Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
__Kratos__

Medical examiner: Drowning boy struggled

47 posts in this topic

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- Seven-year-old Noah Yates struggled so hard as his mother drowned him that his small fists remained stiff and raised over his head hours later, the medical examiner testified Wednesday.

Noah also had deep bruises consistent with someone holding him down, as did 6-month-old Mary and 5-year-old John, Dr. Luis Sanchez said at the third day of Andrea Yates' murder retrial.

Prosecutors have said they will rest their case after Sanchez testifies. During the trial's rebuttal phase, they plan to call Dr. Park Dietz, the psychiatrist whose testimony inadvertently caused Yates' conviction to be overturned.

Dietz, also a consultant to the "Law & Order" television series, told jurors in Yates' first trial that one episode depicting a woman who drowned her kids in a bathtub and was acquitted by reason of insanity aired before the Yates children died.

No such episode existed, attorneys learned after Yates was convicted but before jurors sentenced her to life in prison.

Yates again has pleaded innocent by reason of insanity.

The defense says she suffered from severe postpartum psychosis and did not know that drowning her children was wrong.

Yates is being tried only in the deaths of three of the five children, a common practice in cases of multiple slayings.

The judge is not allowing prosecutors to show evidence about the injuries suffered by the other two children, 2-year-old Luke and 3-year-old Paul.

If convicted, Yates will be sentenced to life in prison because prosecutors are not seeking the death penalty. After the first jury rejected death, prosecutors could not seek execution again because they did not find any new evidence.

Source

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

She should be shot. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better, she should be drowned just like what she did to her poor children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, while I absolutley abhor what she did, I am torn on this one. If she was indeed suffering from PPP (post partum psychosis), then her husband is equally culpable (or more so) for leaving her alone with the children.

I had PPP after my second kid was born. I spent hours locked in the bedroom screaming until my voice gave out. I was completely irrational. My doctor said "It will pass." Having experienced the temporary insanity of it, this one is such a tough call for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, while I absolutley abhor what she did, I am torn on this one.

I'm with you on this one. It's so completely obvious and documented that she was mentally ill. I have a hard time with this one too. :hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just cannot imagine being so depressed that you would kill all of your children... My 2 drive me insane at times...but dang...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not depression Nyx, its psychosis - as in psychotic - as in hearing voices and not recognizing reality. The woman was mentally ill and her husband knew and left her alone with the kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah AY was bad off. She'd been in and out of mental institutions and advised not to have any more children yet they still kept having children! Then she got involved with that religious maniac that her husband followed and for a while they all lived in a van....she was just really bad off. Horrible situation. She should have been in an institute and this never would have happened, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

her husband is equally culpable (or more so) for leaving her alone with the children.

I don't think he is to blame. She has had it with past kids and she should have taken the proper steps before the child was born to ensure herself. She was probably telling him everything was alright and he wasn't in her head before hand or then, so he couldn't have known she was going to flip out to be a bad mother and kill their children.

Update: Yates was psychotic, former jail nurse says

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- Andrea Yates stared at her cell wall the day after she drowned her five children in a bathtub and appeared to be talking to someone who wasn't there, a psychiatric nurse testified Friday.

John Bayliss, who worked in the mental health unit of the Harris County Jail, testified in Yates' second murder trial that the suburban Houston woman slowly turned to look at him only after he repeatedly called out her name. She then turned back to the wall and continued rapidly mumbling and picking at her hair, he said.

"(It) is something I had not observed in any other patient I had dealt with," Bayliss said.

Yates was convicted of murder in 2002, but the conviction was overturned last year because of erroneous testimony. She has again pleaded innocent by reason of insanity.

Dr. Melissa R. Ferguson testified Thursday that she evaluated Yates the day after the children -- 6-month-old Mary, 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old Paul, 5-year-old John and 7-year-old Noah -- were drowned in their home in June 2001. Ferguson, then the medical director of psychiatric services at the Harris County Jail, said Yates at first showed no emotion but then started crying and yelling.

"She screamed, 'Couldn't I have killed just one to fulfill the prophecy? Couldn't I have offered Mary? Are they in heaven?"' Ferguson said.

Ferguson testified that Yates said her children were not righteous and had stumbled because she was evil, and they could never be saved because of how she was raising them. Yates then paraphrased Luke 17:2, saying, "It is better for someone to tie a millstone around their neck and cast them into a river than to stumble," Ferguson told jury.

She added that Yates did not believe she was mentally ill.

Prosecutors, who rested their case Wednesday, contend Yates knew her actions were wrong because she called 911 after the crime and later told a detective she killed her children because she was a bad mother and wanted to be punished. They also said she did it after her husband went to work and before her mother-in-law arrived.

Ferguson testified that Yates showed signs of paranoia when she reported hearing voices and said the media had put cameras in her cell, but prosecutors showed the jury pictures of Yates' cell that had a surveillance camera and intercom.

When she asked Yates if she was suicidal, Ferguson testified, Yates said, "I cannot destroy Satan; only the state can." Ferguson said Yates believed President Bush was still the Texas governor, and that Yates said that he would destroy Satan.

On Thursday, a former case worker testified that the day after the drownings, Yates asked for a razor to shave her head. She said "666" -- the "Number of the Beast" in the Book of Revelation -- was on her scalp, Corey Washington testified.

Washington said he stood to look at the back of Yates' head and noticed three marks that he was told were scabs where she had picked at her scalp.

"I kind of buckled a little bit," Washington said.

Prosecutors still plan to call Dr. Park Dietz, the psychiatrist whose testimony inadvertently caused Yates' conviction to be overturned. They said that he would testify during the trial's rebuttal phase, after the defense presents its case.

Dietz, also a consultant to the "Law & Order" television series, told jurors in Yates' first trial that one episode depicting a woman who drowned her kids in a bathtub -- and was acquitted by reason of insanity -- aired before the Yates children died. No such episode existed.

Yates, who turns 42 on Sunday, will be sentenced to life in prison if convicted. She is being tried in only three of the children's deaths, a common practice in cases involving multiple slayings.

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

Seemly any idiot can have kids... :hmm: I'm still hoping for her to be put to death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm still hoping for her to be put to death.

She deserves it :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The husband should be jailed too. He kept pushing her to have more kids even though he knew she was mentally ill.

I don't care if she was ill during the murder. Some crimes should mandate execution no matter what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Update: Yates was warned not to have 5th child

quote:

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- A psychiatrist testified Friday that she warned Andrea Yates not to have any more children after she tried to commit suicide twice within months of having her fourth child in 1999.

"I could pretty much predict that Mrs. Yates would have another episode of psychosis," Dr. Eileen Starbranch told jurors in Yates' second murder retrial.

Starbranch said Yates suffered from postpartum psychosis, which she said causes a mother to have delusions and lose touch with reality, making it much more severe than postpartum depression.

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

She knew at the time she would be a danger of having another child, yet she did and all those innocent children died at the hands of her. :no:

Edited by __Kratos__

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Surely her husband had something to do with her having another child?

I do not remember the entire case, nor did I follow it exceptionally closely, but I believe I remember something about her husband making a statement that he understood that she was unbalanced (after having the last child) but he had to go to work and she looked fine to him. Surely the doctor shared with him that his wife was having mental illness issues. He should, I believe, at least have gotten in some sort of trouble for child endangerment - leaving the children with someone he knew was unsuitable - even though it was his own wife and their mother.

Edited by Purplos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

u shouldnt be able to plead for insanity, its a sad accuse for murder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the husband was just suppose to drop everything in his life, including work?

I don't know if the shrink even had permission to give out details of their client to her husband. Privacy laws are enforced.

DA: Yates' Husband Not Criminally Responsible

"Russell Yates is a victim," Mallett said. "He is a victim of a system that didn't care for his wife when he was trying to get care for her. And he will carry this memory with him for the rest of his life."

Yates' Husband Offended By Prosecution

Yates was asked if he saw the signs and possibly could have prevented the murders.

"No. People have said, 'Why did you leave her at home that day?' A lot of people have talked about responsibility and what is the responsibility of a loved one when they have a sick family member? What's the responsibility of the family member who is sick? What is the responsibility of the doctor and the hospital and the insurance company?" Russell Yates said.

