Andrea Yates conviction overturned

[Gaard]

Woman's Convictions on Drowning Children Are Overturned

Andrea Yates, a Texas woman convicted of drowning her children, was granted a new trial by an appeals court in Houston today. The court ruled that a prosecution expert's false testimony about the television program "Law & Order" required a retrial.

Mrs. Yates, who had received diagnoses of postpartum depression and psychosis, confessed to the police that she drowned her five children, ages 6 months to 7 years, in a bathtub in 2001. A Houston jury convicted her of capital murder in 2002 for three of the drownings, rejecting her insanity defense. Although prosecutors had sought the death penalty, the jury recommended a life sentence that required Mrs. Yates to spend at least 40 years in prison.

The case ignited a national debate about mental illness, postpartum depression and the legal definition of insanity.

Today's ruling was narrow and novel. It turned on testimony by Dr. Park Dietz, a psychiatrist who was the prosecution's sole mental health expert. Dr. Dietz, who has testified for prosecutors in a number of prominent cases, had interviewed Mrs. Yates, concluding that while she was psychotic at the time of the murders she nevertheless knew right from wrong. The latter conclusion meant that she was not insane under the Texas definition of insanity, which is unusually narrow.

On cross-examination, Dr. Dietz was asked about his work as a consultant on "Law & Order," a television program Mrs. Yates was, the appeals court said, "known to watch." He was also asked specifically whether any of the episodes he had worked on concerned "postpartum depression or women's mental health."

"As a matter of fact," he answered, "there was a show of a woman with postpartum depression who drowned her children in the bathtub and was found insane, and it was aired shortly before the crime occurred."

That statement was false, defense lawyers discovered - and Dr. Dietz acknowledged - after the jury rejected Mrs. Yates's insanity defense and found her guilty of capital murder. The trial court denied a defense request for a mistrial, but the jury was told about the false testimony before sentencing.

The appeals court ruled that the motion for a mistrial should have been granted.

"The state used Dr. Dietz's false testimony to suggest to the jury that appellant patterned her actions after that 'Law & Order' episode," the decision said. "We conclude that there is a reasonable likelihood that Dr. Dietz's false testimony could have affected the judgment of the jury."

Dr. Dietz had said the testimony was based on a mistaken recollection, and the appeals court ruled that "the record does not show that Dr. Dietz intentionally lied." The court added that there was no evidence that prosecutors had knowingly offered false testimony.

Joseph Owmby, one of the prosecutors in the case, said his office would ask the three-judge panel to reconsider. If that fails, he said, prosecutors will ask the entire appeals court, the Court of Appeals for the First District, and the state's highest court for criminal matters, its Court of Criminal Appeals, to reverse the panel's decision.

"It wasn't material," he said, referring to Dr. Dietz's testimony about "Law & Order." "It didn't affect her fair and just trial rights at the trial level."

Mr. Owmby said that no decision has been made about whether to retry Mrs. Yates should the appeals fail.

At a news conference today, George Parnham, one of Mrs. Yates's lawyers, said his client was not seeking an immediate release from prison.

"She is in the very best possible place," Mr. Parnham said, "all things considered, at this time, at this place, under these circumstances."

Mrs. Yates "was surprised and not unpleased" by the decision, Mr. Parnham said, adding, "She understands what's happening."

He also said he had talked with Russell Yates, who filed for divorce from Mrs. Yates in August. "He thought the court had done the right thing," Mr. Parnham said of Mr. Yates. "He wants only mental health care for Andrea."

Mr. Parnham said he hoped today's decision would increase the public's understanding of how the legal system should treat people with mental health problems, especially women with postpartum depression.

"Today is obviously a very exciting and momentous day in the lives of this legal team as well as, obviously the lives of Andrea Yates and the issues of mental health and how mental health is dealt with in our legal system, women's mental health specifically, and how we in society deal with that issue," Mr. Parnham said.

He said his team of lawyers has been working with state legislators to rewrite the rules about the insanity defense and who gets to testify, and he said he believed Mrs. Yates's case has furthered the public's understanding of what such a defense means.

"I want the community to know that a verdict of this magnitude does not mean that Andrea goes free, much like a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity does not mean that an individual is released," he said.