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 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 381-395 next last
To: A. Pole
No, are you?
61
posted on
03/16/2002 8:41:07 AM PST
by
rintense
To: codebreaker
I have been in situations similar to what the Yates went through (without the dead children, of course!). Let me tell you, I did not fall down on the job of making sure the kids were protected. I can't tell you what it cost me in my personal and business life. (How many of you have had a supervisor say, "the phone's for you - It's someone saying he just took an overdose and its all your fault"?)
I can tell you that it is not that easy to get help. It took me three years of taking my husband to doctors before they even realized the problem was not a "marital problem", it was a severe mental illness. (I knew it, but mentally ill people can have a gift for making you look like a major league liar once they get you in front of a doctor.) I have sat and yelled at hospital personnel for releasing an obviously psychotic man to home. I have had doctors not return calls and hospitals not admit. And you can't always get them in the car to get them to the ER, you know.
I have often wondered what horrible things must happen to uneducated people who don't have the chutzpah and persistance to "deal with the system". I personally know someone (a woman) who just "took off" and left her kids with a psychotic man who decided not to take his medication. (Mentally ill people often decide not to take medicine because, you see, they are "fine" - its everyone else who is nuts).
The doctors often don't have a clue and if you have no personal support system you are toast. If you are the kind of person who just does what they are told and has no one to help you can expect stuff like this to happen. Not excusing the husband - I would have never done the things he did - just letting you guys know it is NOT as easy as you think it might be.
To: All
According to what I read, Rusty left for work at 9:00 a.m. and his mother came over at 10:00 a.m. every morning.
I'm not sure he should be crucified here. I think he did everything he could, he couldn't very well not have worked. He had his mother there, Andrea was left for one hour a day.
To: codebreaker
What if Rusty saw that Andrea was a little wacked out that fateful morning, then whispered to her: "Today's the day. You can get rid of them for all I care." She dutifully called him afterwards...
To: rintense
Putting this guy in a prison where he'd become someone's b$#ch would be the ultimate in justice. That is a shameful thing to write. Homosexual rape is an intrinsic evil that has no relationship to justice.
To: Zviadist
I guess treating your family like prisoners is "traditionalist?" Having an incompetent person take care of your children when you know she was a danger to them "conservative?" This has nothing to do with one-income or homeschooling. These people make one-income families and homeschooling look bad.
It's a shame that you feel this way. Too many LEO's feel that way, too. Close ranks and cover for your own instead of rooting out the rogue cops. And they wonder why many people have a bad view of law enforcement.
To: Wild Irish Rogue
Why the hell were these parents of the year having so many damn kids in the first place?
To: Righter-than-Rush
Please refer to my thoughts at post 57 about what it REALLY means to be a good husband and father. Andrea said he was a good husband and father? Uh, earth to Righter-than-Rush, since that assessment came from a lunatic, I don't know if it carries an awful lot of credibility.
And again, politics ... and you brought it up by using the term "political correctness" ... has nothing to do with this situation.
68
posted on
03/16/2002 8:43:42 AM PST
by
GB
To: antaresequity
He should never have been allowed to have a "press conference" like that. I couldn't believe he was on when I turned on the TV. I immediately turned it off only to be even more amazed to see his lousy mug on the TV when I turned it back on some 30 minutes later.
Absolutely disgusting.
69
posted on
03/16/2002 8:43:47 AM PST
by
Wphile
To: Righter-than-Rush
Ruseel Yates knew for years that his wife had mental issues. In a psychiatric report, it is shown that he had to pry a knife out of her hands. And yet, after being told by doctors after their fourth child that they should not have any other children, he chose to do so! As I said before, the Yates verdict was correct and just. But her husband must bear some responsibility in all this.
70
posted on
03/16/2002 8:44:26 AM PST
by
rintense
To: Marty
As for blaming the medical profession--the man put his own wife at risk--aside from the children--because he continued to have children with her. IMO he is a control freak, and the pregancies were one of the ways he kept her under control. Did you recall the question at the press conference, where he was asked why they had more children, against the advice of her doctor, when past pregancies had already caused such huge problems? He said that during the previous episodes, it took trial and error and quite a bit of time to find a medication that worked for her (Haldol). So, "they" assumed that it would be OK for her to get pregant again. If (when) the symptoms came back they would know which medication worked. So in his mind, putting her at risk for further PPD, psychosis, or suicide attempts was OK just to get her pregnant and tie her down with yet another baby. No doubt in my mind she was lashing out at Rusty, not the kids. She has actually been in prison for a long time.
