• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Great. Yates gets life. What a sad day.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.


<< so we do anything to live no matter what...life in prison she will have to live with the fact she killed her kids. Now choose, which would you pick for yourself if you had the choice? >>


She is overjoyed that she killed her kids. So my choice is a long life of joy or a short life of fear and dread for the day she is executed... Easy choice. I'll pick the life of fear and dread forcing on her the one thing that is human nature to avoid.

If you took away the free food/shelter/TV/computers/entertainment/training rooms/clean water/etc then I will agree that life in prison will be much worse. But since we currenly pamper those in prison, life in prison is a life of pampering.
 
Lemme put it this way - a lot of people on this board are Christian (just as I am) in one of its major flavors.

Christian means believing in Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ tells us to forgive people who show remorse.
Yates has clearly shown remorse.

"Thou shalt not kill" does not only apply to the individual, but also to the society.
If you kill the killer, then who kills the killer of the killer?

This is what makes me sick.
Now I am gonna shut up, because my opinion is clearly in the minority.

Edit: PS: He who is without blemish, shall throw the first stone.
 


<<

<< so we do anything to live no matter what...life in prison she will have to live with the fact she killed her kids. Now choose, which would you pick for yourself if you had the choice? >>


She is overjoyed that she killed her kids. So my choice is a long life of joy or a short life of fear and dread for the day she is executed... Easy choice. I'll pick the life of fear and dread forcing on her the one thing that is human nature to avoid.

If you took away the free food/shelter/TV/computers/entertainment/training rooms/clean water/etc then I will agree that life in prison will be much worse. But since we currenly pamper those in prison, life in prison is a life of pampering. >>


it all depends on how the rest of her life will be, it all depends on the prison
 


<<

<<

<< Ah...good call. If only there was a way to make them pay up front... >>



It is a bit too bad isn't it. But the best thing for our government's profit is to have people die in the 60 to 65. (We all want to lower taxes right so we need to get as much government profit as possible). Smoking and obesity are the best method we have for a death that is early enough to not pay for retirement and yet late enough to collect as much as possible. >>


Nice. And we already tax cigarettes pretty heavily. If only there were a way to tax obesity... >>



An Ice cream tax???

Seriously though I think they should have to pay more for benefits and I think that any illness or injury because you are a lardass should not be covered under your benefits..Instead the US government and all its wonderful thinking rewards thos 300 lb clunkers by letting them claim disability. I still remember that episode of the Simpsons where Homer tries to get to fat so he won't have to work...It's sad but a reality

As for Yates...a bullet to the back of the head in the parking lot outside the trial would suffice. Everyone including her knows she is guilty as hell..what's to appeal and waste tax payers money here? If you are guilty without a reasonable doubt...I'm talking hard evidence..DNA....photography, fingerprints, eyewitnesses, a confession...shoot them right then and there...why make them suffer and make the family of the victim suffer knowing that the murderer is alive in their jail cell watching HBO with their feet propped up...

I think retribution and revenge is cause enough for her to get the axe..5 murders of innocent children by holding them under water until they drown in the excrement and vomit of those that she killed before them..
 


<< Lemme put it this way - a lot of people on this board are Christian (just as I am) in one of its major flavors. >>




Um, please dont throw religion into the mix, especially violent origin Christianity. While I respect all religions, we should leave that out of the mix as religion clouds judgement. IMO



<< Edit: PS: He who is without blemish, shall throw the first stone. >>



Um, throwing stone and killing innocent children are hardly comparable.
 


<< Christian means believing in Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ tells us to forgive people who show remorse.
Yates has clearly shown remorse.

"Thou shalt not kill" does not only apply to the individual, but also to the society.
If you kill the killer, then who kills the killer of the killer?

This is what makes me sick.
Now I am gonna shut up, because my opinion is clearly in the minority. >>



First as you can see I'm trying to make fun of Oyeve's placing a monetary value on life. Killing the obese at 65 is a really rediculous and stupid idea - if you missed my sarcasm, I'm sorry.

I don't want to get into a religion exercise, but if you bring it up. The problem is the bible interpretation - yours may be different than mine.
1) In the bible, you are supposed to be stoned to death for eating a flat fish. There are plenty more examples of this type of minor offense. If the bible supports execution for minor offences, why would it oppose it for major ones?
2) Who kills the killer of the killer (let he without sin throw the first stone)? I don't know, so why don't we execute her without using a human killer - it can be easily done.
3) If God didn't want her dead, then our attempts at execution would fail. Or is the bible wrong when it says only God has the power to give and take life?
4) Do I need to go into more religion? Or do you agree that we can interpret the same bible in many ways?
 


<< Capital punishment and the legal steps required to commit it cost more than keeping someone in jail for life. >>



*SMACK* did that hurt oyeve?
rolleye.gif
 
Dullard, the post was not directed at you.
I was actually the first who stated that by the same token one should kill obese, smokers, and drinkers. Look it up.

I first tried it with sarcasm, and then with religion.
Hey, I am desparate when it comes to bashing death penalty - I am that much against it.

Edit: added the bold word
 


<< *SMACK* did that hurt oyeve?
rolleye.gif
>>



Yes but we could easily make capital punishment much cheaper - if we as a society decided to do that.
 


<< I got a question, in female prisions does rape occur too? >>



Yeah, I suppose, but probably by the guards! Lot of cat fights also.
 


<< << *SMACK* did that hurt oyeve? >> >>



Nah, ASCII can't hurt me.

I just get pissed when stuff like this occurs. Children always suffer and adults always pull that mental crap. I'm sorry if that is wrong but its the way i feel. I love children too much being a father myself.
 


<< always pull that mental crap. >>


All criminals (especially murderers) are not of normal mind. Thus by definition all criminals are not sane. Should we let all criminals go free? No. So I really dislike it when people plead innocent due to insanity. It should be guilty due to insanity. Then punish them to life in a mental institution/jail (let the criminal choose).

As it is if she was found mentally deficient, she could be on the streets in days after her conviction. This shouldn't be tolerated. An insane murderer should be kept locked up to prevent future temporary insane murderous acts.

If that policy was passed, then Yates would have never mentioned any sort of mental illness... She just wanted to get off Scott free.
 


<< Yates has clearly shown remorse >>



Nobody in that backwards ass family has shown remorse for the deaths of those kids.
I watched the post sentencing interviews by both families an all they could talk about was how unfair it was that Andrea was convicted in the first place. The kids were and remain an after thought. The father is already lining up the doctors and insurance companies for lawsuits, yet he's the one who kept knocking her up, even after being told another pregnancy could drive her over the edge. His response when asked about it? "We thought we could nip it in the bud if she began to have problems".

The whole damn family needs to be spayed and nutured.

The only ones being punished in this whole sad mess were the kids.

Oh, by the way. She won't be going to a regular womens prison.
She begins therapy 6-8 weeks after arrival. $60K/yr the rest of her miserable life to treat her and incarcerate her.

And she doesn't have to be around any kids anymore.

 


<< Cause Then you have other things that go along with such laws like putting people to death for their religion. No thanks, I'll foot the tax bill so that we don't have to go there >>


What I meant was replacing the electric chair, lethal injection, etc. etc. with just a blindfold and a paid-for lead slug propelled by a nitroglycerine/nitroguanidine/nitrocellulose mix. 🙂
 


<< The father is already lining up the doctors and insurance companies for lawsuits, yet he's the one who kept knocking her up, even after being told another pregnancy could drive her over the edge. His response when asked about it? "We thought we could nip it in the bud if she began to have problems". >>


I agree with you that the father had a great doing in this, and I don't think he is showing ANY remorse.

Anyway.
 


<< I agree with you that the father had a great doing in this, and I don't think he is showing ANY remorse. >>



For someone who lost 5 kids, he seems far more interested in the fate of his wife. That makes him seem awfully guilty of part of the planning - or at least guilty of not stopping her when he knew she planned this.

