Quote:
|
Quote by: whoracle This bothers me on so many levels that I can't even begin to discuss it without becoming somewhat irritated.
What are your thoughts on these three cases (Schlosser, Yates & Laney)? They all involve the use of religion as motivation. Although I doubt it has much bearing, they're also within the same state.
I'm almost given over to the idea that the only reason Yates was actually found guilty is that she killed all five instead of stopping, as if that means something. She was on several meds for serious mental illness well before she snapped and drowned her children.
Do you believe these three cases might have been handled differently elsewhere in the country?
Why is it that TX of all places did not enforce capital punishment in the murder of 5 children? |
I believe that Yates woman was a cold-blooded killer. To drown your children goes beyond mental-illness. It's too heinous. She obviously didn't act totally mental or the husband wouldn't have left her alone with the kids, although I still think he was mental to some degree as well. Mental finds mental if you catch my drift. He had problems with being too religious before she did. They lived on a school bus for quite a long time which is absurd when you have children.
Cases where they kill one child I think would be different, heinous, but different.
I think they are mentally ill, but I don't think all mental illness makes you kill, or have that desire. The religion factor to me probably is what cracks these women, and it seems to be women mostly. I think women tend to believe in a stronger way. Just an observation.
I don't know why they didn't give the Yates woman the death penalty, possibly cause being alive is more punishment for her.
Women usually do a stint in a mental hospital and in a year or so get out. I think a man/father might get a different sentence, and it would be the death penalty.