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

Andrea Yates was the mother of five children whom she proceeded to drown in a bath tub one night. A Texas jury said she was not insane but a few years later, a court of appeals determined that she indeed was insane.

Read the article and let me know what you think.

Andrea Yates

Is she insane or not You Be the Judge!

Andrea Yates single choice
	Yes, I believe she is insane
	No, I believe she knew right from wrong.
	It doesn't matter, she should die in jail anyway
Votes accepted starting: 08/15/08 05:36 AM You must vote before you can view the results of this poll.

At the time that this crime happened I was horrified and read everything I could find about it. After reading the entire story I was even more horrified at her husband.

Andrea had been diagnosed with postpartum psychosis after her 4th child was born. Postpartum psychosis is to postpartum depression what a broken finger is to a hangnail! She was treated successfully and both she and her husband were told she should NEVER have another child.

Her husband was well aware of her condition and chose to continue living the life HE chose...she home schooled all the kids, lived in a trailer, kept the house clean, cooked, and got pregnant again.

He was also well aware of her condition on that fateful day when he left her alone with the kids. If she is guilty, and I don't believe she is, he is equally guilty and should have been punished the same as her.

Helen, you can't be serious. You are insinuating that Rusty knowingly left his children to be murdered. Come on, now.

I have to agree with Gorgeousred. He had no idea that he was leaving his kids alone with a psychotic woman like that. He went to work and she called him there telling him that she just killed the kids. Plus she had to chase down the oldest one and then killed him.

I dont know what set her off to kill as I am not a psychiatrist and it could be that she had just stopped taking her medication as well and that affected her. She could have been having a rough time with one or more of the kids yelling and that set her off too. Who knows what was going on in that brain of hers.

I do not believe that her husband should be held liable either and apparently the law didnt either. There was no way he could know what she was feeling and what about if the kids had some one sleeping over, do you think she may have tried to kill them too?

I agree with Helen - and yes, she can be serious, just as serious as I am. The husband was well aware of his wife's medical and mental condition and should have taken every precaution to make sure she always had the help she needed and someone (another adult) living in the household to guard against any possible problems (as what happened). If it was not possible to have another adult always present, then the children should have been taken out of harm's way to live with relatives or friends. Andrea should never have been allowed to have had more children after the first diagnosed case of post-partum depression to the severity of it being labeled a psychosis - psychosis is nothing to dally around with and must be taken seriously. No one with a psychosis of any kind should ever be left alone with children, whether the children are their own or not. The husband and doctor should have made every precaution to keep her on pills or other contraceptive to prevent pregnancy, or the husband could have had surgery to prevent impregnation.

In this case, I think the husband is either just as guilty as Andrea for the death of the children by leaving them in harm's way - or - he is down right stupid and should have his own mind examined.

I believe Andrea's doctors did not handle her case very well and someone should have been doing a lot more for her. Insanity can come and go in certain cases. Someone may seem totally sane and normal one minute then go totally berserk without warning. If the doctors and her husband did not acknowledge this then they were avoiding the obvious.

Oh! - poor Rusty! Of course he had known Andrea was psychotic! She was diagnosed as such and the husband was aware of that. Would you leave your child alone with a psychotic person? Well, he left five of them alone with a psychotic person. By leaving Andrea alone with the children at any time was like locking up the children in a room with a hungry lion! Anyone with enough common sense and love for the children would never do such a thing.

PS: Why would it be so impossible to believe that the husband "knowingly left his children to be murdered"? Who knows what went on before he left home? He lived with Andrea, he knew her habits, he knew what pushed her to the edge, he knew what ticked her off. Is it not theoretically possible that he could have been talking with her, playing mind games with her, putting ideas into her head while pretending to empathize with her on how hard it must be for her to take care of five children, do all the housework, do all the cooking, then tell her something like, he himself could never do that and maybe putting ideas and words of satan into her head - some people are extremely clever when it comes to playing mind games and manipulating the mind of a psychotic person. This is no more impossible than it is for the husband to "knowingly leave his children to be murdered".

Gee! Now the husband is free of the psychotic wife and the five children. Poor guy.

Are you serious? Suppose he is the type of man who loved his wife and children dearly? She was just apparently depressed a lot but was apparently trying to live a normal life. There is no way that anyone can seriously blame him for this as well. Maybe she stopped taking the medication that she was on and snapped.

There could have been several things leading her to snap and kill her children that fateful night or maybe it was just one thing. She did say that she heard Satan's voice telling her to do it and he said that this was the first time that he knew of her hearing voices.

Maybe she wasn't crazy? Maybe it was all an act and she was just tired of taking care of the children and killed them. Maybe she knew that if she said she heard voices and with her past medical history, she thought that she would be hospitalized and not sent to jail. I am sure the hospital is a lot more comfortable than the jail and she will have a chance to leave the hospital once she is all better. Even if she doesn't and she does spend the rest of her life in a hospital, it is still better than spending her life in an 8x10 cell.

I cannot believe that you and Helen would blame any of this on the husband. Even if he was that cold and calculating there would be no way he could be sure that she would snap and kill the kids. If he loved his family like he says he did, and if he thought for a moment that she would be capable of doing something like that, dont you think he would have had her committed or had someone staying with her.

I dont feel he thought that she was capable of doing something like that, but a couple of you do and you are certainly entitled to your opinion and You Can Be the Judge anyway you see fit.

That is the beauty of this country of ours. lol

Are you listening to yourself, Vance? You are using words such as "maybe", "supposing", "if". I do not write anything like that if I am not serious, Vance. Suppose I am right, suppose you are right - supposing does not give us the truth, does it? People can be portrayed any way we want to see them and some people can have themselves portrayed any way they want us to see them. All of your opinions are the same as mine: assumptions. No one knows what went on between Andrea and her husband on that fateful day or the days or weeks or months leading up to it.

How many crimes have been committed by people who we (the general public) think it would be impossible for that person to have done that? How many people do you think have gotten away with horrendous crimes because the public or the jury/courts think there is no way that person could have done that? Juries are made up of people just like you and me with their own assumptions and feelings and vulnerabilities.

Looks like if you, Helen, GorgeousRed and I had been on the jury, it would have been a hung jury. Suppose the poor guy had just had all he could take of the problems his wife was facing, the tremendous job of raising five kids, etc and he snapped and knew how to work ideas into her poor confused mind? Why would that be so difficult to accept and yet so very easy to accept that she was solely at fault? People usually have preconceived opinions and it is hard to change their judgement call.

My opinions may be preconceived, but, they are mine and they are possibilities and yes - I am serious!

By the way, I love these "You Be The Judge" articles of yours! It really prompts a lot of comment and thoughts. Good job!

Without going into major details here because I do have first hand knowledge about my following post, Yes there are alot of marriages where the husband is very "clueless" about what he should do when he KNOWS there is abuse going on or things just are not quite right so to speak. I think we all sort of forget that it really hasn't been that long since society has started to recognize that YES certain things are abuse and here is what you do about them. Sadly alot of Men still think their role is to earn money and it is the Wifes role to clean and raise children, which is what I am trying to say here, He may have thought it wasn't his place or "job" to interfere in that, I know it doesn't sound right but again I think everyone would be a little surprised at how this "mentality" is still going strong today. I do not know either one of them but I am pretty sure her husband had no idea that was going to happen and honestly he probably never even imagined that it would. Another thing I wonder about and have not seen mentioned is their religion, there are several religions that don't believe in treating anything or that there is even a "mental condition" for anyone and or if they just pray enough it will go away. I'm not trying to do the blame game here just trying to add more food for thought.