To: codebreaker
It's about time.
72
posted on
03/16/2002 8:45:06 AM PST
by
eleni121
To: RANGERAIRBORNE
To support you, Rusty said when he got home after the killiings "she finally did it",,now what does that mean other than he knew she contemplated it. One of the docs wrote and testified that when she saw andrea in the er prior to putting her under the dreadful Sayeed's lack of care, that Rusty didn't tell her the history,,he left out prior hospitilazations, etc,,she wasn't told of the extent of Andreas illness,,Rusty just must have thought the doc didn't need to know. Rusty also was begged by Andrea's nurse friend days before the killings to do something about her and he said after the weekend. She told Rusty she didn't think Andrea would make it thru the weekend and Rusty blew her off. And finally, he left a mute, stinking, crazy, not eating mother alone with a five month old baby that day and went to work,,he deserves a charge of reckless endangerment on that alone. He says noone told him how dangerous she was,,I think it will out that Andrea told him and he just ignored it. Andrea was telling him all along that having those kids and caring for them with no help, pent up in that house, was making her crazy. He just didn't hear. Odd, if I have a headache, my husband hears and helps. If he has a cold, I bring him soup and tell him he works to hard. If I cough, he runs out to the drugstore to get coughdrops. If I were in her condition, he would raise hell to get me help. Rusty, I don't have the words for a husband who is stone cold.
To: father_elijah
True, and maybe when my anger over this fool R. Yates dies down, I might feel differently.
74
posted on
03/16/2002 8:46:04 AM PST
by
rintense
To: grlfrnd
I guess that one hour was enough to drown 5 children.
To: codebreaker
I'm going to take what I think is the contrarian view here. Let's remember that the mother's physician took her off medications. He is the licensed professional here. Not only that, the mother was released from the hospital not too long before the murders. If they released her, are they not the party that suffers exposure here? If she wasn't fit to be released, they shouldn't have released her. I have zero sympathy for the father. His five kids are pushing up daisies and all he can find time to think about is his darling wife. My contempt for this guy goes without saying. But I do not believe he should be held criminally responsible for what happened.
Issue two...
I do not understand the question regarding whether this woman would be considered a danger to society if she was released. Is there any question regarding that? Holy cow, she just killed five of her own kids, yet the jury thinks there's a question as to whether she's a danger to society if she's released. Okay, color me biased here. In my opinion 12 zip! Fry the b---h!
To: Wild Irish Rogue
This man needs to see a psychiatrist to find out why he has this compulsion to prove the motility of his sperm.
And someone earlier made a negative crack about people on here saying they should've used birth control. OK, I'll go on record saying it. When it became evident to Russell Yates that his wife was a lunatic, he should've had a vasectomy, gotten birth control for her or practiced celibacy. Period. I don't have any problem with the big family. I came from a family of six kids. I do have a problem with five kids given the circumstances. There's nothing illegal about it ... but IMHO it was utterly and completely stupid.
77
posted on
03/16/2002 8:48:21 AM PST
by
GB
To: All
The morons on this thread calling for this guy to go to jail have obviously never had the unfortunate opportunity to care for a loved one who has a serious mental illness. I for one have.
You fools are not in the least bit aware of what it is you're crying for.
78
posted on
03/16/2002 8:51:09 AM PST
by
NevadaY
To: cactusSharp
REALLY HAPPENED What really happened is a women drowned her five kids and the father blames everyone but himself and his wife....And because she didn't get the death penalty, we will be treated to 40 years of candel light vigils, and the incesant wail of those who champion irresponsibility...I am sick of it.
There may have been complicit factors but they are not exculpatory...to defend Yates, and ostensibly absolve her [them] of responsibility is ridiculous.
The whole notion of Not Guilty by reason of Insanity exemplifys the liberal mindset. She is Guilty of first of Murder, despite the fact she may or maynot be insane.
This country should adopt Gulty and Insane as a verdict. We would save mountains of lawyer fees, and this jury would have returned the verdict in less than 5 minutes.
To: spectre
So it isn't hard, here folks. He was AWARE she wasn't on her medication, and he knew there were going to be episodes because of it. Still, knowing this, he left HIS children in her care. Unbelieveable. He's culpable.
Prepare to get flamed. I happen to agree 110% with you. He knew. She had a long history of problems. He knew his children might be in danger, yet he left them alone with that "woman" every day.
If my wife so much as even JOKED about doing something harmful to our children, I'd have them and me outta here in a heart-beat. A parent's first obligation is to their CHILDREN.
Damn' right he's culpable.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson