Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Prosecutors 'Seriously Considering' Case Against Russell Yates (Negligent Homicide)
ABC News ^ | March 16, 2002 SGT | Elenn Davis and Mike von Fremd

Posted on 03/16/2002 7:41:28 AM PST by codebreaker

Prosecutors will weigh a number of factors that may lead them to prosecute Andrea Yates husband Russell for either child endangerment or negligent homicide. ABC News has learned.

No decision has been made, but it is being seriously considered, sources said. Prosecutors would charge Russell Yates if an when the evidence warrants, but do not have the evidence now, sources said.

Andrea Yates 37, was convicted Tuesday of two capital murder charges filed in the killings of her children last June.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: charges; father; homicide; yates
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 381-395 next last
To: cake_crumb
Oh, I agree. He was negligent, but watch the excuse-makers fall silent as he goes on trial.

Don't hold your breath waiting for, "Anyone who would leave his children in that situation MUST be mentally ill. He needs treatment, not punishment."

101 posted on 03/16/2002 9:11:15 AM PST by watchin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: codebreaker
If they go after him I'm not going to linger on it, but I think the licensed individuals in this case bare a lot more responsibility than he does.

It's my understanding she had never revealed contemplating injuring the children. She had clearly indicated doing harm to herself. And her violent outburst betrays the lack of competancy of those providing medical care to her.

He is a lay person. Smacking him down in the absense of charges to professionals providing medical care to the woman strikes me as amazingly wrong-headed. Hey, that's MO. Take care.

102 posted on 03/16/2002 9:13:06 AM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: codebreaker
"at least a negligent unwilling accompilce. "

At the very least. But I do wonder how unwilling he was. Could not a case be made that Rusty letting his wife go off her meds and knowing that she could become psychotic, is akin to loosing a hungry pit bull in a day care center?
Perhaps he knew he had the perfect weapon. Perhaps her psychosis was not as deep as his.

103 posted on 03/16/2002 9:14:16 AM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: codebreaker
Are they also going to go after the doctor who did not even bother to get her medical
chart from the previous doctor before he took her off her anti-psychotic medication?
104 posted on 03/16/2002 9:14:21 AM PST by Slyfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A. Pole
No, I relish justice. Nice that you can base such an opinion on one post.
105 posted on 03/16/2002 9:14:23 AM PST by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: mystery-ak
You are correct.
106 posted on 03/16/2002 9:14:56 AM PST by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Bommer
Hmmm.

Reading the responses here, I do think that Rusty Yates was culpable in impregnating her further when it was obvious, with the knife episode etc, that she shouldn't have any more kids.

I do think that Rusty *tried* very hard to take care of her the best he can. I don't know why he kept impregnating her when she was not in the best mental way. Anyone have any ideas on why he did that??

107 posted on 03/16/2002 9:16:04 AM PST by I_Love_My_Husband
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Even as a layperson, he could have arranged for a sitter for the one hour that Andrea was left alone with the kids before the mother in law could come.
108 posted on 03/16/2002 9:18:15 AM PST by codebreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: cactusSharp
opinions out the wazooo...so let me ask this of you brainiacs.....name the 3 drugs she was taking and their results if stopped and what does sugar do to the mix? when you all can ACCURATELY answer,you will all be humbled as to what REALLY HAPPENED.....I hold my head in shame as to you all.....

I don't quite get your point as to what the mother's meds or lack of taking meds has to do with the father's culpability, but to humor you:

Haldol is prescribed for psychotic patients hearing voices or thinking delusionally," said Dr. Lucy Puryear, a psychiatry professor in Baylor College of Medicine's mood disorders research program. "The patient usually functions normally as a result of the medication, but is also subject to reoccurrences when he or she goes off it, so it's important to be sure they're not at risk of hurting themselves or someone else."

Haldol treats symptoms such as delusional or hallucinogenic thinking by blocking the flow of dopamine to the part of the brain that can hear voices. Puryear said Haldol has long been one of the first-line drugs for psychosis, though in recent years there are new ones she would prescribe first.

Haldol was one of four drugs Russell Yates said his wife took. He said she was taking Effexor and Remeron, both anti-depressants, at the time of the killings and was taking Wellbutrin, an anti-depressant, and Haldol before that.

He said that previously she had been in therapy but was not at the time. He said they had recently talked about her going into therapy again but she had not got around to it yet.

John Vincent, chairman of the University of Houston department of psychology, called that "most unfortunate." He said studies have shown that patients do best who receive both medication and psychotherapy and that relying on medication alone can be risky.