"Andrea's responsibility in this was just to take her medication, try to dress herself, take a shower when she could. She didn't really have much responsibility -- eat, drink. We relieved her of all other responsibility -- Mom and I did at home. Our responsibility in this was to seek medical treatment for Andrea, which we did and offload her responsibility at home so Mom and I cared for the kids that entire period," Russell Yates said.

Russell Yates said that no one realized that Andrea Yates was dangerous.

"She didn't step up and say anything that was so outrageous that made us concerned. She just was quiet and stared ahead. We didn't know she was psychotic. We just thought she was depressed. But she was staring ahead and we would see her the same way we'd always seen her," Russell Yates said.

"We knew how much she loved the children and if she didn't say anything, we assumed she was thinking the same thing she always thought. So, no, we didn't see her as a danger," Russell Yates said.

The medical community is partly to blame, according to Russell Yates.

"The real question to me is how could she have been so ill and the medical community not diagnose her, not treat her and I'll say, not protect our family from her," he said. "My responsibility was to protect our family from people outside our house. You never think you have to protect somebody from inside your house. It's really the medical community's responsibility to identify psychosis. I'm not a medical professional. I don't even know what psychosis is. I know now, but didn't then."

Yates believes that there was nothing he could have done to prevent the tragedy.

"A family can't protect itself from a psychotic person. (Andrea) had delusional thinking. She was psychotic. She thought it was imperative that she kill the children. And if it hadn't been about drowning when we were gone, it would have been by smothering at night or poisoning them at breakfast. It would have been some other way," Russell Yates said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- Seven-year-old Noah Yates struggled so hard as his mother drowned him that his small fists remained stiff and raised over his head hours later, the medical examiner testified Wednesday.

Noah also had deep bruises consistent with someone holding him down, as did 6-month-old Mary and 5-year-old John, Dr. Luis Sanchez said at the third day of Andrea Yates' murder retrial.

Prosecutors have said they will rest their case after Sanchez testifies. During the trial's rebuttal phase, they plan to call Dr. Park Dietz, the psychiatrist whose testimony inadvertently caused Yates' conviction to be overturned.

Dietz, also a consultant to the "Law & Order" television series, told jurors in Yates' first trial that one episode depicting a woman who drowned her kids in a bathtub and was acquitted by reason of insanity aired before the Yates children died.

No such episode existed, attorneys learned after Yates was convicted but before jurors sentenced her to life in prison.

Yates again has pleaded innocent by reason of insanity.

The defense says she suffered from severe postpartum psychosis and did not know that drowning her children was wrong.

Yates is being tried only in the deaths of three of the five children, a common practice in cases of multiple slayings.

The judge is not allowing prosecutors to show evidence about the injuries suffered by the other two children, 2-year-old Luke and 3-year-old Paul.

If convicted, Yates will be sentenced to life in prison because prosecutors are not seeking the death penalty. After the first jury rejected death, prosecutors could not seek execution again because they did not find any new evidence.

Source

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

She should be shot. <_<

suerly after finding her guilty of killing her first child, they should have locked her up in a mental home or taken her other kids, that she would soon have, off her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that article Kratos. Like I said, I didn't follow the case very closely.

It still just strikes me as wrong that they just 'assumed' she was depressed and because she didn't say anything out of the ordinary, that she was fine. I mean, if I hire some person out of a mental institution who didn't start yelling somethig crazy in the interview, wouldn't I be responsible if something happened to my children?

The father is just as responsible for his children as the mother is. And more so than the medical community.

Its just a tragedy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- Seven-year-old Noah Yates struggled so hard as his mother drowned him that his small fists remained stiff and raised over his head hours later, the medical examiner testified Wednesday.

Noah also had deep bruises consistent with someone holding him down, as did 6-month-old Mary and 5-year-old John, Dr. Luis Sanchez said at the third day of Andrea Yates' murder retrial.

Prosecutors have said they will rest their case after Sanchez testifies. During the trial's rebuttal phase, they plan to call Dr. Park Dietz, the psychiatrist whose testimony inadvertently caused Yates' conviction to be overturned.

Dietz, also a consultant to the "Law & Order" television series, told jurors in Yates' first trial that one episode depicting a woman who drowned her kids in a bathtub and was acquitted by reason of insanity aired before the Yates children died.

No such episode existed, attorneys learned after Yates was convicted but before jurors sentenced her to life in prison.

Yates again has pleaded innocent by reason of insanity.

The defense says she suffered from severe postpartum psychosis and did not know that drowning her children was wrong.

Yates is being tried only in the deaths of three of the five children, a common practice in cases of multiple slayings.

The judge is not allowing prosecutors to show evidence about the injuries suffered by the other two children, 2-year-old Luke and 3-year-old Paul.

If convicted, Yates will be sentenced to life in prison because prosecutors are not seeking the death penalty. After the first jury rejected death, prosecutors could not seek execution again because they did not find any new evidence.

Source

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

She should be shot. <_<

:cry: If she had postpartum psychosis that bad then why didn't she give them away or do something else besides drown them. I have memories from time I was a toddler so I anyone that is human can only imagine what those children were put thru. Murder is murder. She should be tried on all counts. She should be drowned to point of not dead yet and it should be performed over and over. She may have been sick at the time but she lived a normal life still. So for her to now say she is pleading innocent by sanity-is a bunch of crock. I think mothers that kill they're children are severly depressed and need help but you also know when to cross the line. I had postpartum after my first child was born but not that kind of P.D. stage. And I never once wanted to hurt my child. That womans kids were angels and are now in a better place with God where they can't be hurt.

:cry: I just don't see how someone could do this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What no one seems to grasp is that the woman was psychotic. She didn't just have a bit of depression. Also she'd been in mental hospitals before. It's not like she just killed them out of the blue. Unless you've been psychotic you have no idea what you're capable of doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Update: 'I thought they would go to heaven'

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- A videotaped jail interview played for jurors Monday showed Andrea Yates weeping after she told a psychiatrist why she drowned her five children in a bathtub.

"In their innocence, I thought they would go to heaven," Yates told Dr. Lucy Puryear about five weeks after the June 20, 2001, drownings. "I just -- since they were so young," she stammered before trailing off and starting to cry.

Puryear, an expert on reproductive-related psychiatric disorders, was called by the defense at Yates' murder trial.

Yates has again pleaded innocent by reason of insanity. If the jury agrees, she could be committed to a state hospital, with periodic hearings to determine whether she should be released. A guilty verdict would mean life in prison.

An appeals court overturned her 2002 conviction because erroneous testimony might have influenced the jury.

Her attorneys say Yates suffered from severe postpartum psychosis and did not know that killing 6-month-old Mary, 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old Paul, 5-year-old John and 7-year-old Noah was wrong.

Court ended at midday Monday because of a scheduling conflict. Testimony resumes Tuesday. Defense attorneys had said they planned to wrap up their case this week.

On Friday, Dr. George Ringholz, a neuropsychologist who evaluated Yates about six months after the children were drowned, told jurors that Yates was suffering from a delusion and thought killing the children was right.

Yates' attorney Wendell Odom said Friday he is not sure whether the defense or state will call Rusty Yates, who divorced Andrea Yates last year and remarried in March.

Rusty Yates, who was sworn in as a witness before the trial began, has repeatedly said he believes Andrea Yates was insane at the time of the killings, and he testified for the defense at the first trial. If the defense calls him this time, it may wait until the rebuttal phase.

Prosecutors say Andrea Yates may be mentally ill but did not meet the state's definition of insanity, because she called 911 to report the crime and later told a detective that she killed the youngsters because she was a bad mother and wanted to be punished.

After the defense rests its case, prosecutors will begin rebuttal testimony.

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

Make the world a better place, kill her. :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Update: Psychiatrist: Yates didn't seem psychotic

A psychiatrist who treated Andrea Yates about three months before she drowned her five children told a jury Tuesday that she never appeared psychotic, not even at an office appointment two days before the killings.

Dr. Mohammad A. Saeed, who treated Yates at a mental hospital for 24 days in April and May 2001, said he nonetheless prescribed an anti-psychotic medication because Yates' husband said she had responded well to it previously.

