[writmeister]

She can still be charged in the deaths of 2 of the kids. She was charged with deaths of only 3.

They can still charge her with the other two deaths. However, without some new punishment evidence (particularly regarding future dangerousness), they will not be able to seek the death penalty because of a doctrine known as collateral estoppel (much like double jeaopardy but issue-based rather than offense-based).

As someone experienced in capital litigation, I can tell this sentence is not surprising. There just was not much evidence showing a continuing threat to society and the defense put on a good mitigating circumstances case. All along, I felt that the insanity defense was simply an early attempt to plant the seeds of mitigation evidence in the jury's head.

[KSCITYBOY]

Logical answer.

[let freedom sing]

bump-- fair enough, considering few believe insanity,-- unless the person is shown to be a babbling blob who cannot appear sane under treatment with medication-- hystrionic schizophrenia, I'm not sure what to call it.

[Atticus]

As someone experienced in capital litigation, I can tell this sentence is not surprising. There just was not much evidence showing a continuing threat to society and the defense put on a good mitigating circumstances case. All along, I felt that the insanity defense was simply an early attempt to plant the seeds of mitigation evidence in the jury's head.

I would ask the jury: Would you feel safe sleeping in the same prison cell as Andrea Yates? Would you ever turn your back on her for an instant? This woman used a bathtub to murder five children. A pillow is a lethal weapon in her hands.