I'd like to see at least 1 tear or 1 bad word about his wife. Then I'd feel much better about him.
 


<< Children always suffer and adults always pull that mental crap >>

Always...lol!

Good ol' Hollywood with its second and third rate "righteous indignation' genre of movies such as "Death Wish" and "When A Stranger Calls", depicting a 'broken' justice system that allows criminals to plead insanity in order to 'escape' punishment, and invariably the criminal is released or escapes from a mental hospital and kills again.

Yet, it is not the insanity defense that has been responsible for the hundreds, if not thousands, of known instances of criminals being released or escaping from incarceration (Texas and Michigan anyone?) only to commit additional violent crimes. There is no such event in recent recorded history; John Hinckley is still institutionalized 21 years after his attempt to assassinate President Reagan.

Hinckley has been institutionalized for twice the length of time served by the average murderer incarcerated in the traditional 'crime and punishment' system that, in the minds of the public, is preferred to the insanity defense because it imposes significantly 'longer' or 'more harsh' sentences. lol!

After the Hinckley verdict, Montana, Idaho and Utah barred the insanity defense, while most other states 'tightened' their insanity defense laws, reflecting growing public concerns that many defendants exaggerate their mental conditions to win "not guilty" verdicts; i.e. the insanity defense was being 'abused'. However, this concern was not founded in reality, but rather in perceptions created and fueled by Hollywood's penchant for 'righteous indignation' genres.

Several studies have looked at the frequency with which the 'not guilty by reason of insanity' defense is asserted and, of those, how many are successful. These studies consistently found that the insanity defense is asserted in fewer than one percent of criminal cases. Of those, only about 1/4 are successful. These studies emphasize that the vast majority (upwards of 90%) of cases where the insanity defense is asserted, the defendent had already been diagnosed with a mental illness before committing the crime for which they are pleading insanity.

So much for the common public perception that criminals routinely 'decide' to fake mental illness just to escape punishment.

According to one authoritative government study ("Report of the National Commission on the Insanity Defense"), in 1982 only 52 of 32,000 adult defendants represented by the Public Defender's office in New Jersey asserted the insanity plea - less than two-tenths of one percent. Of those, only 15 were successful. The study looked at a number of other states and found nothing inconsistent with New Jersey's experience. Further, the Commission found that a distinct minority of cases involving an insanity plea were for serious violent crimes, most were lesser-class felonies and misdemeanors (burglary, breaking and entering, vadalism, destruction of property, fraud, etc.).

<< I love children too much being a father myself. >>

Ah, ok! Mental illness is really about "love". If you really love your children, then you wouldn't 'allow' yourself to have a mental illness...is that it? By having a mental illness, that means, therefore, you don't love your children. DOH!

<< She just wanted to get off Scott free. >>

Had Yates' insanity defense been successful, she would NOT have 'got off Scott Free'. Nobody found not guilty by mental illness or insanity just walks away. If getting out as soon as you can is the goal, you're chances are FAR better in the traditional corrections system than it is with the correctional system for mentally ill patients.

I'm wondering if it has become a habit for you to speak on matters you know ZERO about?
 
Bleh...I'm bored.

I really don't have an opinion on the matter but it seems like a lot of you were against Yates getting the death penalty. Now, do you believe that for just this particular case or are there some folks who you would have liked to see killed i.e. Hitler, Pol Pot, Usama Bin Laden, etc. ?
 
Costs more to kill someone than it does for life in prison. All those appeals.

I cold solve that problem with only $0.10 .22 cartidge.
 


<< Costs more to kill someone than it does for life in prison. All those appeals.
I cold solve that problem with only $0.10 .22 cartidge. >>


Better use something bigger so it's definitely instant...Someone might accuse you of prolonging her pain
 
She was sick and undergoing treatment. Shortly before this incident there was a significant change in her medication which is likely to have been the catalyst which lead to these events. It's surprising that she even received the verdict that was handed down, capital punishment is going way beyond justice in this case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top