This one’s from the No-Accounting-For-Taste Department. Yesterday, the Chron’s TechBlog had a great roundup of posts regarding the Andrea Yates verdict.
Unfortunately, the comments included this screwed-up one from Mindy Sterba, who writes for the Chron’s parenting blog:
She can babysit my kids!
Ha, what a joker! It’s comedy gold. Everyone loves some multiple-child-murder humor, especially from someone who blogs about parenting. Yeah, nothing is more hilarious than chasing your terrified children around the house and holding their struggling bodies underwater until the bubbles stop.
Sick.
Filed Under Uncategorized ·
Comments
22 Responses to “Chron blogger wants Yates as babysitter”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...LST Book Club
-
Defending Identity: Its Indispensable Role in Protecting Democracy
by Natan Sharansky -
Fear No Evil
by Natan Sharansky -
The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror
by Anatoly Shcharansky -
The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel's Soul
by Yoram Hazony -
Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There
by David Brooks -
Snobbery: The American Version
by Joseph Epstein -
A Conflict of Visions: Idealogical Origins of Political Struggles
by Thomas Sowell
And we care why?
I don’t even understand the humor in that comment.
Now now now. She only kills when The Devil tells her to.
Obviously, we need to have a restraining order set up. 500 yards and no phone calls or emails from The Devil.
Oh, and no access to the cartoons that were his handiwork in passing the “kill” message along, too.
I think the jury committed a travesty of justice. Yates may well have been bugnuts, but the NG by reason of bugnuts verdict means that as soon as the meds kick in, she’ll be back out on the street. as soon as she hits the street she’ll start flushing her haldol just like she was doing before the murders and she’ll be back out on the prowl to save some other person from Satan.
This woman is proof that the NG by insanity defense is funadmentally flawed and MUST be fixed.
Hey Dan, You listening here?
If you think Yates will ever be “back on the street” you are the one who’s nuts.
Didn’t Noah hear someone tell him to build a big boat? Who’s to say she didn’t actually hear from Satan? According to most religions he is real? Christianity’s main sales pitch is follow us and you wont go to hell. Whats so bad about hell? Satan? Food for thought.
Gregg, I think it’s a real possibility. John Hinckley shot the president, for Pete’s sake, and he did it for the craziest of reasons. He gets weekends off from the looney bin.
Yes, the possibility exists, and if she’s completely sane, then so be it, that’s how our system of justice works.
I know that is a hard concept for the death-mongers to comprehend.
OysterLad,
Here’s my problem. If a sane person kills 5 people, he’ll never get out of jail, right? We just wouldn’t be willing to take the chance on paroling that guy. He might look like a changed man, he might be remorseful, he might swear up and down that he’s found Jesus and wouldn’t hurt a fly. But we just can’t take that chance, even if it’s a small chance.
To me, this is a very similar situation. In 5 years, or 10, or whatever, she might look like a changed woman. She might be totally lucid and clear-headed, and she might swear up and down that she hasn’t had a psychotic thought in years and she wouldn’t hurt a fly. That’d be great and I would be happy for her cure. But I still wouldn’t take the chance.
The death-monger bit is getting old. We’ve been having a reasonable discussion, haven’t we? As I’ve said before, this has nothing to do with bloodlust or a desire for vengeance. It has to do with protecting society from a very dangerous person.
Ya’ll need to calm down. They aren’t gonna let her out after killing FIVE CHILDREN. Period
there used to be a concept called criminally insane, where a nutcase that is violent, can be locked away in a loony bin forever. in our “kinder gentler” world, that concept has gone out the window, but the need for it has not.
Look, my mother in law is bipolar and often suicidal when on the bottom depressed phase. she has on three occasions either popped a handfull of pills or threatened to chug a gallon of bleach. all three times, she was committed, medicated, and released. shortly thereafter she decided she didn’t like how the meds made her feel and quit taking them.
#9, we would all hope you are right, but the simple fact of the matter is that the law allows it. If the law allows it, some bleeding heart judge is probably going to do it.
Navymom, Hinckley shot four people, including the President of the United States, his press secretary, a Secret Service agent and a cop. They only survived because he was a lousy shot. Hinckley gets unsupervised furloughs.
If a would-be presidential assassin can get out, I have no confidence that Yates won’t.
What I find amazing is that a Harris County jury was split 8 to 4 for acquittal. How do four jurors do a 180 based on the evidence and testimony I heard? Heck, even Parnham and the judge were shocked by the verdict. If I start seeing these people on the MSM, I’ll know why.
#12 Ok, so glad you could point that out to me. You are so dang much smarter than I am. But I am sure no one has to tell you how smart you are.
Sheesh, you don’t have get all snippy.
But I forgive you, Navymom! I’ll chalk it up to temporary insanity
Yep, i missed my pudding this morning with the funny powder on top!
At the risk of lurching back toward realistic discussion……
Didn’t Ms.Yates get tried (and convicted the first time) on the charge of murdering three (not five) of her children? I thought at the time that it was odd. But the question I now have is whether that fact opens the door for a new trial on murder for the other two children.
Long-range contingency plan, perhaps?
– Ken
#7 ClamBoy
Excuse me? “the death-mongers”???!!!
What would that phrase make Andrea Yates?
– Ken
Ken
The official line from the DA’s office is they have not decided.
I don’t look for them to do it though since they “lost” this one.
Deacon,
I was on the jury. Our first vote was 8-4. We were at 11-1 by the middle of the second day of deliberation, after three wanted to review testimony. We listened to 36 days of testimony and were not allowed to bring our notes into deliberation. The final jurour who originally voted guilty, decided to change her vote after reviewing even more testimony. We were a very close and intellegent jury and did not force views on anyone. Ground rules were created for that reason alone.
Also, what testimony did you hear? Were you present for all 36 days? Even one day? Or did you just rely on the press? Have you ever served on a jury?
There is no doubt in my mind we returned the correct verdict based on all the testimony and evidence. I will not retry this case in this forum, but I’ll be glad to answer any questions.
Also, all of us just wanted to return to our lives and avoid the press. We agreed to let our forman address the press when the judge suggested a press comference. We agreed to be present for his support. He agreed to one interview on Good Morning America, and then returned to his private life.
#20, would you have ruled the same way had you been told that she could be out by years end? See my latest post for what can happen.
I wasn’t on the jury, but based on some of the things I’ve read and what I know of psychiatric medication, it seems to me that this woman was completely brainwashed by a psychopathic fire and brimstone nutcase that she and her husband followed. From my reading of it, it would seem that she was mistreated by her husband, who left her with the responsibility of five children when she was depressed and grieving.
The medications that they put her on can, in and of themselves cause psychosis.
First, religious fervor leads to crazy making black and white thinking. Then the doctor who treated her was utterly irresponsible in the way he gave her medication. The medication themselves cause suicidality and homicidality.
People who NEVER had those feelings BECOME suicidal and homicidal on those medications.
I would not be surprised if it was her husband who actually got her to kill her own children. Based on what I’ve read, he sounds like a piece of work. I would not be surprised if he made her weak and malleable and got her to do his bidding because she was so weakened and brainwashed by all that had happened to her.