STYLETHREAD -- LET'S TALK SHOP!

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Andrea Yates


Gucci

Status: Offline
Posts: 2766
Date:
Andrea Yates
Permalink Closed


http://us.cnn.com/2005/LAW/01/06/children.drowned/index.html


 


What exactly does this mean for her case?  Is she still serving the same sentence or will she be released?  Maybe it's just too early and my brain isn't working yet, but I'm confused.  I hope she's not being released. 



-- Edited by Cricket at 10:47, 2005-01-06

__________________


Gucci

Status: Offline
Posts: 2818
Date:
Permalink Closed

she's not going to be released. she is going to get a new trial (assuming a higher court doesn't overturn the 1st appeals court's decision).

__________________
www.musingsfromamall.com  (my main blog)
http://musingsfromamallinreallife.wordpress.com/ (my personal style blog)


Coach

Status: Offline
Posts: 1915
Date:
Permalink Closed

From everything I have read that is not going to make a difference. The testimony did not make or break the case, so it is not really going to be an issue.



-- Edited by RyanJ at 11:12, 2005-01-06

__________________
I don’t want no part of your tight-ass country-club, you freak bitch!


Gucci

Status: Offline
Posts: 2766
Date:
Permalink Closed

Thanks.  CNN just had an updated article and now I'm understanding.

__________________


Kate Spade

Status: Offline
Posts: 1231
Date:
Permalink Closed

I am a big Law & Order fan and remember seeing the episode that Dr.Parke Dietz referenced in his testimony although I could have sworn this episode aired after she committed the murder but before her trial.


Anyway, she'll remain in the institution she is serving her sentence in, her lawyers are not seeking her release but I think the greater ramifications will be in for pay hired expert's testimonies from this point on.


Dr.Dietz has provided expert opinion on so many high profile cases over the years and I think his reputation is now in question. I would not be surprised if other cases he sat in on are now re-examined for *technicalities in testimony*.


As long as they don't let that b*tch Susan Smith walk, then I think I'd freak.



__________________
~Ally~


BCBG

Status: Offline
Posts: 98
Date:
Permalink Closed

I must live under a rock.  I didn't even know anything about this lady.  That seemed like weird defense to use a Law and Order episode.  Her lawyer was on Today this morning talking about her post-portum depression.

__________________
FB


Gucci

Status: Offline
Posts: 2818
Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:

Originally posted by: Fireball

"I must live under a rock.  I didn't even know anything about this lady.  That seemed like weird defense to use a Law and Order episode.  Her lawyer was on Today this morning talking about her post-portum depression."

it happened a while ago --maybe 2 years. anyway from my understanding the l&o episode wasn't part of her defense. the standard in tx for insanity is your ability to distinguish right from wrong at the time of the crime, and they used the episode as proof of her capacity to do that. (but you might want to double check that.)

__________________
www.musingsfromamall.com  (my main blog)
http://musingsfromamallinreallife.wordpress.com/ (my personal style blog)
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard