's dead or not. Her kids aren't coming back.

Not without John Edward's help

I really fail to see how the death penalty really has done anything to stem violent crime. If I were in charge, I would make the punishment SO miserable (hard labor), that no one would want to be in prison. Society was more civil then.

 

[JNC458]

I can see how someone like that deserves to live. Waste taxpayer money on feeding her & keeping a roof over her head. Then on the other hand, she should have to live everyday with what she did. Whichever is worse is appropriate. Sad thing is, she knew what she doing was wrong & did it anyway.

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: JNC458
I can see how someone like that deserves to live. Waste taxpayer money on feeding her & keeping a roof over her head. Then on the other hand, she should have to live everyday with what she did. Whichever is worse is appropriate. Sad thing is, she knew what she doing was wrong & did it anyway.

With today's legal system, it costs millions more to put a prisoner to death than to exile them to life in prison.

 

[JNC458]

sad but true

Originally posted by: Ryan

Originally posted by: JNC458
I can see how someone like that deserves to live. Waste taxpayer money on feeding her & keeping a roof over her head. Then on the other hand, she should have to live everyday with what she did. Whichever is worse is appropriate. Sad thing is, she knew what she doing was wrong & did it anyway.

With today's legal system, it costs millions more to put a prisoner to death than to exile them to life in prison.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: Ryan

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: JNC458
She chases down her 5 kids like dogs & drowns her them in a bathtub & she gets a new trial? If I was her husband, I would have killed her without a second thought. Even if with the new trial they decide she was insane, she still should be locked up forever. She makes me sick.

What good would killing her really do? Serve as a deterrent for other mothers not to drown their families?

Yep - it changes nothing whether she's dead or not. Her kids aren't coming back.

Not without John Edward's help

I really fail to see how the death penalty really has done anything to stem violent crime. If I were in charge, I would make the punishment SO miserable (hard labor), that no one would want to be in prison. Society was more civil then.

I approve of the death penalty to remove people from society who have proven themselves incapable of rehabilition. Murderers who get out, then murder again, repeat molesters, these people should be put to death. It serves society and themselves no good for them to spend sixty years in jail.
This lady isn't likely to run around drowning other people's kids, so I don't see the need to put her to death.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: Ryan

Originally posted by: JNC458
I can see how someone like that deserves to live. Waste taxpayer money on feeding her & keeping a roof over her head. Then on the other hand, she should have to live everyday with what she did. Whichever is worse is appropriate. Sad thing is, she knew what she doing was wrong & did it anyway.

With today's legal system, it costs millions more to put a prisoner to death than to exile them to life in prison.

Yeah, and that's something ridiculous that needs to change. Although I'd like to see a link showing that it costs any "millions" to execute a prisoner.

 

[Accipiter22]

well a few facts the OP left out...she had severe bouts of post-partum depression. She had this last kid and had an even more severe bout of PPD. Before anyone jumps down my throat, this is a biological fact, PPD, it can be brutal and severe after pregnancy ends. Basically what it is, is a severe hormone imbalance. Most women get an ever so slight case of it after birth, others have it much more severely.

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: JNC458
sad but true

Originally posted by: Ryan

Originally posted by: JNC458
I can see how someone like that deserves to live. Waste taxpayer money on feeding her & keeping a roof over her head. Then on the other hand, she should have to live everyday with what she did. Whichever is worse is appropriate. Sad thing is, she knew what she doing was wrong & did it anyway.

With today's legal system, it costs millions more to put a prisoner to death than to exile them to life in prison.

So you can see how weak supporting the death penalty really is - eh? From my perspective, if we eliminated the death penalty, we'd not only save billions of dollars per year, but I honestly believe that having to live life in prison in some sort of solitary confinement is actually worse than death.

 

[CKent]

How exactly is the death penalty more expensive than keeping someone in prison for life? I'm not disagreeing, just want to know the mechanics of that. I can understand not supporting capital punishment, but I can't believe anyone is sympathetic toward her. I'll chalk it up to ATOT being a bunch of horny virginal teenagers with a vastly different standard for women. You'd all be screaming like a lynch mob for her blood if she were a man who'd killed five children.

 

[Pepsei]

Originally posted by: JNC458
I can see how someone like that deserves to live. Waste taxpayer money on feeding her & keeping a roof over her head. Then on the other hand, she should have to live everyday with what she did. Whichever is worse is appropriate. Sad thing is, she knew what she doing was wrong & did it anyway.

killing her actually "waste" more taxpayer money.

 

[DCFife]

I can understand what nakedfrog is saying about putting to death people who are "rehabilitated" and just turn around and commit another violent crime and I can understand what JNC458 is saying too.

What disturbs me is the people who are in for life with no possibility of parole. Is there really a reason to rehabilitate them? I like the idea of somebody rotting away every day of their existence with nothing to think about but what they've done wrong and how they got themselves where they are. I don't think these people should have access to the same privileges as the other inmates (i.e. library, internet, school) who will be released back into society. They should get their 3 squares a day, a bunk to sleep on and plenty of time to assess themselves.

Just a thought

 

[marvdmartian]

I really fail to see how the death penalty really has done anything to stem violent crime. If I were in charge, I would make the punishment SO miserable (hard labor), that no one would want to be in prison. Society was more civil then.

Well, I'd have to say that part of that is the mamby-pamby way that we have to execute killers nowadays. Back in the "good ol' days", when you could hang someone, or send 'em to "old sparky" there was somewhat of a fear of execution. Nowadays, with there being 10 to 20 years (or more!! :shocked: ) time between the execution sentence and the actual act of it, and then they pretty much just put you to sleep (much as we would a dog or cat), then I can see where there's no deterrent.

I agree with you, though, that punishment should be somewhat miserable, while still being humane. Let's face it, our country (as well as many other "civilized" countries in this world) had it's share of inhumane treatment to prisoners in the past. If you don't know what I'm talking about, go get arrested in Turkey for drug smuggling. See you in 25 years, if you survive, and you can tell us all the horror stories! But coddling prisoners with weight rooms and cable tv is just wrong. I say give them the chance to better themselves through work ethics and education......and if they're not willing to do that, then they can sit in the cells all day, and wait for the sentence to be over.

Certainly, our current "humane" version of prisoner "reform" is doing nothing to reform anyone, least of all the prisoners, many of whom will get out only to commit further crimes which will most likely get them put into prison again and again. Some even fall into the mental imbalance of knowing no other way of life, and will purposely commit crimes when released, just to get themselves incarcerated again.

What I would like to see is a level of corporal punishment brought back to our society. No severing of limbs, as you might see in some societies! But rather, a way that we can punish someone, without causing them permanent physical damage, but in a way that will make them think twice before they commit another act against society (and that's pretty much all crime is, isn't it??). To help others (especially younger, more impressionable types) to see the error of the punished person's ways, and hopefully to convince them to NOT follow that person's path, televise it, preferably during prime time. Remember back when Clinton was in office, and that 17 year old kid in Singapore was sentenced to be caned? Remember the uproar that went up about it, and the fact that our sitting president at the time intervened, and got his sentence cut in half??

So how much do you think that kid misbehaved after he got his caning??

Call me a neanderthal, or worse, if you wish. But I know that when I was a kid, if you screwed up badly enough, you were going to get your bottom busted for it, and we all pretty much grew up better for it. Yeah, there were cases of abuse (there always will be, no matter whether you allow parents to punish their kids or not), and it's certainly something that we would have to be wary of, and do our utmost to prevent.......

But honestly, can you tell me who's worse off? A young adult who feels the lash of a cane across their back a half dozen times.......or a young adult who's put into prison for a year or two, where they'll learn all sorts of new ways to commit crimes from more experienced felons, likely be able to get all the illegal pharmaceuticals they can ever want, and be exposed to gang violence, or worse, sodomy, every day they're incarcerated????

I'll take the butt whooping, please!!

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: RBachman
How exactly is the death penalty more expensive than keeping someone in prison for life? I'm not disagreeing, just want to know the mechanics of that. I can understand not supporting capital punishment, but I can't believe anyone is sympathetic toward her. I'll chalk it up to ATOT being a bunch of horny virginal teenagers with a vastly different standard for women. You'd all be screaming like a lynch mob for her blood if she were a man who'd killed five children.

The increase is due to the appeals process afforded to all convicted criminals. It costs millions to offer them the right to appeal their death sentence, millions to go to retrials, etc.

Here's a good link with supported statistics provided by states: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=108&scid=7

 

[jagec]

Even though I believe some criminals are deserving of death, I'm against the death penalty because (a)innocent people HAVE been sentenced to death, and that's just not acceptible and (b) it costs more anyway, and considering it's less of a punishment than life in prison...why waste the money?

 

[TeeJay1952]

If someone is so deluded that they can't tell right from wrong it seems to me that it would behoove us to send their spirit onto the next level so they could try again.
I mean they CAN"T tell right from wrong. Why would this entitle you to extra legal protection?

 

[CKent]

Originally posted by: TeeJay1952
If someone is so deluded that they can't tell right from wrong it seems to me that it would behoove us to send their spirit onto the next level so they could try again.
I mean they CAN"T tell right from wrong. Why would this entitle you to extra legal protection?

Because, silly, everyone deserves a second chance except the victim.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: Ryan

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: JNC458
She chases down her 5 kids like dogs & drowns her them in a bathtub & she gets a new trial? If I was her husband, I would have killed her without a second thought. Even if with the new trial they decide she was insane, she still should be locked up forever. She makes me sick.

What good would killing her really do? Serve as a deterrent for other mothers not to drown their families?

Yep - it changes nothing whether she's dead or not. Her kids aren't coming back.

Not without John Edward's help

I really fail to see how the death penalty really has done anything to stem violent crime. If I were in charge, I would make the punishment SO miserable (hard labor), that no one would want to be in prison. Society was more civil then.

I approve of the death penalty to remove people from society who have proven themselves incapable of rehabilition. Murderers who get out, then murder again, repeat molesters, these people should be put to death. It serves society and themselves no good for them to spend sixty years in jail.
This lady isn't likely to run around drowning other people's kids, so I don't see the need to put her to death.

THat is why life sentence, no parole, hard labor is a better sentence than death. Society actually benefits from that. How does society benefit from just killing and burying someone?

 

[Mucho]

I could never understand why her husband was never charge, he left five kids alone with a mentally disturb woman seems to me he is also resopnsible for their death.

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: Mucho
I could never understand why her husband was never charge, he left five kids alone with a mentally disturb woman seems to me he is also resopnsible for their death.

Yes - lets blame the party that's not responsible for this crime. Some logic there.

 

[CKent]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: Ryan

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: JNC458
She chases down her 5 kids like dogs & drowns her them in a bathtub & she gets a new trial? If I was her husband, I would have killed her without a second thought. Even if with the new trial they decide she was insane, she still should be locked up forever. She makes me sick.

What good would killing her really do? Serve as a deterrent for other mothers not to drown their families?

Yep - it changes nothing whether she's dead or not. Her kids aren't coming back.

Not without John Edward's help

I really fail to see how the death penalty really has done anything to stem violent crime. If I were in charge, I would make the punishment SO miserable (hard labor), that no one would want to be in prison. Society was more civil then.

I approve of the death penalty to remove people from society who have proven themselves incapable of rehabilition. Murderers who get out, then murder again, repeat molesters, these people should be put to death. It serves society and themselves no good for them to spend sixty years in jail.
This lady isn't likely to run around drowning other people's kids, so I don't see the need to put her to death.

THat is why life sentence, no parole, hard labor is a better sentence than death. Society actually benefits from that. How does society benefit from just killing and burying someone?

Society's morale could benefit, at least those of the mindset for it... regardless, I can't agree with capital punishment for the sole reason that the justice system can, and often does, fail... and anything less than 100% accuracy just won't cut it for putting people to death.