Post by SoulTrainOz on Jun 20, 2006 7:05:56 GMT -5
Five years later, experts say lack of death-penalty component could work in her favour
By PEGGY O'HARE, Houston Chronicle
Five years to the day after Andrea Yates systematically drowned her five children in a bathtub, a new panel of potential jurors will be summoned to downtown Houston on Tuesday in preparation for her new trial.
The first half of a 120-person panel will begin answering questionnaires intended to help attorneys gauge who can fairly and impartially decide whether Yates knew right from wrong when she killed her children in their Clear Lake-area home.
The remaining panelists will go through the process Wednesday, with jury selection to begin the following day. The trial, which is expected to last about a month, will begin June 26.
Few, if any, of those involved in the case might have imagined they would have to repeat this laborious task when Yates first went on trial four years ago. But everything changed when the state's sole mental health expert testified mistakenly about a TV program he claimed had been broadcast just before the drownings.
Forensic psychiatrist Park Dietz - a consultant to the Law & Order TV series - told jurors in Yates' first trial about an episode portraying a woman who drowned her children and was found not guilty by reason of insanity.
After Yates' conviction, it was discovered that no such episode existed.
As a result, an appeals court threw out Yates' capital murder conviction last year, citing concerns that Dietz's error may have swayed the jury's judgment. With recent plea negotiations going nowhere, a new trial was inevitable.
"This is a classic case that probably has to be tried," said Gerald Treece, a constitutional law professor at the South Texas College of Law. "The government's doing its job and the defense is doing its job. And there's no compromise."
Not guilty plea
Yates has once again pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity. Perhaps the biggest difference this time is that jurors will not be able to consider the death penalty if they convict her, since she was sentenced to life in prison in her first trial.
As a result, this jury will be chosen much more quickly than the first. And Yates could benefit by ending up with a more liberal jury, since death-penalty opponents will not automatically be excluded, one consultant said.
"That's going to change the dynamics of the jury pool pretty dramatically," said Houston jury consultant Ellen Finlay. "All those people who might be more moderate jurors and more concerned with her mental issues are not likely to be disqualified this time, which could mean a better jury panel for her."
The passage of time since the drownings likely will help Yates, another consultant said.
"It may be she's convicted again by another jury, even though the shock has worn off. But I think the public will be much more understanding if she is not convicted than they would have been in the first trial," said Dr. Richard Waites, a board-certified trial lawyer and chief trial psychologist for The Advocates, a jury consultant service.
That doesn't mean the jurors' task will be easier this time, however. They will endure yet another account of what Yates and her children experienced and will sift through medical experts' opposing opinions before deciding whether the former homemaker knew that drowning her children was wrong.
History of mental illness
Yates, a former M.D. Anderson Cancer Center nurse, had a history of mental illness, hospitalizations and suicide attempts before she killed her children June 20, 2001. Her husband, Russell, who has since divorced her, had taken her to doctors and hospitals, but her mental condition deteriorated rapidly after her father died months before the drownings.
Yates was home alone with her children, ranging in age from 6 months to 7 years, when she drowned them in a bathtub, one at a time, after her husband left for work. She then calmly called Houston police.
The tragedy ignited a bitter debate across the country. Many people were outraged and demanded that the parents be held accountable, while others pleaded for compassion for the mother, who suffered from postpartum depression and schizophrenia.
Prosecutors did not hesitate to bring Yates to trial again.
"She killed five children. This case is about a woman charged with capital murder," said Harris County prosecutor Kaylynn Williford, who has been on the case since the beginning. "Why should she get any special treatment? She committed a crime and she should be held accountable."
A defendant can be mentally ill and still be criminally responsible,
Williford said.
"Based on everything that we have seen and reviewed (in this case), that's what the evidence supports," she said.
Yates' attorneys earlier this year rejected a plea offer that would have put her in prison for 35 years, saying she needs to be in a mental hospital.
"You're basically talking about a life sentence if we take the plea," said defense attorney Wendell Odom, noting that Yates is 41 years old.
Odom said the state parole board has been reluctant to grant early release for people convicted of such high-profile crimes.
The new trial - again in the court of state District Judge Belinda Hill - will follow a course similar to that of the first one, attorneys predict. Many of the same witnesses are expected to testify, and much of the same evidence will be presented.
However, there could be some new elements. One is the addition of Dr. Michael Welner, the state's new mental health expert, who evaluated Yates during a two-day period last month at Rusk State Hospital, where she has been confined while awaiting her new trial.
Welner, a well-known forensic psychiatrist at the New York University School of Medicine, is founder and chairman of The Forensic Panel, which touts itself as the country's first peer-reviewed forensic practice. Prosecutors said they have not yet received his findings.
And then, there is Yates' mail. Prosecutors have obtained copies of more than 200 letters she wrote while in custody, but they have not revealed the contents. The letters could be introduced as new evidence.
Cellmate's account
Prosecutors also have a statement from a former cellmate who stepped forward last year to report what she said was Yates' chilling account of the drownings during a conversation in 2002.
Felicia Doe, 28, of Alvin, who has been subpoenaed to testify, said Yates described locking the doors of her home before the drownings so nobody could get inside or out.
Doe told authorities that Yates described chasing her oldest son, 7-year-old Noah, through the house and hitting his head against the bathtub to incapacitate him because he was crying so hard he was throwing up, court papers show. Doe also said Yates showed no remorse for the drownings and advised her on how to feign mental illness to "beat" her case.
Prosecutors do not expect to use a tape-recorded statement from Lanette Licatino, another former cellmate, who died two months after meeting with them last year.
Licatino, 33, of Friendswood, had reported that Yates told her the children "were just too much" and that Yates described feeling trapped at home because she didn't want to lose her husband.
The Harris County Medical Examiner's Office ruled that Licatino died of natural causes.
Yates' attorneys have suggested that presenting testimony from a former cellmate could be risky.
"The idea that, somehow or another, (Yates) was faking this (mental illness) - I don't think you can find a self-respecting doctor in the country who is willing to say that," Odom said.
What this jury will decide is anyone's guess, Treece said, since even the experts disagree.
"Everything just turns on which 12 people wind up on this jury," he said. "You have experts from both sides who say exactly different things ... It just shows the legal system sometimes doesn't know quite what to do with a situation."
Source : Houston Chronicle
www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/3981522..html
By PEGGY O'HARE, Houston Chronicle
Five years to the day after Andrea Yates systematically drowned her five children in a bathtub, a new panel of potential jurors will be summoned to downtown Houston on Tuesday in preparation for her new trial.
The first half of a 120-person panel will begin answering questionnaires intended to help attorneys gauge who can fairly and impartially decide whether Yates knew right from wrong when she killed her children in their Clear Lake-area home.
The remaining panelists will go through the process Wednesday, with jury selection to begin the following day. The trial, which is expected to last about a month, will begin June 26.
Few, if any, of those involved in the case might have imagined they would have to repeat this laborious task when Yates first went on trial four years ago. But everything changed when the state's sole mental health expert testified mistakenly about a TV program he claimed had been broadcast just before the drownings.
Forensic psychiatrist Park Dietz - a consultant to the Law & Order TV series - told jurors in Yates' first trial about an episode portraying a woman who drowned her children and was found not guilty by reason of insanity.
After Yates' conviction, it was discovered that no such episode existed.
As a result, an appeals court threw out Yates' capital murder conviction last year, citing concerns that Dietz's error may have swayed the jury's judgment. With recent plea negotiations going nowhere, a new trial was inevitable.
"This is a classic case that probably has to be tried," said Gerald Treece, a constitutional law professor at the South Texas College of Law. "The government's doing its job and the defense is doing its job. And there's no compromise."
Not guilty plea
Yates has once again pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity. Perhaps the biggest difference this time is that jurors will not be able to consider the death penalty if they convict her, since she was sentenced to life in prison in her first trial.
As a result, this jury will be chosen much more quickly than the first. And Yates could benefit by ending up with a more liberal jury, since death-penalty opponents will not automatically be excluded, one consultant said.
"That's going to change the dynamics of the jury pool pretty dramatically," said Houston jury consultant Ellen Finlay. "All those people who might be more moderate jurors and more concerned with her mental issues are not likely to be disqualified this time, which could mean a better jury panel for her."
The passage of time since the drownings likely will help Yates, another consultant said.
"It may be she's convicted again by another jury, even though the shock has worn off. But I think the public will be much more understanding if she is not convicted than they would have been in the first trial," said Dr. Richard Waites, a board-certified trial lawyer and chief trial psychologist for The Advocates, a jury consultant service.
That doesn't mean the jurors' task will be easier this time, however. They will endure yet another account of what Yates and her children experienced and will sift through medical experts' opposing opinions before deciding whether the former homemaker knew that drowning her children was wrong.
History of mental illness
Yates, a former M.D. Anderson Cancer Center nurse, had a history of mental illness, hospitalizations and suicide attempts before she killed her children June 20, 2001. Her husband, Russell, who has since divorced her, had taken her to doctors and hospitals, but her mental condition deteriorated rapidly after her father died months before the drownings.
Yates was home alone with her children, ranging in age from 6 months to 7 years, when she drowned them in a bathtub, one at a time, after her husband left for work. She then calmly called Houston police.
The tragedy ignited a bitter debate across the country. Many people were outraged and demanded that the parents be held accountable, while others pleaded for compassion for the mother, who suffered from postpartum depression and schizophrenia.
Prosecutors did not hesitate to bring Yates to trial again.
"She killed five children. This case is about a woman charged with capital murder," said Harris County prosecutor Kaylynn Williford, who has been on the case since the beginning. "Why should she get any special treatment? She committed a crime and she should be held accountable."
A defendant can be mentally ill and still be criminally responsible,
Williford said.
"Based on everything that we have seen and reviewed (in this case), that's what the evidence supports," she said.
Yates' attorneys earlier this year rejected a plea offer that would have put her in prison for 35 years, saying she needs to be in a mental hospital.
"You're basically talking about a life sentence if we take the plea," said defense attorney Wendell Odom, noting that Yates is 41 years old.
Odom said the state parole board has been reluctant to grant early release for people convicted of such high-profile crimes.
The new trial - again in the court of state District Judge Belinda Hill - will follow a course similar to that of the first one, attorneys predict. Many of the same witnesses are expected to testify, and much of the same evidence will be presented.
However, there could be some new elements. One is the addition of Dr. Michael Welner, the state's new mental health expert, who evaluated Yates during a two-day period last month at Rusk State Hospital, where she has been confined while awaiting her new trial.
Welner, a well-known forensic psychiatrist at the New York University School of Medicine, is founder and chairman of The Forensic Panel, which touts itself as the country's first peer-reviewed forensic practice. Prosecutors said they have not yet received his findings.
And then, there is Yates' mail. Prosecutors have obtained copies of more than 200 letters she wrote while in custody, but they have not revealed the contents. The letters could be introduced as new evidence.
Cellmate's account
Prosecutors also have a statement from a former cellmate who stepped forward last year to report what she said was Yates' chilling account of the drownings during a conversation in 2002.
Felicia Doe, 28, of Alvin, who has been subpoenaed to testify, said Yates described locking the doors of her home before the drownings so nobody could get inside or out.
Doe told authorities that Yates described chasing her oldest son, 7-year-old Noah, through the house and hitting his head against the bathtub to incapacitate him because he was crying so hard he was throwing up, court papers show. Doe also said Yates showed no remorse for the drownings and advised her on how to feign mental illness to "beat" her case.
Prosecutors do not expect to use a tape-recorded statement from Lanette Licatino, another former cellmate, who died two months after meeting with them last year.
Licatino, 33, of Friendswood, had reported that Yates told her the children "were just too much" and that Yates described feeling trapped at home because she didn't want to lose her husband.
The Harris County Medical Examiner's Office ruled that Licatino died of natural causes.
Yates' attorneys have suggested that presenting testimony from a former cellmate could be risky.
"The idea that, somehow or another, (Yates) was faking this (mental illness) - I don't think you can find a self-respecting doctor in the country who is willing to say that," Odom said.
What this jury will decide is anyone's guess, Treece said, since even the experts disagree.
"Everything just turns on which 12 people wind up on this jury," he said. "You have experts from both sides who say exactly different things ... It just shows the legal system sometimes doesn't know quite what to do with a situation."
Source : Houston Chronicle
www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/3981522..html