DVD Talk
Another selfish parent kills her 4 children before killing herself! [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Longest Day
Buy: $54.99 $24.99
9.
10.
DVD Blowouts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alien [Blu-ray]
Buy: $19.99 $9.99
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : Another selfish parent kills her 4 children before killing herself!


mrpayroll
05-29-07, 04:37 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-05-29-children-killed_N.htm?csp=34

Texas mother hangs herself, 4 children
Updated 1h 1m ago

HUDSON OAKS, Texas (AP) A 23-year-old mother apparently hanged herself and her four small daughters in a closet in their mobile home. An 8-month-old survived and was taken to a hospital, the sheriff said Tuesday.

VIDEO: Mom, kids found hanged (http://usatoday.feedroom.com/index.jsp?fr_story=FEEDROOM196768)

Authorities did not immediately identify the victims in the Oak Hills mobile home park, about 25 miles west of Fort Worth in this rural community of 1,600 people.

The woman's sister, who lived nearby, forced her way into the locked home after the woman failed to show up for work. Parker County Sheriff Larry Fowler said the sister rescued the infant when she realized the baby girl was still alive.

The other children, ages 5, 3 and 2, had all had been hanged with strips of clothing and sashes, Fowler said.

"It's horrendous. That's all I can say," he said. "It's just something you don't want to see."

The infant was listed in good condition at a Fort Worth hospital, Fowler said.

The sheriff said the hangings appeared to be murder-suicide because the trailer's doors were locked from the inside and a relative said the woman had been depressed.

The young mother and her girls were last seen alive Monday evening, he said. She was believed to be separated from her husband.

"I just got a big kick out of watching the kids play over there on her porch, and today it's sad, very sad," said neighbor Joyce Harris.

Texas has seen a number of child killings by mothers in recent years.

Less than five years earlier, another Hudson Oaks family was torn apart when Dee Etta Perez, 39, shot her three children, ages 4, 9 and 10, before killing herself.

Andrea Yates drowned her five children in the family's Houston bathtub in 2001. In 2003, Deanna Laney beat her two young sons to death with stones in East Texas, and Lisa Ann Diaz drowned her daughters in a Plano bathtub. Dena Schlosser fatally severed her 10-month-old daughter's arms with a kitchen knife in 2004.

All four of those women were found innocent by reason of insanity. Yates initially was convicted of capital murder, but that verdict was overturned on appeal.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.


Chris

dick_grayson
05-29-07, 04:38 PM
why do people continue to post these types stories (other than to bum people out?)

antennaball
05-29-07, 04:39 PM
Damn Texans. Oh, but I'm sure it's post-partum depression. Hence, not her fault. She just needed treatment, donchaknow.

-rolleyes-

DVD Polizei
05-29-07, 04:42 PM
It's been a while since we've had a mobile home massacre around here. Give the OP a break.

CPA-ESQ.
05-29-07, 04:46 PM
Trailer Park + 4 kids + 23 yrs old

Have these people ever heard of Birth Control? is it "cool" to have kids at 18 and then have one every year?

Dammn when I was 18 - I just wanted to drive after 9pm -ohbfrank-

Joel Goodsen
05-29-07, 04:50 PM
Its posts like these that make you realise what sort of world we live in.

Here in England, 15+ year old girls have kids, just so they can get a house off the council and do nothing but walk around all day pushing a pram...WITH THEIR BOYFRIENDS who do nothing all day aswell, except enjoy there self on my tax money.

I know people come from different backgrounds and situations etc but how they can do something like this I will never know.

" All four of those women were found innocent by reason of insanity. Yates initially was convicted of capital murder, but that verdict was overturned on appeal. "

NOW THIS IS A JOKE. I am going on here but its like the law has gone soft. People who commit crime today dont seem to be bothered about jail etc because it is all too nice. Bring back the death sentence, that will lower the crime rate.

printerati
05-29-07, 04:51 PM
All four of those women were found innocent by reason of insanity.

-ohbfrank-

antennaball
05-29-07, 04:51 PM
Wait, did Slayer2005 ever say where his "friend" lived?

RunBandoRun
05-29-07, 04:56 PM
There's not enough information out about this case to make any judgments yet, other than to say how terrible it is for those poor babies -- particularly the one who lived. Can you imagine trying to explain to her, after she grows up, what happened to her mother and her siblings? :(

Andrea Yates had a documented mental illness. That doesn't mean she should walk free. She belongs in a mental institution, though -- not prison. She cannot receive adequate treatment in prison.

printerati
05-29-07, 05:02 PM
She cannot receive adequate treatment in prison.

Adequate treatment = death penalty. Shame that Texas (of all places) got it wrong.

jeffkjoe
05-29-07, 05:02 PM
I really despise reading these news reports. Being the father of 2 kids, this always depresses me.

mrpayroll
05-29-07, 05:03 PM
All I'm saying is:

killing your child / children = is the ultimate act of selfishness.

Maybe they had a hard life, but at least give these children a chance (if you're going to kill yourself) by at least not killing them and allowing them to life with relatives or being adopted / foster home.

But now these precious children, have no chance whatsoever. :(

Maybe I post these stories so that we will all keep a look out for our friends with (especially) children and to always support them in hard times

Chris

X
05-29-07, 05:10 PM
Wouldn't selfish be killing herself before killing her kids?

porieux
05-29-07, 05:14 PM
I call it Darwinism.

bwvanh114
05-29-07, 05:15 PM
So how did this go down?

1. She hunts down one of the kids.
2. Hangs 'em up. Kid is screaming/bawling.

What are the other kids doing? Waiting patiently? I guess the youngest is busy drinking diet coke from a nursing bottle to to anything. What about the others? Watching cartoons?

How did these other women do it? Knock 'em all out quickly and then tied/hang them up?

Birrman54
05-29-07, 05:18 PM
For those complaining about the law's response not being tough enough, a question.

Do you think tougher laws would have STOPPED her? I certainly don't. Andrea Yates, regardless of the legal decision, will spend the rest of her life in an institution, are we petty enough to insist that even the mentally ill rot in jail?

Chrisedge
05-29-07, 05:21 PM
As long as they rot forever behind bars/or in a "hospital", I don't care what you call it. "reason of insanity" lol...isn't everyone that commits murder insane?

mrpayroll
05-29-07, 05:23 PM
Wouldn't selfish be killing herself before killing her kids?

Of course that is also selfish. But the way she did it, they have no chance to experience their own lives (good and bad).

Chris

Joel Goodsen
05-29-07, 05:28 PM
For those complaining about the law's response not being tough enough, a question.

Do you think tougher laws would have STOPPED her? I certainly don't. Andrea Yates, regardless of the legal decision, will spend the rest of her life in an institution, are we petty enough to insist that even the mentally ill rot in jail?

Using a movie as an example, see 15 MINUTES. That movie says a whole lot about social commentary. People know how to fuck over the law and they do it well. I am not using that as an excuse for this case in particular, I mean on a whole scale. Criminals have got the law well and truly fucked and they know it.

Mrs. Danger
05-29-07, 05:36 PM
All four of those women were found innocent by reason of insanity.

If you can't execute them, this IS the next worst punishment. Mental hospitals are not as nice a prisons. There is no getting out on parole. You don't get out until you can convince the shrinks you are not a danger to anyone.

I don't think Andrea is going to be doing that any time soon.

RunBandoRun
05-29-07, 05:46 PM
If you can't execute them, this IS the next worst punishment. Mental hospitals are not as nice a prisons. There is no getting out on parole. You don't get out until you can convince the shrinks you are not a danger to anyone.

I don't think Andrea is going to be doing that any time soon.

THANK YOU! :thumbsup: I get really upset when people think that I am saying Andrea Yates should just WALK. I know she needs to be confined and I don't think she should ever be released. But if she is imprisoned, rather than committed to a mental institution, she is less likely to receive the necessary psychiatric treatment and medication for her illness.

antennaball
05-29-07, 06:04 PM
There's not enough information out about this case to make any judgments yet,

Bullshit.

She hung her children. That's plenty for me.

General Zod
05-29-07, 06:08 PM
But if she is imprisoned, rather than committed to a mental institution, she is less likely to receive the necessary psychiatric treatment and medication for her illness.
See I don't understand this. It's quite possibly because I'm a cold-hearted bastard but I don't understand why it is our responsibility to deal with her "illness". She broke down, she cracked, she killed. People like her don't walk out of mental hospitals and have a new normal life. I could just as easily say everyone who has murdered has a mental illness for doing what they did. Why cure them? What are we trying achieve? Is anyone comfortable letting people like that out just because some shrinks thing they appear to be better now? Do I dare ask - why risk it?

Joel Goodsen
05-29-07, 06:13 PM
See I don't understand this. It's quite possibly because I'm a cold-hearted bastard but I don't understand why it is our responsibility to deal with her "illness". She broke down, she cracked, she killed. People like her don't walk out of mental hospitals and have a new normal life. I could just as easily say everyone who has murdered has a mental illness for doing what they did. Why cure them? What are we trying achieve? Is anyone comfortable letting people like that out just because some shrinks thing they appear to be better now? Do I dare ask - why risk it?

Exactly. It is through people being WARM hearted bastards and light on criminals that we have so many walking around today. Life for a life I say. Never mind working out and playing pool in jail.

RunBandoRun
05-29-07, 06:14 PM
See I don't understand this. It's quite possibly because I'm a cold-hearted bastard but I don't understand why it is our responsibility to deal with her "illness". She broke down, she cracked, she killed. People like her don't walk out of mental hospitals and have a new normal life. I could just as easily say everyone who has murdered has a mental illness for doing what they did. Why cure them? What are we trying achieve? Is anyone comfortable letting people like that out just because some shrinks thing they appear to be better now? Do I dare ask - why risk it?

WHERE DID I SAY TO LET HER OUT??????

Please reread my post. I am NOT saying she should be released. I am saying she belongs in a mental institution, not prison. It is inhumane to confine a mentally ill person in a prison where they will not receive the treatment they need to control their illness.

General Zod
05-29-07, 06:16 PM
WHERE DID I SAY TO LET HER OUT??????

Please reread my post. I am NOT saying she should be released. I am saying she belongs in a mental institution, not prison. It is inhumane to confine a mentally ill person in a prison where they will not receive the treatment they need to control their illness.
I'm not saying you did say to let her out. I'm asking why she should receive treatment? What's the goal? If she is cured then put her in prison for the rest of her life? What's the point of that? If your never going to let her out why cure her? I'm mystified.

My only assumption is that you think we should cure her so eventually she should be let out. If that's not the goal then what is the goal? To let her rot cured?

Brent L
05-29-07, 06:16 PM
Exactly. It is through people being WARM hearted bastards and light on criminals that we have so many walking around today. Life for a life I say. Never mind working out and playing pool in jail.

It once again comes down to the PC police...

Bullshit.

She hung her children. That's plenty for me.

:lol: :thumbsup:

RunBandoRun
05-29-07, 06:17 PM
I'm not saying you did say to let her out. I'm asking why she should receive treatment? What's the goal? If she is cured then put her in prison for the rest of her life? What's the point of that? If your never going to let her out why cure her? I'm mystified.

They're not trying to cure her. They are trying to maintain her. Going by your logic, why treat someone with chemotherapy when they have cancer. They're going to die anyway, right?

General Zod
05-29-07, 06:23 PM
They're not trying to cure her. They are trying to maintain her. Going by your logic, why treat someone with chemotherapy when they have cancer. They're going to die anyway, right?
Not neccessarily. Cancer has different levels and chemo does work for some people to get rid of it. Murder has one level.. Murder. I don't want murderers "cured" I want them locked away or executed so they don't do it again. I don't want them having an opportunity to do it again. It's bad enough tax payer dollars are pissed away keeping them alive as it is - but to attempt to cure them so they can rot away in better mental health makes no sence to me at all. Mental hospitals should be for people who haven't murdered. For people who have depression or even that have tried to kill themselves. Not for people that will and should stay locked up forever even if they improve. What a complete waste of time and money.

shoppingbear
05-29-07, 06:25 PM
I'm not saying you did say to let her out. I'm asking why she should receive treatment? What's the goal? If she is cured then put her in prison for the rest of her life? What's the point of that? If your never going to let her out why cure her? I'm mystified.

My only assumption is that you think we should cure her so eventually she should be let out. If that's not the goal then what is the goal? To let her rot cured? They're not trying to cure her. They are trying to maintain her. Going by your logic, why treat someone with chemotherapy when they have cancer. They're going to die anyway, right?
Meh, perhaps not the best analogy, Vibiana, but I get what I think you're saying, and I agree with it: the argument is that it's cruel to not treat the mental illness, like it would be cruel to let someone suffer from any other disease. She should receive treatment for the same reason we treat diabetics or anyone else suffering a medical illness in prison. You may or may not "cure" her, but it's about treating the illness, not "curing" it, so that the patient doesn't suffer (or even continue to be a danger to themselves in prison).

I'm sure someone's going to reply that "why should we care that someone like this suffers or not?", but the point is, we provide medical treatment for most illnesses, including serious illnesses, while someone is incarcerated. From what I've been told, I guess our courts have decided that not doing so is "cruel and unusual punishment"? If that's the case, mental illness should be treated medically also, and that requires a mental institution, not a prison.


.

Brent L
05-29-07, 06:31 PM
I don't think cancer kills anyone other than the single person with the disease, but I might need to check on that to make sure. With someone with cancer, the only risk is to the person with it, not to others. For sick, mental murderers, there is a risk to everyone else. That's why I don't think that analogy works at all.

RunBandoRun
05-29-07, 06:33 PM
Not neccessarily. Cancer has different levels and chemo does work for some people to get rid of it. Murder has one level.. Murder. I don't want murderers "cured" I want them locked away or executed so they don't do it again. I don't want them having an opportunity to do it again. It's bad enough tax payer dollars are pissed away keeping them alive as it is - but to attempt to cure them so they can rot away in better mental health makes no sence to me at all. Mental hospitals should be for people who haven't murdered. For people who have depression or even that have tried to kill themselves. Not for people that will and should stay locked up forever even if they improve. What a complete waste of time and money.

So you're saying that you believe in executing the mentally ill?

Chrisedge
05-29-07, 06:36 PM
Anyone that kills = mentally ill = murderer = lock them up forever

(I'm against the D.P.)

shoppingbear
05-29-07, 06:43 PM
So you're saying that you believe in executing the mentally ill? Vibiana, this is where we get to hear about the Otters who think mental illness is not a "real illness", not a "medical illness". Makes me sad, but it's a prevalent societal idea. -ohbfrank-

Brent, just to play devil's advocate, if someone has a serious mental illness (schizophrenia, etc) that is the sole reason they killed someone, well then you could argue that the schizophrenia killed that victim, the same way cancer kills a patient. Both times, the medical disease was, in a way, the cause of death, right?

Just a different way to think about it...


.

General Zod
05-29-07, 06:46 PM
So you're saying that you believe in executing the mentally ill?
Since I'm strongly against wasting taxpayer dollars keeping people in jail forever to rot away (or escape.. or kill someone else in prison.. ) then yes - I would say execute all mentally ill murderers just like they should non mentally ill murderers.

Once you have murdered I believe you forfeit the responsibility of society to "fix" your problem.

Joel Goodsen
05-29-07, 06:49 PM
Vibiana, this is where we get to hear about the Otters who think mental illness is not a "real illness", not a "medical illness". Makes me sad, but it's a prevalent societal idea. -ohbfrank-

Brent, just to play devil's advocate, if someone has a serious mental illness (schizophrenia, etc) that is the sole reason they killed someone, well then you could argue that the schizophrenia killed that victim, the same way cancer kills a patient. Both times, the medical disease was, in a way, the cause of death, right?

Just a different way to think about it...
.

I still think Life for a Life. When people are considered mentally ill and have not murdered anyone, I wouldnt mind as much about treatment etc but when murders are involved, I say Life for a Life.

If not what happens? They are kept in an institute doing nothing all day and we pay to try and treat them, they get released, live on welfare with a possibility of a repeat chance of murder? No thanks.

RunBandoRun
05-29-07, 06:50 PM
Since I'm strongly against wasting taxpayer dollars keeping people in jail forever to rot away (or escape.. or kill someone else in prison.. ) then yes - I would say execute all mentally ill murderers just like they should non mentally ill murderers.

Once you have murdered I believe you forfeit the responsibility of society to "fix" your problem.

You do realize that with the current system of automatic appeals, it actually costs more to execute a person than to keep them in prison for life without parole, right?

By the way, I am not anti-DP. I believe that there are evil people in this world who do terrible things -- on purpose. But to execute a mentally ill person goes against everything humane that ever was.

tasha99
05-29-07, 06:50 PM
Sigh. I think it's sad that things like this happen, and it's also sad that people don't recognize mental illness. :(

mrhan
05-29-07, 06:52 PM
Once you have murdered I believe you forfeit the responsibility of society to "fix" your problem.


Strongly agree. If you commit 1st degree murder there should be only one route. Execution. It's those bleeding hearts that don't know how it's like to have somebody they know murdered that's always talking out of their ass.

Why should we pay for this asshole murderer to stay alive in prison? Fuck 'em.

Joel Goodsen
05-29-07, 06:56 PM
The stupid wanker running our country, Tony Blair, I believe was a firm front for the human rights act or stopping executions...He might aswell of said " Now my country, go forth and commit all the crimes you want. Don't worry, you wont get killed for it "

This is coming from a party that says " supporting the working man " yet pays thousands of lay abouts my tax money to do nothing all day.

God, how the world is going to pot. Life for a Life, dont work, dont eat. Thats my philosophy.

RunBandoRun
05-29-07, 06:57 PM
God, how the world is going to pot. Life for a Life, dont work, dont eat. Thats my philosophy.

Then what the hell are you doing in England? :lol: The NHS will be the death of you all.

Joel Goodsen
05-29-07, 06:59 PM
Then what the hell are you doing in England? :lol: The NHS will be the death of you all.

I am just using my country as an example, It is similar in USA. I even read about one person saying it was wrong to kill saddam. If someone could explain that way of thinking, then fuck me gently with a chainsaw. Its along that line of thinking, that the world is going to pot. I dont want to think back to the World Wars, where hard working people got killed for the idle, murdering bastards that are walking around today. I dont want to turn this into a country thing, because it is not.

DVD Polizei
05-29-07, 07:16 PM
Anyone that kills = mentally ill = murderer = lock them up forever

(I'm against the D.P.)

Obviously, the mother didn't agree with you. :)

mrpayroll
05-30-07, 11:14 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-05-29-children-killed_N.htm?csp=34

Mom, 4 daughters found hanging in Texas home

http://i.usatoday.net/news/_photos/2007/05/29/kids1x.jpg
By Tony Gutierrez, AP

Filly Echeverria holds an undated family photo showing Gilberta Estrada and two of her daughters Janet Frayre, left, and Magaly Frayre, in Hudson Oaks, Texas. Parker County Authorities say Estrada was found hanged with her four daughters at their mobile home, Tuesday. A relative rescued the 8-month-old.


http://images.usatoday.com/news/_photos/2007/05/29/kidsx.jpg
By Tony Gutierrez, AP

A view of the front door of the mobile home, left, where Parker County authorities say the 25-year-old hanged her four children, killing three, and herself.

By Emily Bazar, USA TODAY

Police in east Texas are working to explain the inexplicable: the hangings of a mother and her four children.

The mother, Gilberta Estrada Vega, 25, was found dead in a bedroom closet early Tuesday alongside three of her daughters, ages 5, 3 and 22 months, Parker County Sheriff Larry Fowler said. An 8-month-old baby girl also was hanged but survived.

"This is an absolutely horrendous situation," Fowler said.

"As far as the motive or what happened, we don't know yet."

The heart-breaking scene was in the Oak Hill mobile home park just outside Hudson Oaks, a city of about 2,000 people 20 miles west of Fort Worth.

Evidence pointed to a murder-suicide, but the investigation continues, Fowler said. The sheriff said the trailer's door had been tied shut from the inside with a piece of string, and he said the aunt told police Estrada had been depressed. He said the bodies were hanging by pieces of cloth from a rod in the closet.

The children's father, who did not live with them, was interviewed by police, but is not currently a suspect, Fowler said. Estrada had gotten a protective order against him in August, he said.

The children's aunt, whose name was not released by police, found the bodies about 6:30 a.m. after her sister did not appear at her restaurant job, he said.

She heard the 8-month-old making sounds, released her from her noose, ran from the house with her and called 911, Fowler said.

"It's an absolute miracle" the baby survived, he said.

"She is in very good condition," Winifred King, spokeswoman for Cook Children's Medical Center in Fort Worth, said.

A similar killing recently shook Montgomery County in Maryland. On April 3, Gerardo Roque killed his 2-year-old daughter and 1-year-old son by hanging them from tree limbs before committing suicide the same way, Montgomery County police said.

"This was certainly one of the most difficult cases to investigate," said Lucille Baur, spokeswoman for the Montgomery County police department.

"It's heart-wrenching."

Hudson Oaks city administrator Robert Hanna said the city has offered counseling to employees who responded to the crime scene.

In July 2002, another Hudson Oaks resident, Dee Perez shot and killed her 9- and 10-year-old sons and 4-year-old daughter before killing herself.

"We're not looking forward to reopening those wounds," Hanna said.

"Overall in the community, there's a feeling of tragic loss."

Posted 1d ago
Updated 4h 3m ago


Chris

Noonan
05-30-07, 11:50 AM
By the way, I am not anti-DP. I believe that there are evil people in this world who do terrible things -- on purpose. But to execute a mentally ill person goes against everything humane that ever was.

Who gets to decide the line where evil ends and mentally ill begins? What's to stop someone from saying that being "evil" is itself a mental illness?

wendersfan
05-30-07, 12:11 PM
Have these people ever heard of Birth Control?No. Abstinence only "education" is the preferred policy of the current administration.

atari2600
05-30-07, 12:14 PM
There's not enough information out about this case to make any judgments yet,

wtf are you talking about?

go ahead and present the information needed to make us all go "oooooh, now i see...i shouldnt have judged before i read this"

and you can make up whatever you want. what possible missing information could there be to justify this?

Joel Goodsen
05-30-07, 12:15 PM
Why pay for any birth control, when you can make not using birth control pay?

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 12:15 PM
As long as they rot forever behind bars/or in a "hospital", I don't care what you call it. "reason of insanity" lol...isn't everyone that commits murder insane?

Uh, no.

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 12:19 PM
Not neccessarily. Cancer has different levels and chemo does work for some people to get rid of it. Murder has one level.. Murder. I don't want murderers "cured" I want them locked away or executed so they don't do it again. I don't want them having an opportunity to do it again. It's bad enough tax payer dollars are pissed away keeping them alive as it is - but to attempt to cure them so they can rot away in better mental health makes no sence to me at all. Mental hospitals should be for people who haven't murdered. For people who have depression or even that have tried to kill themselves. Not for people that will and should stay locked up forever even if they improve. What a complete waste of time and money.

Murder does not have just one level. Would you put a 15-year-old who was sexually and emotionally abused by his mother for years and then murdered her in the same category as Ted Bundy?

This is just a different spin on the attitude that mental illness isn't a "real" condition. It's deplorable and sickens me.

wendersfan
05-30-07, 12:35 PM
Why pay for any birth control, when you can make not using birth control pay?
Yes, it certainly paid off well for the woman in this story. :rolleyes:

Joel Goodsen
05-30-07, 12:38 PM
Yes, it certainly paid off well for the woman in this story. :rolleyes:

Exactly. It pays off for all of them because they love putting on the "anti work, pro welfare" condom and fucking the law system.

PixyJunket
05-30-07, 12:39 PM
Damn Texans. Oh, but I'm sure it's post-partum depression. Hence, not her fault. She just needed treatment, donchaknow.Beat me to it.

RunBandoRun
05-30-07, 12:41 PM
wtf are you talking about?

go ahead and present the information needed to make us all go "oooooh, now i see...i shouldnt have judged before i read this"

and you can make up whatever you want. what possible missing information could there be to justify this?

There is nothing to justify it. I have not said that my heart doesn't ache for those poor children and everyone who loved them, let alone the baby who is now without a mother and siblings.

Nor have I said that the woman is someone I would pat on the hand and go, "Aw, poor baby." She did a terrible thing.

But nothing has been said about what might have driven her to do such an awful thing. The story is too new. The early reports about Andrea Yates didn't refer to her mental health history, either.

Goldblum
05-30-07, 12:44 PM
If you can't execute them, this IS the next worst punishment. Mental hospitals are not as nice a prisons. There is no getting out on parole. You don't get out until you can convince the shrinks you are not a danger to anyone.

I don't think Andrea is going to be doing that any time soon.
Serious question, then:

Why have the trial? Why not take a plea deal for LWOP in prison instead of fighting tooth and nail to be committed to a mental hospital?

Goldblum
05-30-07, 12:51 PM
No. Abstinence only "education" is the preferred policy of the current administration.
You're saying they never heard of birth control? :eek:

Goldblum
05-30-07, 12:52 PM
Uh, no.
Uh, yes. But legally insane? Uh, no.

wendersfan
05-30-07, 12:59 PM
Exactly. It pays off for all of them because they love putting on the "anti work, pro welfare" condom and fucking the law system.
Of all the nonsensical statements I've read here this one makes the least sense. :lol:

DealMan
05-30-07, 01:04 PM
I think it's silly that everyone seems to laugh when a parent jokingly says something along the lines of "I brought you into this world, I can take you out!". Then the same people get reallly upset when someone actually does it.

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 01:07 PM
Uh, yes. But legally insane? Uh, no.

Everyone that commits murder is insane? The answer to that question is so clearly no I can't even believe you disagree with it. I mean, what about hitmen? What about soldiers? Are they insane? I mean, insanity isn't even a psychiatric diagnosis anymore.

Joel Goodsen
05-30-07, 01:08 PM
Of all the nonsensical statements I've read here this one makes the least sense. :lol:

ahaha I suppose so

" Who knows where thoughts come from? They just appear " - Lucas, Empire Records

General Zod
05-30-07, 01:10 PM
Murder does not have just one level. Would you put a 15-year-old who was sexually and emotionally abused by his mother for years and then murdered her in the same category as Ted Bundy?

I don't lump murderers into neat categories. One could argue in court in the case above that it was not murder but rather self-defense. What I'm saying is once someone is found guilty of Murder - a murderer is what they are and I don't want to see them back on the street nor do I feel like society has the responsibility to treat their illness.

This is just a different spin on the attitude that mental illness isn't a "real" condition. It's deplorable and sickens me.

:lol: Nobody in this thread has said that. You can feel less deplorable and sickened by recognizing that. I simply said I don't think society has the responsibility to treat the illness once someone has crossed the line into murder. Obviously the courts disagree with me but it doesn't stop me from voicing my opinion.

wendersfan
05-30-07, 01:10 PM
You're saying they never heard of birth control? :eek:
I'm saying it's quite likely that what they had heard was factually inaccurate and deliberately distorted to exaggerate the ineffectiveness of birth control.

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 01:13 PM
I don't lump murderers into neat categories. One could argue in court in the case above that it was not murder but rather self-defense. What I'm saying is once someone is found guilty of Murder - a murderer is what they are and I don't want to see them back on the street nor do I feel like society has the responsibility to treat their illness.

Do you not allow for mistrials, unintroduced evidence, prosecutorial misconduct, etc.? Once that verdict comes down, that's it?

:lol: Nobody in this thread has said that. You can feel less deplorable and sickened by recognizing that. I simply said I don't think society has the responsibility to treat the illness once someone has crossed the line into murder. Obviously the courts disagree with me but it doesn't stop me from voicing my opinion.

Then I misunderstood you. This is a sensitive area for me; my apologies.

I would submit that not treating a prisoner's illness could be construed as cruel and unusual punishment.

Giles
05-30-07, 01:15 PM
The stupid wanker running our country, Tony Blair, I believe was a firm front for the human rights act or stopping executions...He might aswell of said " Now my country, go forth and commit all the crimes you want. Don't worry, you wont get killed for it "

This is coming from a party that says " supporting the working man " yet pays thousands of lay abouts my tax money to do nothing all day.

God, how the world is going to pot. Life for a Life, dont work, dont eat. Thats my philosophy.

maybe I should move to the UK ... ;)

General Zod
05-30-07, 01:16 PM
Do you not allow for mistrials, unintroduced evidence, prosecutorial misconduct, etc.? Once that verdict comes down, that's it?
I firmly believe in an appeals process - but not a lengthy one.

I would submit that not treating a prisoner's illness could be construed as cruel and unusual punishment.

No big deal. The court agrees with your assessment, and I disagree with it. Just like I think making someone rot away in jail for the rest of their life could be construed as cruel and unusual punishment instead of just shooting them in the head and getting it over with.

mrpayroll
05-30-07, 01:18 PM
I think it's silly that everyone seems to laugh when a parent jokingly says something along the lines of "I brought you into this world, I can take you out!". Then the same people get reallly upset when someone actually does it.

They don't have the right, just like I don't have the right to go into her family and kill her 4 kids.

Chris

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 01:19 PM
No big deal. The court agrees with your assessment, and I disagree with it. Just like I think making someone rot away in jail for the rest of their life could be construed as cruel and unusual punishment instead of just shooting them in the head and getting it over with.

This seems like a curious position to me. If a prisoner breaks their leg, do you think it should be treated?

Joel Goodsen
05-30-07, 01:26 PM
This seems like a curious position to me. If a prisoner breaks their leg, do you think it should be treated?

No because not even a broken leg would probably equal the amount of pain they have caused to someone and their family.

CRM114
05-30-07, 01:29 PM
I believe that there are evil people in this world who do terrible things -- on purpose. But to execute a mentally ill person goes against everything humane that ever was.

I sort of agree with you but not totally.

For instance, Jeffrey Dahmer. He murdered 17 people. He cut them up and ate them. Some of them he had sex with after they were dead. Is his insanity enough to spare HIS life? I say NO.

Sure, if someone is nuts and freaks out and kills someone in a crime of passion, I can understand. But this dude did it for a decade.

I put Andrea Yates right up there. Her insane devotion to mythology and the supernatural didn't help matters.

CRM114
05-30-07, 01:32 PM
But nothing has been said about what might have driven her to do such an awful thing. The story is too new. The early reports about Andrea Yates didn't refer to her mental health history, either.

I bet you wouldn't be waiting to hear the motive if a man killed his 4 children.

I can't believe the sympathy Yates and the other woman who drowned her kids in the car receive.

mrpayroll
05-30-07, 01:34 PM
maybe I should move to the UK ... ;)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/Benedict_arnold_illustration.jpg/180px-Benedict_arnold_illustration.jpg
Benedict Arnold

Chris

RunBandoRun
05-30-07, 01:37 PM
I bet you wouldn't be waiting to hear the motive if a man killed his 4 children.

I can't believe the sympathy Yates and the other woman who drowned her kids in the car receive.

You're right, I probably wouldn't. I've never heard of a man diagnosed with postpartum psychosis.

Giles
05-30-07, 01:37 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/Benedict_arnold_illustration.jpg/180px-Benedict_arnold_illustration.jpg
Benedict Arnold

Chris

http://www.seriouseats.com/images/20070109eggsbenbeauty.jpg



:D

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 01:39 PM
I sort of agree with you but not totally.

For instance, Jeffrey Dahmer. He murdered 17 people. He cut them up and ate them. Some of them he had sex with after they were dead. Is his insanity enough to spare HIS life? I say NO.

Sure, if someone is nuts and freaks out and kills someone in a crime of passion, I can understand. But this dude did it for a decade.

I put Andrea Yates right up there. Her insane devotion to mythology and the supernatural didn't help matters.

This is the problem with throwing the word "insane" around. Insanity is about as useful in describing mental illness as saying that someone is sick. Someone with terminal cancer and someone with a cold are both "sick".

Could Andrea Yates control her actions? Did she understand that what she was doing was wrong? Did she even have a sense of right and wrong? How about Dahmer?

NotThatGuy
05-30-07, 01:40 PM
Who gets to decide the line where evil ends and mentally ill begins?

*raises hand*

-p

CRM114
05-30-07, 01:42 PM
You're right, I probably wouldn't. I've never heard of a man diagnosed with postpartum psychosis.

How about schizophrenia?

CRM114
05-30-07, 01:46 PM
Could Andrea Yates control her actions? Did she understand that what she was doing was wrong? Did she even have a sense of right and wrong? How about Dahmer?

Good question.

It really doesn't matter much to me. Their end result was heinous enough that the "whys" are meaningless. This is just my personal opinion. (I don't think many were too concerned when Dahmer met his end.)

RunBandoRun
05-30-07, 01:47 PM
How about schizophrenia?

Most schizophrenics are not violent. Also, most persons who kill their own children are mothers. That's because most WOMEN who kill, kill family members or people close to them rather than strangers.

I'm not saying what this woman did wasn't wrong. Nor am I saying that she shouldn't be confined for life. All I am saying is that if she is mentally ill -- like Andrea Yates -- she belongs in a mental institution, not a prison. I don't understand why that is so hard for you to grasp. I'm not saying she should walk.

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 01:51 PM
Good question.

It really doesn't matter much to me. Their end result was heinous enough that the "whys" are meaningless. This is just my personal opinion.

Those questions may not matter to you, but they sure as hell matter to the justice system.

(I don't think many were too concerned when Dahmer met his end.)

I certainly wasn't. However, serial killing is very unlike any other type of murder, and comparing a serial killer to someone like Andrea Yates isn't very productive.

I also think a lot of people in this thread (not you) need to understand that just because some people want to understand why someone murders, it doesn't mean they think the murderer should walk. If we are going to catch disparate murderers like Dahmer and Yates, we need to understand them.

CRM114
05-30-07, 02:18 PM
Those questions may not matter to you, but they sure as hell matter to the justice system.



I certainly wasn't. However, serial killing is very unlike any other type of murder, and comparing a serial killer to someone like Andrea Yates isn't very productive.

I also think a lot of people in this thread (not you) need to understand that just because some people want to understand why someone murders, it doesn't mean they think the murderer should walk. If we are going to catch disparate murderers like Dahmer and Yates, we need to understand them.

To your first point, thats why I added that it was my opinion.

Second point. Why is Andrea Yates mental illness different from Jeff Dahmer's? Or Charles Manson? Or Susan Smith? Or David Berkowitz?

Its not as if Yates murdered one kid. She murdered all of them. She was a mass murderer blinded by religion I might add. I don't deny all of these people deserve meds while incarcerated but I don't like that people stratify the mentally ill murderers.

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 02:47 PM
To your first point, thats why I added that it was my opinion.

Second point. Why is Andrea Yates mental illness different from Jeff Dahmer's? Or Charles Manson? Or Susan Smith? Or David Berkowitz?

Its not as if Yates murdered one kid. She murdered all of them. She was a mass murderer blinded by religion I might add. I don't deny all of these people deserve meds while incarcerated but I don't like that people stratify the mentally ill murderers.

Yates was not a mass murderer. If she hadn't been caught, it would have been been extremely unlikely for her to murder anyone else. She certainly would not have murdered complete strangers.

Dahmer was a classic predatory serial killer whose compulsion stemmed from social maladjustment, hatred, and feelings of inadequacy.

wendersfan
05-30-07, 02:50 PM
You need to differentiate between the terms "mass" murderer and "serial" murderer.

CRM114
05-30-07, 02:52 PM
Yates was not a mass murderer. If she hadn't been caught, it would have been been extremely unlikely for her to murder anyone else. She certainly would not have murdered complete strangers.


Yates killed FIVE people. I'd say that qualifies as "mass."

And how do you know who she would have killed? She used Christian delusions as a rationale.

Goldblum
05-30-07, 02:55 PM
Everyone that commits murder is insane? The answer to that question is so clearly no I can't even believe you disagree with it. I mean, what about hitmen? What about soldiers? Are they insane? I mean, insanity isn't even a psychiatric diagnosis anymore.
Yes, I think anyone who murders someone (self defense is not murder) is insane. I made the distinction in my post that not all murderers are legally insane. Insane and legally insane are very different, as we all should know.

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 02:56 PM
You need to differentiate between the terms "mass" murderer and "serial" murderer.

True. A mass murderer is someone that commits a certain number of murders (I believe the threshold is five) at the same time. However, this is really only used to describe the typical "lone gunman" shooting up a grocery store, etc.

A serial killer kills with a "cooling-off" period between murders. This can be days, months, years.

Goldblum
05-30-07, 02:58 PM
You're right, I probably wouldn't. I've never heard of a man diagnosed with postpartum psychosis.
I don't remember hearing this woman was either.

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 02:59 PM
Yates killed FIVE people. I'd say that qualifies as "mass."

And how do you know who she would have killed? She used Christian delusions as a rationale.

Andrea Yates killed her children at the same time. This is typical of women killers in general, who murder only family members, and of the type of psychosis she has/had in general, which manifests itself as a killing, usually of children, in one episode. These killers very rarely ever kill again.

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 03:01 PM
Yes, I think anyone who murders someone (self defense is not murder) is insane. I made the distinction in my post that not all murderers are legally insane. Insane and legally insane are very different, as we all should know.

But again, "insane" is not a clinical definition. It's about as useful as describing someone as "sick".

Goldblum
05-30-07, 03:01 PM
Yates was not a mass murderer. If she hadn't been caught, it would have been been extremely unlikely for her to murder anyone else. She certainly would not have murdered complete strangers.
Thank you for your expert opinion, Dr. Bullet. But I don't think I'll be taking your word for it. ;)

Dr. Henry Jones, Jr.
05-30-07, 03:04 PM
True. A mass murderer is someone that commits a certain number of murders (I believe the threshold is five) at the same time. However, this is really only used to describe the typical "lone gunman" shooting up a grocery store, etc.


Four or more at one location in a single event.

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 03:05 PM
Thank you for your expert opinion, Dr. Bullet. But I don't think I'll be taking your word for it. ;)

Can you point me to any information on Yates that refutes this, or are you just going to be snide?

CRM114
05-30-07, 03:07 PM
Andrea Yates killed her children at the same time. This is typical of women killers in general, who murder only family members, and of the type of psychosis she has/had in general, which manifests itself as a killing, usually of children, in one episode. These killers very rarely ever kill again.

But she was a mass-murderer, right? I'm uncomfortable with you and others qualifying these murders.

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 03:11 PM
But she was a mass-murderer, right?

Honestly, I'm not sure. I can't find a definitive definition of a mass murderer. I seem to recall that part of the definition includes an impersonal relationship between the killer and his or her victims, but I may be wrong.

I'm uncomfortable with you and others qualifying these murders.

Why are you uncomfortable with this? Like it or not, murderers are not created equal, and there are many different types. In trying to understand them, we can perhaps one day identify warning signs and get a potential murderer psychiatric help before they kill.

Ranger
05-30-07, 03:13 PM
Just posting this to show that this is not just a Texas thing.

Mother Accused of Strangling Twin Sons

Twin six-year-old boys are dead, reportedly strangled by their own mother inside their Baton Rouge home. Police were called to 3146 Wyandotte, which is just east of Plank Road, just before 9:00 Friday morning. What police say happened in the downstairs apartment just boggles the mind. The two adorable little boys were identical twins with biblical names, Samuel and Solomon. The two six-year-olds were full of life.

Aaron Boone, Jr., a neighbor, says, "I mean, yesterday, when I came home, I saw them pushing each other on the dolly, playing like normal kids. Today, saw the crime scene, the yellow tape. It's unbelievable. I can't believe it." What's even harder to believe is who's accused of strangling the boys; their own mother, 30-year-old Sherie Simms.

Kenyetta Maiden says, "They tell her every day that they love her and I figured that she loved her kids, too. She didn't have no right to take her kids' life." Kenyetta Maiden lives in the apartment right above Simms and her sons. Maiden says in the early morning hours before police came here, the boys' mother, her best friend, called her. Maiden says Sherie seemed to be high on cocaine.

Maiden says, "She was really depressed. She wanted me to talk to her, which I never thought to go and check on her kids. I figured they were going to be asleep." At that point, Samuel and Solomon may have just been asleep in that bed, but now, they'll never wake up, and this friend feels betrayed. Maiden says, "I don't hate her. It's just, I'll never respect her again, ever."

Neighbors say when paramedics rushed the children to the hospital, one of the boys still had an extension cord wrapped around his neck. Deputy coroners pronounced both of the boys dead when they arrived at the hospital. As for Sherie Simms, she is fighting for her life. Baton Rouge police say she took a bunch of pills and is currently in intensive care. If she gets out of the hospital, police will book her with two counts of first-degree murder, which upon conviction, could carry the death penalty.
http://wafb.com/Global/story.asp?s=6536464

As for the whole debate, I think that while the issue is complicated, the main thing is that dangerous people like murderers should be kept separate from society whether or not they are cured.

For example, John Hinckley, Jr. stalked a woman and attempted to murder the President. Now he's on some conditional release - I don't agree with that. It's fine to keep him on needed meds and counseling but considering his history, he shouldn't be out in society, period.

CRM114
05-30-07, 03:16 PM
Why are you uncomfortable with this? Like it or not, murderers are not created equal, and there are many different types. In trying to understand them, we can perhaps one day identify warning signs and get a potential murderer psychiatric help before they kill.

Because Yates' deed (and this latest woman) is even more egregious (to me) than Manson or Berkowitz yet people try to find a reason why they are different. No one seems very concerned with finding out why Manson killed.

MoviePage
05-30-07, 03:16 PM
Once again I am very thankful that our criminal justice system wasn't set up and isn't run by DVDTalk forum members. It would be on about the same level as that of the Middle Ages.

I think we should throw anyone who has any sign of mental illness into an institution for the rest of their lives with no treatment or possibility of eventual freedom. They are all clearly possessed by evil spirits.

CRM114
05-30-07, 03:17 PM
Just posting this to show that this is not just a Texas thing.


http://wafb.com/Global/story.asp?s=6536464

As for the whole debate, I think that while the issue is complicated, the main thing is that dangerous people like murderers should be kept separate from society whether or not they are cured.

For example, John Hinckley, Jr. stalked a woman and attempted to murder the President. Now he's on some conditional release - I don't agree with that. It's fine to keep him on needed meds and counseling but considering his history, he shouldn't be out in society, period.

Hinckley never killed anyone.

wendersfan
05-30-07, 03:18 PM
Because Yates' deed (and this latest woman) is even more egregious (to me) than Manson or Berkowitz yet people try to find a reason why they are different.This statement contradicts itself.

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 03:18 PM
Because Yates' deed (and this latest woman) is even more egregious (to me) than Manson or Berkowitz yet people try to find a reason why they are different. No one seems very concerned with finding out why Manson killed.

Actually, many people have been interested in finding out why Manson killed. That's a real :hscratch: comment. Have you really never heard of criminal psychology?

Ranger
05-30-07, 03:23 PM
Hinckley never killed anyone.
Despite firing a gun six times.

Edit: he did paralyze one guy.

mrpayroll
05-30-07, 03:41 PM
Once again I am very thankful that our criminal justice system wasn't set up and isn't run by DVDTalk forum members. It would be on about the same level as that of the Middle Ages.

I think we should throw anyone who has any sign of mental illness into an institution for the rest of their lives with no treatment or possibility of eventual freedom. They are all clearly possessed by evil spirits.

Well, if they are clearly possessed by evil spirits, don't you think that someone should be there to pray for them, because that's the only way that they will be freed of the evil spirits.

Chris

RunBandoRun
05-30-07, 03:43 PM
I don't remember hearing this woman was either.

Andrea Yates was, and that's who I am referring to.

antennaball
05-30-07, 03:43 PM
You're right, I probably wouldn't. I've never heard of a man diagnosed with postpartum psychosis.

:lol:

So, of all the mental illnesses out there, postpartum is the ONLY one that you'll recognize as being a legitimate cause for cold-blooded murder?

As I've said before, it's sickening that when 3 innocent children are killed, the outpouring of sympathy around here is GREATER for the monster that killed them. Mental illness, psychosis, whatthehell ever. I'll still reserve my sympathies for the truly innocent.

Jadzia
05-30-07, 03:56 PM
While I could never imagine or condone killing ones children, as someone who suffered from post-partum depression I can certainly attest to how scary it is. I fortunately did not have a severe case and I never entertained the idea of harming my son or myself, but I was really scared by how not "myself" I felt. I am normally a very strong, together person but for several weeks I couldn't even talk about my birth experience or new mom situation without being reduced to a puddle of tears. I think I was so overcome with the huge responsibility of being a new mother and I was so afraid of anything bad happening to my son, I would have these horrible images of him being hurt that just scared the crap out of me. Maybe these psychotic mothers feel the same way and in essense they are driven so insane by it they are compelled to somehow make it happen? I heard Brooke Shields talking about PPD and it sounds like she had a similar experience: traumatic birth and then visions of her baby being hurt (but never an urge to hurt her baby.) For me the only urge I really had was to just run away, but when I rationalized it and thought about it I knew my son needed me and that kept me near him and made me better. I had to heal myself for his sake, as well as mine.

I was lucky I had a very supportive husband and family so I was able to get myself together and come out of it after about 6 weeks, but I can only imagine how difficult it would be for a young mother who has several other children and no outside help to help shoulder the burden.

I think a better solution to treat someone like an Andrea Yates would be sterilization. I don't think someone who has post-partum psychosis is a threat to general public like a regular murderer is, but I do think they should be kept from having more children.

RunBandoRun
05-30-07, 04:03 PM
:lol:

So, of all the mental illnesses out there, postpartum is the ONLY one that you'll recognize as being a legitimate cause for cold-blooded murder?

As I've said before, it's sickening that when 3 innocent children are killed, the outpouring of sympathy around here is GREATER for the monster that killed them. Mental illness, psychosis, whatthehell ever. I'll still reserve my sympathies for the truly innocent.

Where did you get that? Not from my posts. I never said I didn't feel extremely sorry for the children, the entire family in fact. I am simply disagreeing that the correct thing to do now is stigmatize people with mental illness as killers, and to treat mentally ill people as if we were still living in twelfth-century Europe.

CRM114
05-30-07, 04:12 PM
This statement contradicts itself.

In the opposite way I suppose. People do not feel the Yates murders were more egregious and they work toward explaining her murders away.

CRM114
05-30-07, 04:13 PM
Despite firing a gun six times.

Edit: he did paralyze one guy.

my point is that we don't treat attempted murders and murderers in the same way.

CRM114
05-30-07, 04:17 PM
Where did you get that? Not from my posts. I never said I didn't feel extremely sorry for the children, the entire family in fact. I am simply disagreeing that the correct thing to do now is stigmatize people with mental illness as killers, and to treat mentally ill people as if we were still living in twelfth-century Europe.

wait, if someone with a mental illness kills another human they aren't killers?

RunBandoRun
05-30-07, 04:18 PM
wait, if someone with a mental illness kills another human they aren't killers?

A person with mental illness who kills belongs in a mental institution, not prison. That is all I am trying to say.

jeffkjoe
05-30-07, 04:30 PM
To the original poster:

When you bring up topics like this, how would you like us to react?

Do you want us to feel depressed? Angry?

To be honest, I really hate seeing these topics.

Ranger
05-30-07, 04:44 PM
my point is that we don't treat attempted murders and murderers in the same way.
Although in the first post, I used the phrase: dangerous people like murderers...

I think Hinckley obviously is/was a dangerous person and that such people don't belong in society. But I guess I do prefer not to make much of a distinction between attempted murder and a successful murder.

Joel Goodsen
05-30-07, 04:51 PM
Once again I am very thankful that our criminal justice system wasn't set up and isn't run by DVDTalk forum members. It would be on about the same level as that of the Middle Ages.

I think we should throw anyone who has any sign of mental illness into an institution for the rest of their lives with no treatment or possibility of eventual freedom. They are all clearly possessed by evil spirits.

I can see where you are coming from with your opinion but with all the crime around today, we need a middle age way of thinking back. Let me give you some insight on why I think a stricter justice system is needed.

Imagine you are a criminal and about to commit a pretty serious crime. Yes, it is a silly scenario but I am just making an example. So lets say the crime is murder for example. Now before you go out to commit murder, with todays criminal system, you think "well if i get caught, few years in jail, shoot some pool, bit of light work. I suppose jail wont be that bad "

Now lets imaging there were laws such as hanging/execution in place and you are about to go and commit a crime. "well if I get caught, I could be killed aswell. Is it worth it?"

I would guarantee that a potential murderer or whatever would think twice about commiting a serious crime. I really do believe it should be life for a life. None of this bullshit excuses. But that is my opinion and I am sure that many wont agree with it.

mrpayroll
05-30-07, 05:01 PM
To the original poster:

When you bring up topics like this, how would you like us to react?

Do you want us to feel depressed? Angry?

To be honest, I really hate seeing these topics.

As I stated previously, I post these kinds of stories, so that we will always be aware of how our friends are doing and making sure that they never get to the point of desperation that they would do something like this, especially when it involves children.

Chris

antennaball
05-30-07, 05:02 PM
Where did you get that? Not from my posts. I never said I didn't feel extremely sorry for the children, the entire family in fact. I am simply disagreeing that the correct thing to do now is stigmatize people with mental illness as killers, and to treat mentally ill people as if we were still living in twelfth-century Europe.

I'm sorry, I was quoting your post for the first part of mine but the second part of my post was to the thread in general. I know you guys are sympathetic to the children, but there's always a general tone that these threads take on quickly. Within 2 or 3 posts there's always the first stirrings of "well, what about the killer's side?". Then, when you staunchly defend your position that some illness made her do it, the whole damn thread becomes about the killer and why she just needed a hug. Lost in the shuffle are the poor little kids who lost their lives.

mrpayroll
05-30-07, 05:06 PM
I can see where you are coming from with your opinion but with all the crime around today, we need a middle age way of thinking back. Let me give you some insight on why I think a stricter justice system is needed.

Imagine you are a criminal and about to commit a pretty serious crime. Yes, it is a silly scenario but I am just making an example. So lets say the crime is murder for example. Now before you go out to commit murder, with todays criminal system, you think "well if i get caught, few years in jail, shoot some pool, bit of light work. I suppose jail wont be that bad "

Now lets imaging there were laws such as hanging/execution in place and you are about to go and commit a crime. "well if I get caught, I could be killed aswell. Is it worth it?"

I would guarantee that a potential murderer or whatever would think twice about commiting a serious crime. I really do believe it should be life for a life. None of this bullshit excuses. But that is my opinion and I am sure that many wont agree with it.

The only problem with this is most murders are committed as a 'crime of passion', meaning that a person usually isn't thinking properly when they kill someone. Whether that means that they are 'insane' or just plain pissed off at someone is up to a jury to decide. I think too many people get off easily by the 'temporary insanity' plea. But I'm no doctor, though I play one on this board! :D

Using your scenario, the only people that would actually be thinking about the ramifications would be 'contract' killers who have no emotional connection to the intended victim. There may be other types of 'murderers' out there, but none come to mind right now.

Chris

Joel Goodsen
05-30-07, 05:09 PM
Yeah true but there is people out there, that would rob someone, and hurt them in the process and if they killed them doing so, they wouldnt care. There are people who are just BAD people. Plain and simple. I am just sick to death of seeing all these crimes on the TV all the time and thinking to myself, well what will they do when they catch them? Not alot IMO.

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 05:16 PM
In the opposite way I suppose. People do not feel the Yates murders were more egregious and they work toward explaining her murders away.

:rolleyes:

So the entire disclipline of criminal psychology, in trying to understand the motivations of murderers, is trying to explain murders away?

I'd still like to see an answer to my question.

Birrman54
05-30-07, 05:17 PM
Yeah true but there is people out there, that would rob someone, and hurt them in the process and if they killed them doing so, they wouldnt care. There are people who are just BAD people. Plain and simple. I am just sick to death of seeing all these crimes on the TV all the time and thinking to myself, well what will they do when they catch them? Not alot IMO.

Are murder rates / violent crime rates lower in states (or nations) with death penalties? I'm pretty sure they're not.

And as for "with all the crime around today, we need a middle age way of thinking back. Let me give you some insight on why I think a stricter justice system is needed."

Crime is at historic lows, and I mean by easily a factor of ten when compared to rates in the middle ages. Despite whatever "good ol' days" assertions are made, people today are healthier, wealthier, and less violent.

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0192-3234(1981)3%3C295%3AHTIVCA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-D

Joel Goodsen
05-30-07, 05:24 PM
I respect the facts and figures there Birrman54, but those dont make me feel any safer today. The government uses figures like those to say what a great job they are doing, yet when you change the channel shortly after you see " A 96 year old woman is in hospital tonight after being robbed and beaten at her home "

As to the good ol days...I often speak to relatives about what it was like where we live etc back in the day and if you wasnt at work, people would be shouting at you down the street " you idle bugger, you wasnt at work today " where as today, people sit comfortably in there homes, nice big TVs (from our tax money) and dont do a thing and get paid more than the working man. I am going off track here, sorry, but as for crime, if anyone did something, everyone knew about it and the local policeman would be around that night to sort it out. Of course the towns and villages etc were smaller then, but I still like that method.

wendersfan
05-30-07, 05:29 PM
Translation: "I don't care what the facts are, revenge feels good!"

-ohbfrank-

Birrman54
05-30-07, 05:34 PM
I can't speak for the UK, but the myth of these super lucky poor on welfare is completely overblown. Although I don't have figures, in the US, working poor (single moms mostly) make up the vast majority. Have you ever seen East Baltimore? They're not living the high life.

As for the evening news, what else would you expect? Regardless, the plural of anecdote isn't data.

Joel Goodsen
05-30-07, 05:37 PM
I can't speak for the UK, but the myth of these super lucky poor on welfare is completely overblown. Although I don't have figures, in the US, working poor (single moms mostly) make up the vast majority. Have you ever seen East Baltimore? They're not living the high life.

As for the evening news, what else would you expect? Regardless, the plural of anecdote isn't data.

Thats fair enough, as I can't speak for the USA either, but over here, trust me on this one, they really are lucky. It was proven in the paper that people on welfare over here, earn more than a man who goes out and works 40 hours per week. I even hear people bragging about it aswell, which really makes me angry. But what gets me really angry is that there is nothing wrong with these people. They get away with it.

Numanoid
05-30-07, 06:37 PM
I'd just like to point out that Manson never killed anyone himself.


I now return you to the weekly Otter bloodlust thread.

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 07:52 PM
I'd just like to point out that Manson never killed anyone himself.

I knew that, but there are certain things worth arguing and certain things not worth arguing.

CRM114
05-30-07, 09:07 PM
:rolleyes:

So the entire disclipline of criminal psychology, in trying to understand the motivations of murderers, is trying to explain murders away?

I'd still like to see an answer to my question.

what question? did i ever hear of criminal psychology? of course i have.

and yes, people have studied manson. people just don't feel sorrow for manson like they do for yates. they don't go out of their way to defend his actions.

wildcatlh
05-30-07, 09:08 PM
what question? did i ever hear of criminal psychology? of course i have.

and yes, people have studied manson. people just don't feel sorrow for manson like they do for yates. they don't go out of their way to defend his actions.

Who the hell has defended Yates' actions, besides her idiot ex-husband?

Goldblum
05-30-07, 09:13 PM
Can you point me to any information on Yates that refutes this, or are you just going to be snide?
You are the one who made the rather remarkable claim that even though Yates killed her five children, she is not and would not have been a threat to anyone else. I would think you should be the one pointing me to some information explaining that she is not a threat. I don't think I'd like to leave my hypothetical daughter alone in a bathroom with Miss Yates.

EDIT: five, not three

CRM114
05-30-07, 09:16 PM
I knew that, but there are certain things worth arguing and certain things not worth arguing.

there is no need to argue it. why would you? do you think manson participated?

Goldblum
05-30-07, 09:17 PM
The only problem with this is most murders are committed as a 'crime of passion', meaning that a person usually isn't thinking properly when they kill someone. Whether that means that they are 'insane' or just plain pissed off at someone is up to a jury to decide. I think too many people get off easily by the 'temporary insanity' plea. But I'm no doctor, though I play one on this board! :D

Using your scenario, the only people that would actually be thinking about the ramifications would be 'contract' killers who have no emotional connection to the intended victim. There may be other types of 'murderers' out there, but none come to mind right now.

Chris
Most crimes of passion are ineligible for the death penalty anyway. We are talking about premeditated murders.

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 10:01 PM
You are the one who made the rather remarkable claim that even though Yates killed her five children, she is not and would not have been a threat to anyone else. I would think you should be the one pointing me to some information explaining that she is not a threat. I don't think I'd like to leave my hypothetical daughter alone in a bathroom with Miss Yates.

EDIT: five, not three

http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/428/428lect11.htm


Statistically, females usually account for about 15% of all violent crime and 28% of all property crime. However, there has been about a 140% increase in the number of crimes committed by women since 1970, and the upward trend is steady. Researchers typically track female offenders on FBI Part II offenses since they far outnumber men in two Part II categories: prostitution and runaway. However, they have significant numbers in embezzlement (41%), fraud (39%), forgery (36%), and larceny-theft (33%). For homicide, one of the most frequently-cited facts is a Justice Department study in 1991 which found females who were incarcerated for murder were twice as likely as men incarcerated for murder to have killed an intimate (husband, boyfriend, or child). To give some idea of how common the acquaintance relationship is between female serial killers and their victims, consider the following table:

Female Killers and Their Victims
Velma Barfield -- 4 to 7 victims, all people she knew.
Marie Becker -- 12 victims, all people she knew.
Marie Besnard -- 13 victims, all people she knew.
Elfriede Blauensteiner -- 5+ victims, all people she knew.
Judy Buenoano -- 3 victims, all people she knew.
Mary Ann Cotton -- 17+ victims, all people she knew.
Faye Copeland -- 5 victims, all people she knew.
Daisy De Melker -- 3 victims, all people she knew.
Nannie Hazel Doss -- 10 victims, all people she knew.
Ellen Etheridge -- 4 victims, all people she knew.
Christine Falling -- 6 victims, all people she knew.
Constance Fisher -- 6 victims, all people she knew.
Debbie Fornuto -- 6 victims, all people she knew.
Tillie Gbrurek -- 5 victims, all people she knew.
Janie Lou Gibbs -- 5 victims, all people she knew.
Amy Gilligan -- 9 victims, all people she knew.
Caroline Grills -- 4 victims, all people she knew.
Anna Marie Hahn -- 5 to 7 victims, all people she knew.
Audrey Marie Hilley -- 3 to 4 victims, all people she knew.
Waneta Hoyt -- 5 victims, all people she knew.
Helene Jegado -- 23+ victims, most or all people she knew.
Martha Ann Johnson -- 4 victims, all people she knew.
Christa Lehman -- 4 victims, all people she knew. Diana Lumbrera -- 6 victims, all people she knew.
Anjette Lyles -- 4 victims, all people she knew.
Rhonda Belle Martin -- 6 to 8 victims, all people she knew.
Virginia McGinnis -- 4 victims, all people she knew.
Blanche Taylor Moore -- 5 victims, all people she knew.
Marie Noe -- 8 victims, all people she knew.
Dorothea Puente -- 9 to 25 victims, most or all people she knew.
Vera Renczi -- 35 victims, all people she knew.
Martha Rendell -- 3 victims, all people she knew.
Lydia Shermman -- 10+ victims, all people she knew.
Marybeth Tinning -- 8 victims, all people she knew.
Lydia Trueblood -- 6 victims, all people she knew.
Debra Sue Tuggle -- 4 victims, all people she knew.
Lise Jane Turner -- 3+ victims, all people she knew.
Maria Velten -- 5 victims, all people she knew.
Louise Vermilyea -- 10 victims, all people she knew.
Jeanne Weber -- 10+ victims, all people she knew.
Rosemary and Fred West -- 10 to 18 victims, many people they knew.
Martha Wise -- 3 victims, all people she knew.
Martha Woods -- 7 victims, many people she knew.
Anna Zwanziger -- 3+ victims, all people she knew.

In addition, this was a woman that had committed no prior violent criminal offenses. What she does have is the classic personality type that indicated she may kill her children.

To say that Yates is a danger to anyone else besides any further children she may have is to say that you know absolutely nothing about criminal psychology.

Tracer Bullet
05-30-07, 10:03 PM
there is no need to argue it. why would you? do you think manson participated?

Huh? You used Manson as an example of a serial killer, when he in fact never committed a murder. I just didn't correct you because I didn't think it was that important.

Ranger
05-30-07, 10:15 PM
To say that Yates is a danger to anyone else besides any further children she may have is to say that you know absolutely nothing about criminal psychology.
You don't think that it's possible that she would be a threat to the husband or any future boyfriends?

shoppingbear
05-30-07, 10:22 PM
Once again I am very thankful that our criminal justice system wasn't set up and isn't run by DVDTalk forum members. It would be on about the same level as that of the Middle Ages. Damn straight, my thoughts exactly. :(

NotThatGuy
05-30-07, 11:13 PM
http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/428/428lect11.htm



In addition, this was a woman that had committed no prior violent criminal offenses. What she does have is the classic personality type that indicated she may kill her children.

To say that Yates is a danger to anyone else besides any further children she may have is to say that you know absolutely nothing about criminal psychology.
To say you know anything about criminal (forensic) psychology [based on the above] would be incorrect.

There is not a 'classic personality type' that will indicate if they will kill there kids. There may be some clusters of traits, but it is more than a stretch to state that there is a 'classic personality type'. People make the same assumption with 'serial killers'. Profiling is very much misunderstood by 98% of the population.

The ONLY place where your arguement would hold any water is in "battered women syndrome", but that has more to do with clustered factors (environment, internalized belief system, cycle of violence, etc) and not so much personality traits. BWS is often a central point to many of these cases, but it is a far cry from personality, and even farther than a 'profile'.

-p

tasha99
05-30-07, 11:35 PM
While I could never imagine or condone killing ones children, as someone who suffered from post-partum depression I can certainly attest to how scary it is. I fortunately did not have a severe case and I never entertained the idea of harming my son or myself, but I was really scared by how not "myself" I felt. I am normally a very strong, together person but for several weeks I couldn't even talk about my birth experience or new mom situation without being reduced to a puddle of tears. I think I was so overcome with the huge responsibility of being a new mother and I was so afraid of anything bad happening to my son, I would have these horrible images of him being hurt that just scared the crap out of me. Maybe these psychotic mothers feel the same way and in essense they are driven so insane by it they are compelled to somehow make it happen? I heard Brooke Shields talking about PPD and it sounds like she had a similar experience: traumatic birth and then visions of her baby being hurt (but never an urge to hurt her baby.) For me the only urge I really had was to just run away, but when I rationalized it and thought about it I knew my son needed me and that kept me near him and made me better. I had to heal myself for his sake, as well as mine.

I was lucky I had a very supportive husband and family so I was able to get myself together and come out of it after about 6 weeks, but I can only imagine how difficult it would be for a young mother who has several other children and no outside help to help shoulder the burden.

I think a better solution to treat someone like an Andrea Yates would be sterilization. I don't think someone who has post-partum psychosis is a threat to general public like a regular murderer is, but I do think they should be kept from having more children.

This could have almost been my post (except for the "supportive" husband part.) I came home from the hospital barely able to stand (induced labor that took more than 24 hours, no epidural, 4th degree tear, totally botched breastfeeding due to not being allowed to see my son till late the next day). I could barely function, my husband was at work all day, and I didn't know anyone in the Cincinnati area where we had just moved.

It got to the point where I would see flashes of me hurting my son--drowning him, cooking him, all kinds of crazy things, and I had never heard of a mother feeling this way. It wasn't that I wanted to--it was that I could see myself doing horrible things and I was afraid I would. I got so scared I would hurt him that I would put him in one room and sit in a locked bathroom and cry for hours.

Then, miraculously, it just went away without any treatment or medication. I was afraid that would happen with my other 2 kids, and I told my doctors about it (even saw psychiatrists regularly after childbirth just in case), but it never happened again. I guess one reason I can feel sympathy for both the innocent child victims and the mothers in these cases is because I feel like I was lucky that whatever was happening to me stopped. I don't know what going over the edge is like, but I got close to it and don't take sanity for granted.

Numanoid
05-30-07, 11:44 PM
It's amazing how much hormones and chemical imbalances can change not only your personality, but your very actions. Of course, the usual suspects clamoring for blood here probably have no point of reference in understanding this, and just have the unenlightened knee-jerk reaction of "an eye for an eye".

I'm constantly amazed at the inability of people to stop and think for two seconds that maybe people go through something that is completely foreign to them, maybe factors they've never experienced are involved, and maybe they should try and understand it before calling for their heads. But if that were the case, we wouldn't have such fun historical events as witch trials and lynchings.

mrpayroll
05-31-07, 12:01 AM
It's amazing how much hormones and chemical imbalances can change not only your personality, but your very actions. Of course, the usual suspects clamoring for blood here probably have no point of reference in understanding this, and just have the unenlightened knee-jerk reaction of "an eye for an eye".

I'm constantly amazed at the inability of people to stop and think for two seconds that maybe people go through something that is completely foreign to them, maybe factors they've never experienced are involved, and maybe they should try and understand it before calling for their heads. But if that were the case, we wouldn't have such fun historical events as witch trials and lynchings.

Just to be clear, I've never called for this womans head or anyone else's head that have killed their children (now you're going to search my previous posts to prove me wrong), but whether these women or men (if any) are either clinically insane, post partum depression or just plan depressed, they were selfish to take away the gift that God has given them.

At the very least, any parent that takes the life of their child / children should be sterilized, mother or father, so that they can never do that to someone who has complete trust and love in them.

And I cannot believe that her decision to do this came at the spur of the moment. The story states that she was depressed and it is a shame that her family or friends couldn't have helped her out in some way by taking care of the kids while she worked out her depression and problems.

Maybe I live in la la land, but none of my friends with kids have ever exhibited this sort of behavior or inclination. I would hope if they did, that I would be right there to help them to do whatever it takes to make sure their children are safe.

But upon further thought, I have done these things, usually by lending them money when things were tight or in the case of my former friends who had 3 children, taking their kids around so that they could lead a semblance of a regular life, while both their parents were in the hospital or recovering from their illnesses (at the same time). This went on for 6 months and I'm glad that God used me in this way.

These tragedies should remind us that we should always support our family and friends when they need our help, especially when children are involved.

Can I get an Amen? ;)

Chris

DVD Polizei
05-31-07, 02:36 AM
http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/428/428lect11.htm

In addition, this was a woman that had committed no prior violent criminal offenses. What she does have is the classic personality type that indicated she may kill her children.

To say that Yates is a danger to anyone else besides any further children she may have is to say that you know absolutely nothing about criminal psychology.

I'm familiar with Criminal Psych and you're trying tell us Yates wouldn't have killed again? The circumstances of her mentality could be repeated again, if exposed to the same triggers. This is what psychs and socials have a hard time figuring out and still are.

No priors doesn't mean shit (but psychologically, she DOES have priors--just not on a criminal record--and our society needs to re-think how we document these incidents). Why? Because she went passed her threshold. She probably thought about killing her kids for several years. But never did. Then, she finally did it. It's parallel to a serial killer's mentality in some ways. You don't just wake up one morning and decide to kill. No, you think about it for quite some time. Yates thought about it. She finally did it. And now, since she has accustomed her mind to killing, has accepted it, she can do it again and it would probably be easier for her, and easier for justifying it as well.

This isn't some passing thing like bad gas from eating a burrito. She's ill, and in my opinion should be shot dead in the backyard of a mobile home and left to pitbulls to clean the mess up. Not exactly a profesional opinion, but some people just need to be dumped off the civilized planet and forgotten about while we can concentrate on others who are more worthy of our help.

If you think Yates poses no danger to other children, then prove it. She is a pre-meditated murderer, sly, able to fool her own self into believing she suffers from depression in order to make herself feel better for killing her own children. She is a narcissistic sociopathic murderer who is bipolar, if that makes sense. She feels responsibility for killing her children, but when it comes down having to pay for her crimes...well, "I'm insane". It's not her fault--it's her "depression" or some other reason. But never her fault.

Being familiar with Criminal Psych you should know that a ruling of not guilty by reason of insanity does not mean she's not dangerous. She still is in the eyes of the law. By Reason Of Insanity means you were insane, you killed someone or did something terrible (being general here), and although you will not get the usual criminal statute punishment, you will still be considered dangerous to society while locked up in an institution. Only at that institution is the possibility of release if they determine you are no longer a danger to society.

Usually, the more horrific the crime, the longer you will be studied and evaluated. Yates will probably be locked up in an institution for quite some time, but as I've often encountered, an institution is no guarantee. You could have some nutjob Psychologist or Psychiatrist who has enough seniority and faith in "rehabilitation" to set a freak like this back on the streets.

NotThatGuy
05-31-07, 03:05 AM
I'm right there with ya.

-p

Tracer Bullet
05-31-07, 08:50 AM
I don't really have any time to respond as I'm leaving on vacation today, but because I know this thread will probably die by the time I get back, I just wanted to say I'm glad pedagogue made an appearance in this thread to give some professional opinion in this matter. I'm certainly no expert and if he thinks that Yates could be a danger to other children or close associates, then I'm certainly not going to argue the point with him. Still, I don't think Yates is a danger to the general public.

Goldblum
05-31-07, 09:19 AM
I'm familiar with Criminal Psych and you're trying tell us Yates wouldn't have killed again? The circumstances of her mentality could be repeated again, if exposed to the same triggers. This is what psychs and socials have a hard time figuring out and still are.

No priors doesn't mean shit (but psychologically, she DOES have priors--just not on a criminal record--and our society needs to re-think how we document these incidents). Why? Because she went passed her threshold. She probably thought about killing her kids for several years. But never did. Then, she finally did it. It's parallel to a serial killer's mentality in some ways. You don't just wake up one morning and decide to kill. No, you think about it for quite some time. Yates thought about it. She finally did it. And now, since she has accustomed her mind to killing, has accepted it, she can do it again and it would probably be easier for her, and easier for justifying it as well.

This isn't some passing thing like bad gas from eating a burrito. She's ill, and in my opinion should be shot dead in the backyard of a mobile home and left to pitbulls to clean the mess up. Not exactly a profesional opinion, but some people just need to be dumped off the civilized planet and forgotten about while we can concentrate on others who are more worthy of our help.

If you think Yates poses no danger to other children, then prove it. She is a pre-meditated murderer, sly, able to fool her own self into believing she suffers from depression in order to make herself feel better for killing her own children. She is a narcissistic sociopathic murderer who is bipolar, if that makes sense. She feels responsibility for killing her children, but when it comes down having to pay for her crimes...well, "I'm insane". It's not her fault--it's her "depression" or some other reason. But never her fault.

Being familiar with Criminal Psych you should know that a ruling of not guilty by reason of insanity does not mean she's not dangerous. She still is in the eyes of the law. By Reason Of Insanity means you were insane, you killed someone or did something terrible (being general here), and although you will not get the usual criminal statute punishment, you will still be considered dangerous to society while locked up in an institution. Only at that institution is the possibility of release if they determine you are no longer a danger to society.

Usually, the more horrific the crime, the longer you will be studied and evaluated. Yates will probably be locked up in an institution for quite some time, but as I've often encountered, an institution is no guarantee. You could have some nutjob Psychologist or Psychiatrist who has enough seniority and faith in "rehabilitation" to set a freak like this back on the streets.
Thanks, Poliezi. That's pretty much what I was trying to say, delineated well. :up:

mrpayroll
05-31-07, 10:10 AM
I don't really have any time to respond as I'm leaving on vacation today, but because I know this thread will probably die by the time I get back, I just wanted to say I'm glad pedagogue made an appearance in this thread to give some professional opinion in this matter. I'm certainly no expert and if he thinks that Yates could be a danger to other children or close associates, then I'm certainly not going to argue the point with him. Still, I don't think Yates is a danger to the general public.

Oh, we'll keep the fires warm while you're gone. Have a good vacation.

Chris

CRM114
05-31-07, 10:34 AM
Huh? You used Manson as an example of a serial killer, when he in fact never committed a murder. I just didn't correct you because I didn't think it was that important.

I didn't denote "serial killer" anywhere. You did.

My first reference to Manson was: "Second point. Why is Andrea Yates mental illness different from Jeff Dahmer's? Or Charles Manson? Or Susan Smith? Or David Berkowitz?"

Obviously, the inclusion of Susan Smith would rule out any examples of "serial killers."

Thanks for not "correcting" me on common trivia though.

MoviePage
05-31-07, 01:27 PM
I'm just wondering how this thread became a discussion of punishment for incidents like this. In case you missed it, the mother in this story killed herself as well. Depending on your views on religion and the afterlife, her punishment is either over completely and forever, or is just beginning and is kinda out of control of the courts at this point.

Just leads me back to my point that I seriously doubt her thoughts before doing this ran along the lines of, "Gee, I'd really like to murder my children, but prison would suck." Or anything remotely resembling that. Stop oversimplifying.

mrpayroll
05-31-07, 01:46 PM
I'm just wondering how this thread became a discussion of punishment for incidents like this. In case you missed it, the mother in this story killed herself as well. Depending on your views on religion and the afterlife, her punishment is either over completely and forever, or is just beginning and is kinda out of control of the courts at this point.

Just leads me back to my point that I seriously doubt her thoughts before doing this ran along the lines of, "Gee, I'd really like to murder my children, but prison would suck." Or anything remotely resembling that. Stop oversimplifying.

None of us can probably know what type of spiritual and mental anguish she was going thru before she murdered her children. And hopefully none of us will.

Chris

DVD Polizei
05-31-07, 09:23 PM
I'm just wondering how this thread became a discussion of punishment for incidents like this. In case you missed it, the mother in this story killed herself as well. Depending on your views on religion and the afterlife, her punishment is either over completely and forever, or is just beginning and is kinda out of control of the courts at this point.

Just leads me back to my point that I seriously doubt her thoughts before doing this ran along the lines of, "Gee, I'd really like to murder my children, but prison would suck." Or anything remotely resembling that. Stop oversimplifying.

So, you think Mr. I-Shot-32-People at a college was going through the same issue? What about: "Gee, I'd really like to murder 32 people, and get back at society, but prison would suck, so fuck that shit. I'm checkin' out."

Those who kill themselves are conveying a guilt they know they couldn't deal with if they were left alive. That's why they kill themselves. They are in some ways, the cowards they have always tried to convince others they were not while they were alive. Example? Cho.

As to this idiot who killed her four kids? We don't know all of her mental thoughts, but I have a good idea. She couldn't deal with facing her ex in a courtroom and his crying and screaming of why she killed THEIR children. She also couldn't deal with society shaming her, either.

I'm simplifying a lot here because I don't have the time to write a thesis on her dumbass, but believe me, she was no "hero" in the sense that "we don't know how she felt."

She was a dark coward. She was horribly selfish.