Saeed said he later switched Yates to another anti-psychotic drug, Haldol, but tapered it off during an office visit in early June, three weeks after she had been released from the Devereux Texas Treatment Network.

He said he thought she was suffering side effects but should stay on antidepressants because he believed she was depressed.

"I did not personally observe any signs of psychosis," said Saeed, a witness during the prosecution's rebuttal phase, which started Tuesday after the defense in her murder trial rested its case.

Yates, 42, is being retried because her 2002 capital murder conviction was overturned by a court that ruled erroneous testimony might have influenced the jury. She has again pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity.

Her attorneys say she suffered from severe postpartum psychosis and did not know it was wrong to kill 7-year-old Noah, 5-year-old John, 3-year-old Paul, 2-year-old Luke and 6-month-old Mary.

Prosecutors say Yates knew her actions were wrong because she waited until her husband left for work to drown the children in the tub and then called 911, and later told a detective that she was a bad mother and wanted to be punished.

Under cross-examination, Saeed maintained that he did not see Yates in a psychotic state. His notes from a May 2001 office visit indicate Yates was almost catatonic, had not been eating and drinking, and did not answer any questions – and he had recommended that she undergo shock therapy.

He was also questioned about a June 18 office visit – two days before Yates drowned her children.

During that visit, Saeed said, Yates was quieter than usual, and her husband said she initially improved after discontinuing Haldol but had started to decline. Saeed said she denied any psychotic symptoms or suicidal thoughts.

Saeed acknowledged that if someone is psychotic, discontinuing an anti-psychotic medicine could make the person's condition worse.

Earlier Tuesday, Yates' defense rested after her best friend tearfully told the jury that Yates still talks about activities she did with her children and "misses them terribly."

Debbie A. Holmes, who met Yates about 20 years ago when both were nurses at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, said she continues to visit Yates and writes her letters.

Holmes said that in the spring of 2001, after Yates' father died and her fifth child was an infant, Yates appeared to spiral downward. Yates lost weight, could not concentrate and did not bathe or brush her teeth for days before she was hospitalized again, Holmes said.

"She says, 'I feel the darkness coming back. Please pray that God will come into my heart,'" Holmes testified. "She made a comment about not letting Satan come back."

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

Even her own doc is saying she is lying now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes exactly, I think she was being a selfish b**ch!! Like the docs said-she was sick but not mentally ill. Grant ya you would have to be sick to kill your kids but she killed them and called 911 and drowned them all before her mother n law arrived to help with the kids. She didn't snap and do this. She knew what she was doing!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well either way it's a no win situation. We know she had been mentally ill because she had been in hospitals and she had been on anti-psychotic meds. Of course the doc is going to say she didn't seem psychotic NOW because he wants to keep his license. I'm not trying to defend her, I'm just saying that we need better care for the mentally ill. It needs to be recognized. It just needs to be recognized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

My feeling is that (1) She was NOT insane at the time although was suffering terribly from various mental afflictions. If she were insane I can't see how she would ever have phone 911 to report what she had done (she woudn't have been aware it was wrong - according to the legal definition of insane - the McNaghton Rule)

(2) Her husband, the aptly named RANDY, should have kept his pecker in his pants and clearly seen she needed desperate help and instead of inflicting more children on her should have had her taken to a hospital LONG ago.

3) she should receive the death penalty and he should be charged with culpable homicide.

Edited by Saint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My feeling is that (1) She was NOT insane at the time although was suffering terribly from various mental afflictions. If she were insane I can't see how she would ever have phone 911 to report what she had done (she woudn't have been aware it was wrong - according to the legal definition of insane - the McNaghton Rule)

I am aware of the McNaughton Rule but who is to say that she knew what she had done was wrong? She believed that she was sending them to Heaven because how she was raising them was wrong. I think that the McNaughton Rule needs a bit of re-vamping myself since a psychotic person is going to go from one extreme to the next.

Again I'm not trying to defend her but anyone who hasn't ever had a pyschotic episode won't ever understand. Just what I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, I hink she was in the depths of a psychotic episode during the actual murder process, then when she came out of it, she called the police. I don't think the death penalty is warranted here, life without parole, yes. Not death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.