There are a lot of possibilities that may or may not have been looked at and all we have to go on are our personal opinions. The point I am trying to get across is that it is no more difficult to think that the husband is in any way at fault then it is to think that the mother was solely guilty. I am sure that the mother, in her heart, loved the children and did what she did in a frame of insanity where she was out of control. The husband was aware of her mental condition and, in my opinion, should not have ever left her alone with the children.

If you, or anyone, had a spouse who was diagnosed with a psychosis, would you leave your child in their care? I certainly would not.

On the religious side, I do not know what their religion is or if it ever came up. I do know there are some religions that do not believe in professional medical assistance, but would that include allowing your children to be left alone with a person whom you know is mentally ill?

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.

I agree with you Kristin...I am a nice guy.

lol I agree with you that Rusty should have been held liable now that Phyllis brought some new evidence to light

Yes - you are a nice guy, Vance! You are very passionate in your beliefs yet still open to all sides.

Thanks for the great debate - I love it!!!

Keep up the good articles, Buddy. It really sparks interest.

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

Sorry you misunderstood my post, Here is what I posted:
Yes there are alot of marriages where the husband is very "clueless" about what he should do when he KNOWS there is abuse going on or things just are not quite right so to speak.

I did not say that Rusty knew or there was any mention of abuse

I think alot of people "dropped the ball" on this one. I do not think that this woman was living the life that she wanted to be living. This story was so awful and touched us all. I think that the husband does bear responsibility in this case, as does the state,I think she may have known what she was doing, but the psychosis is what "pushed" her over the edge don't you think?
I think she needed a great deal of help and I do think that abuse does enter into the picture. Controling someone's every move and "keeping" them there is a form of abuse. So sad. So shameful. I too, do not think she should have been left alone either,

Mary Caliendo
Tea Editor

Phyllis,
Thank-you so much for finding that story. That was the information I had read at the time so I knew that Rusty was at least as responsible as Andrea (IMHO much more), and that HIS choices were what caused this tragedy in the first place.

Vance,
I had a feeling you were looking at this case from a purely male perspective and didn't know all the facts. Thank-you for restoring my faith in you as the good person you are.

It irritates the heck out of me that people can manipulate a mentally ill person to the point of getting rid of his children then turn around and marry someone else and have a happy life. His Karma will catch up with him.

The question I posed to Helen after her post was did she think Rusty deliberately left his children alone with his psychotic wife to allow for the murder of his children?

I am in no way defending Rusty. Simply stating that I don't think he ever thought Andrea was capable of doing such a thing.

I think Rusty had some reality issues and perhaps had a warped interpretation of Christianity but I don't think he should share responsibility for cold blooded murder with Andrea.

Also, he did make arrangements for his mother to be with Andrea during the day while he was at work. Andrea knew when her mother in law was coming and planned on killing the children right after Rusty left that day for work before she arrived.

It is very obvious that Andrea did not "plan" on killing the children. She was psychotic and had a mental crisis that made her go off the deep end. Because she had a psychotic breakdown, she was no longer in control of her actions.

Rusty had urged her to go off the medication that kept her from snapping. I do not think that Rusty chose that day to set up the murder scene then "went off to work knowing she would kill the children" - I believe he manipulated Andrea's thinking over several months or so and hoped she would some day snap and put an end to their life together. Of course, this is only my personal opinion. It does look, though, that Rusty was just as much to blame for the deaths of those children because he was aware of all the dangers of his wife's mental illness yet urged her anyway to stop taking the medicine. He was more than capable of doing such a thing, he was devious and manipulating.

We are only stating our own opinions. Mine is that Rusty knew how to put Andrea's mind onto a certain track of thoughts.

I still think Rusty should have been convicted of "endangerment to children" at the very least.

Rusty should have been put on trial in the beginning - he was just as much to blame as Andrea - maybe more.

Now he is out free and re-married - didn't take him very long to move on, did it?

The woman who married him - gotta question her sanity, too.......