BellaOnline Forums News and Politics Crime You Be the Judge Article - Andrea Yates

Another thought just occurred to me. There is such a crime as "child neglect" and also "child endangerment" (both are serious offenses). If the husband was aware of his wife's diagnosis of that severity and he willingly left the children in her care, is that not "child neglect" and putting the children in "harms way"?

I have heard of a few women who left their babies in a car on hot summer days and the babies died. That was "child endangerment". Leaving your child in a dangerous situation is a crime.

While certainly not taking away the blame from Rusty and Andrea, (I feel both are responsible for their children's murders), let's not discount the man who had a lot to do with it as well.

A London Times magazine reporter said,

"one Michael Peter Woroniecki, (alias Michael Warnecki, Warneki, Worneki, Mike War and Shabar Ben, a self-ordained, itinerant, fundamentalist "fire and brimstone" preacher. He is notorious for his "belligerent evangelical style" his disdain of women, calling them instruments of the devil, and his negative ministerial influence on Andrea Yates, the Texas woman who drowned her five children in 2001.

His character and teachings have been criticized as cultlike and dangerous by some cult experts and ex-followers."

Enough said?

I was completely serious in my first post!

Rusty was very aware that Andrea suffered from postpartum psychosis after her 4th and 5th pregnancies. He knew he was leaving his children with a woman who should never be alone with them. His mother had been staying at their house but that day she couldn't get there before he left for work. Both Rusty and his mother knew the condition of her mind and yet they left her alone.

There was no possibility that Rusty didn't know.

And yeah, he went on and married someone else, so he's free of the crazy wife.

I think it's so unfortunate when he was interviewed after all of it, he said that this is a great country where everyone can choose the life that works for them, when he was asked if maybe Andrea had tried to take on too much! As if his lifestyle worked for his family! His head is so far down in the sand it's a wonder he can breathe.

Thanks for that Kristen. Puts some new light on the issue that I've only guessed at.

I'm of the ilk that her husband is as much as fault too. I don't know if all was disclosed about what the doctor warned of her condition but it is serious. I would not leave my children in the hands of someone with that condition.

It was pointed out, he knew her, lived with her and had a pretty good understanding of her moods and the like (probably was responsible for choosing their religion and living in a trailer). I've worked with crazy people and even briefly met people on the street I wouldn't feel safe with after one meeting. I'm thinking Ms. Andrea probably had been hearing voices and her husband had probably heard her answering back as well. If he didn't then he wasn't paying attention and should still be at fault.

Parents killing their children is not something new. It is quite possible he thought she might do this. It is one of the things they warn about in these conditions. So with the same disdain as Helen, I'd say I can't think of him ever as not being guilty.

But rightly so...great topic!

Kristen, Helen and Violette,

Great information on this issue! I had not heard or read anything about that Michael Peter Woroniecki guy before. What a negative influence he must have on people! From the sound of it, he must have had a negative affect on Andrea for sure!

Must agree with Phyllis, here in Oklahoma the State would have filed something (whatever the most severe crime they could come up with and hope to make stick) on Rusty as well. I've lectured my class on this particular case and my wonderful little undergrads decided the fact that he was never charged had to do more with the fact that he is a NASA rocket scientist than with his own culpability. go figure. The kids may have it. I have been infuriated for years at the State of Texas for allowing him to remain free. Frankly, I hope he's shackled with guilt for the rest of his days. Ugly, ugly attitude, I know. I can't help it. Religion did come up numerous times and I remember it being reported that she was diagnosed PRIOR to the birth of their daughter, who was the baby. He was very, very aware of her condition. The entire family was.

Where did anything say that Rusty knew there was abuse going on? Where was anything mentioned about abuse that was on going?



Apparently children services nor anyone like that didn't feel there was anything wrong for her to have her children taken from her or that they ordered someone to be there. If they felt there was a need for it then they should have done something. She wasn't court ordered not to have any more kids and nothing was looked into after she had the fifth child so there was no concern from the state that any child was in danger. It was only suggested by a therapist that she should not have any more kids.

There was not enough concern warranted by the state or anything so why should the husband be charged with anything? Maybe the mother should be charged for not being there when she should have. Rusty worked for NASA and he probably couldn't be late for work. We have all been late for work and we all have been spoken to about it. The mother should be charged with child neglect then as well. If the husband should be charged for going to work, then the mother should be charged for not going there when she was supposed to.

As far as being on the jury, I would have voted her guilty because I dont think she was insane. I think she had full control of her faculties and made the voices thing up to try and get out of going to jail. That is my opinion. Obviously the State didn't feel anything Rusty did was wrong. If Child Services thought there was a problem, why didnt they order something done? Why didn't they charge Rusty? Because they didn't feel there was an issue either.

By just reading some of the articles on the internet about this case, they all confirm my own belief. The so-called experts, in my opinion, screwed up. This is not such a shocking thing either as "experts" and "professional testimonial witnesses" have been wrong in many trials. The best article I read (and this was just this morning, after I already stated my opinions on this case) is at the link below which contains numerous other links. The "gist" of most of what I read about this case is that Rusty was very aware of Andrea's psychotic illness and fed it and should have been charged and convicted for being also responsible for the deaths of the children. He was the one who urged Andrea to go off her psychotic medicine and become pregnant yet again for the fifth time.

This is not the first time in history where a series of mistakes, mis-diagnosis, screw ups and misinterpretations have all come together to allow a person responsible for a crime to go free and enjoy life.

A poll taken at the site below shows that most people agree that justice was not served in this case.

BellaOnline ALERT: Raw URLs are not allowed in these forums for security reasons. Please use UBB code. If you don't know how to do UBB code just post here for help - we will help out!

See I didn't see that when I researched the article. Okay he should burn as well.

Vance-you're a nice guy and you are seeing this from a male perspective. Yes, many men have the problem of their companies being on their cases about family matters but, please, Rusty is not Mr. Innocent. He knew this was serious. If he says he didn't, he is lying.

How can any man impregnate his wife when he knows he is suffering a mental illness. Hey he was at work, she was the one in the "bus/home."

He should be charged in the deaths of his children as well.