Honey I Drowned Our 5 Kids Mrs. Yates Found Not Guilty!!!
Dateline: US
Author: Pit Bull
From: The Honor Network
Houston Mother Who Systematically Drowned her Five Children in the Family Bathtub Found not Guilty by Reason of Insanity
Well here we have another example for two justice systems (one for men and one for women). “Equality” where are you now! Mrs. Yates benefit from the old ways for women yet again in our modern times, and you won’t hear anyone crying out for equality in the mainstream press.
“If this were a man” kinda seems tiring to shout out, for it has gotten so common with no one seeming to care about how unjust it all is. Yet stick it in your cap and use it to modivate yourself is your activsim.
Mrs. Yates will be committed to a state mental hospital, with periodic hearings before a judge to determine whether she should be released on th public. She could have lived a life in prison if convicted, but I guess she is only a woman.
Her lawyers never disputed that Mrs. Yates killed her five children – 6-month-old Mary, 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old Paul, 5-year-old John and 7-year-old Noah – by drowning them over serveral hours in a bathtub of their suburban Houston home in June 2001.
The shear terror of the children awaiting their turn in the tub, must have been set aside out of the women’s superior motherly love trumping any brutal male backward form of revenge justice. How’s that slogan for the feminists!
In 2002 another jury found Yates guilty of murder in the deaths of three of her children. Due to erroneous testimony she will be out and about before long, and count on someone blaming a man or the church for her badness.
The old ways or the new ways seem to be used whenever a woman need them, while men get a mix of their own old and new, but always to their lose.
check out this link in todays sydney herald..http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,19924354-2862,00.html
Comment by starr — Thu 27th July 2006 @ 6:00 pm
Hi Starr,
I stayed in one of those homes and I can tell you personally they are the worst. Very strict religiously with little empathy of what it is to be a teenager. And when I say religiously I mean using the rod helps the child learn discipline.
And this is what can happen now that we open the door for rape going back 20 years and domestic violence. Now we can all go against people who did things back in the days when things were not \’in the best interest for the children.\’
Comment by julie — Thu 27th July 2006 @ 6:43 pm
Please excuse the spelling mistakes but I have to share the computer with teenagers.
Comment by julie — Thu 27th July 2006 @ 7:41 pm
HERES MORE
N A T I O N A L N E W S S T O R Y — local NZ papers
> Young most at risk at hands of family
> 27 July 2006
>
> The country’s smallest citizens are the most at risk
> of being killed by a family member, a new report from Child, Youth
> and Family (CYF) shows.
> >
> The report, released today, shows in the 10 years to
> 2003, the average rate of death from maltreatment for children
> under the age of one was 4.6 deaths per 100,000, more than three
> times the rate for 1-4 year olds (1.3 per 100,000), and eight times
> higher than the rate for 5-14 year olds (0.6 per 100,000).
>
> The report, Children at Increased Risk of Death from
> Maltreatment and Strategies for Prevention, shows 38 New Zealand
> children were killed in the five-year period to 2003, down from 50
> in the previous five-year period.
>
> The majority of young children were killed by family
> members, with NEWBORN BABIES MOST AT RISK FROM THEIR MOTHERS.
> Nearly all were killed by someone known to them.
Statistics showed children living in households with
an adult unrelated to them were almost 50 times as likely to die of
an inflicted injury as those living with two biological parents.- SO WHEN A CHILD IS BORN IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD, IT SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE BIOLOGICAL PARENTS TO PREVENT KILLINGS
>
> CYF deputy chief executive Ray Smith said the report
> offered valuable insight into the risks associated with fatal child
> maltreatment. — FROM PARENTS??
>
> > “The report reassures us that child homicide in New
> Zealand is a relatively rare occurrence,” he said.
>
> “It does, though, signal a need for us to focus
> greater attention to the care and protection needs of the younger
> child.”
>
> The report identified PARENTAL FACTORS which
> signalled greater risk for their children as poverty, low
> education, unemployment, being young, having poor mental health,
> including drug and alcohol abuse, being the victim of family
> violence and a history of criminal offending. The report emphasised
> the need for agencies dealing with families to work together.
>
> “Research shows that only one family in five WHERE A
> CHILD HOMICIDE HAS HAPPENED HAD PREVIOUS CONTACT WITH CHILD YOUTH
> AND FAMILY,” Mr Smith said. — SAYS IT ALL DOESN’T IT?
>
> “This tells us how important it is for agencies to
> work together across the spectrum of services in identifying early
> those families who need more support than others. — ARE THEY SERIOUS?
>
> “Building cross-sector capacity and providing a
> coordinated response has the potential to strengthen the safety net
> around vulnerable children and information from the report will be
> used to improve this,” Mr Smith said. — IS THIS REPORT FOR REAL? Has it been proof read for logics
Comment by starr — Fri 28th July 2006 @ 1:46 pm
I can’t imagine that staying in a psychiatric institution would be much better than being in prison. In the US there are psychiatric institutions for those who are a danger to society and they are probably no different from prisons. Certainly she is likely to be on medication which is a chemical strait jacket in itself.
Comment by New Zeal — Sat 29th July 2006 @ 1:02 pm
All you have to do is watch an infant, less than 1 year old and they are wary of strangers already. They know who their parents are and depend on them – the bond is made at birth.
And see the distress it puts the child in when they are away from thier parents for any amount of time.
And so in the great wisdom of CYFS they think
Wow, no wonder these people who make these decisions get paid the big bucks.
Comment by Moose — Sun 30th July 2006 @ 10:54 pm