(for complete article: Houston Chronicle: 6/25/01

Russell Yates probably knew the effects of his wife not getting psychotherapy and only receiving meds, too. His wife needed help and she wasn't getting it. He is culpable.

109 posted on 03/16/2002 9:19:49 AM PST by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rintense
No, I relish justice. Nice that you can base such an opinion on one post.

Since you confuse homosexual practices with justice and enjoy fantasies about homosexual rape you must be a homosexual. But you might be in denial.

110 posted on 03/16/2002 9:21:30 AM PST by A. Pole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: grlfrnd
Self-centered Psociopath wh only give a damn about himself and not others. I'm sorry but I have a 4 year old boy. I call in when my wife is too sick cannot take care of him. I can't imagine anyone that would be soo cruel to his wife that he would make her take care of all these kids in her mental frame of mind. Andrea Yate may have been nutz, but her husband is definately a psociopath. See how everyone else was to blame then when he was asked if he shared any responsibility, he said no! Sounds like Bill Clinton to me!
111 posted on 03/16/2002 9:21:48 AM PST by Bommer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: A. Pole
You're taking this all too personal for someone not involved in this case one bit. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder regarding the mentally ill. Psychologist perhaps?
112 posted on 03/16/2002 9:23:17 AM PST by StolarStorm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Bommer
Well, let me put it this way--A woman stalked throughout her home and, one-by-one, snuffed the life out of her little children by drowning them in a bath tub. In one case she--like a witch out of an unexpurgated Grimm's failry tale--chased her first born son down as he--torn between animal instinct and childish devotion to the matriarch who was hunting him--apologised for some imagined offence.

Your response? "...Russell Yates is the real peice of crap in this whole mess!..."

As they say in the movies--I rest my case......

113 posted on 03/16/2002 9:23:28 AM PST by LaBelleDameSansMerci
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: NevadaY
I cannot believe that you said "A parent's first obligation is NOT to his/her children. It is to their spouse." Are you serious??!!!

If you bring a child into this world, protecting that child is your FIRST obligation. If you know that the other parent may cause physical or psychological harm to that child, you PROTECT THE CHILD. That is what being a parent is about. The welfare of minor children that you bring into this world should outweigh anything else, including a spouse.

114 posted on 03/16/2002 9:23:48 AM PST by LBelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: cactusSharp
Haldol, Wellbutrin, and Effexor; and at one time Zoloft
115 posted on 03/16/2002 9:25:58 AM PST by paix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Bommer
Randy, had several relatives helping her out... he himself did quite a bit as well. BUT he had a job at NASA that required him to actually be on site to keep his job and be able to provife for her and the kids.

He didn't neglect her or the kids.... but he should have gotton a vasectomy. His religious views kept him from making the rational choice. The kids are also victims of unthinking inflexible fundementalism.

116 posted on 03/16/2002 9:26:50 AM PST by StolarStorm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: LaBelleDameSansMerci
Rest it on what? He KNEW she tried to kill herself before her last kid! He KNEW she was so severely depressed that they had to put her on not 1 but 3 types of medication! He KNEW about her being too metally ill to take care of herself. If Russell Yates isn't culpable in letting a mentally ill person take care of his children while he is gone, I again ask you to list how many mentally ill babysitters you let watch YOUR kids! Bet the answer is ZERO. If that is the case, then Russell Yates is guilty of 5 counts of child endangerment. You loose!
117 posted on 03/16/2002 9:28:46 AM PST by Bommer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
It's my understanding she had never revealed contemplating injuring the children.

I read somewhere that when Andrea called Russell - she said "Well, I finally did it." and he said "Which one?" and she said "All of them," not that her last response is all that germaine.

If this is accurate - then a whole bunch of things can be assumed. Russell knew about her threats against one or more of his kids. If so, he is an accomplice to murder and should definitely pay. Can someone please confirm or deny this dialog?

118 posted on 03/16/2002 9:29:57 AM PST by ctonious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: LBelle
Why is that? One person isn't more important than any other person. The children are always first mentality has destroyed more marriages than almost anything... and spoiled countless children. Children are important... but so is your spouse.
119 posted on 03/16/2002 9:30:00 AM PST by StolarStorm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: A. Pole
HAHAHHAHA! Lord have mercy, that is the funniest thing I've heard all dern day! You must really think you're perfect to be throwing around such unfounded accusations. But then again, I'm sure you're a better person than I am.
120 posted on 03/16/2002 9:30:56 AM PST by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 381-395 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson