Yates Second Trial: The Insanity Defense

The stories about Andrea being insane and having a psychological disorder do not prove to be true. According to Dr. Puryear, “Mrs. Yates was insane at the time driven by delusions that they were going to hell and she must save them.” If her doctor was aware of her status before all this happened, why did he let her be at home? Yates should have been helped and treated, since Dr. Puryear claims she had suffered from psychotic delusions. Dr. Puryear said “This woman did not now right from wrong,” as he stated to Court Television Network, on February 2,2002. It is somewhat strange how Mr. Yates claims he had no suspicions of her being unhealthful in the mind. What kind of married couple will not be able to detect this in their partner? Some of the jurors believed Andrea was mentally ill, but they also believed that she knew right from wrong. This is a key element in determining if the Andrea meets the legal definition of insanity.

Sam Stevens lives in an apartment building owned by his landlord, Mr. Quinn, where he has been working on an invention that plays the sound of a barking dog to scare off potential intruders. A national chain store has contacted Mr. Stevens, and would like to sell his product exclusively. Despite the fact that Mr. Stevens and the store never signed a physical contract, he verbally told a store manager several months ago that he would ship 1,000 units. Now, the chain store has just contacted Mr. Stevens via letter, demanding that he deliver the promised 1,000 units immediately (Southern New Hampshire University, n.d.).

A Crime of Insanity is about a 26-year old psychology student names Ralph Tortorici. One day Ralph walked into his Greek History class at his State University of New York college campus in Albany, NY. When Ralph came to class, he had a hunting knife and a rifle hidden under his clothes. When he closed the door behind him, after entering his classroom, he told his class that he was taking them as hostages.

There are a few different types of insanity pleas in the court of law; however, just because someone pleads insane will try actually be found insane. About half of the states follow the "M 'Naughten" rule, based on the 1843 British case of Daniel M 'Naughten, a deranged woodcutter who attempted to assassinate the prime minister. He was acquitted, and the resulting standard is still used in 26 states in the U.S.: A defendant may be found not guilty by reason of insanity if "at the time of committing the act, he was laboring under such a defect of reason from disease of the mind as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know it, that he did not know what he was doing was wrong." (emphasis added) This test

In 1981 Steven Steinberg was accused of murdering his wife Elena Steinberg by stabbing her twenty-six times in Scottsdale, Arizona (Guy, 2015). At the time of the murder, Steinberg was the one who called law enforcement to report an attempted break-in at his home, even though no signs of force entry were found at the scene. During that time, the case drew a lot of publicity in the state of Arizona; not only because it was a horrifying crime, but because it was a case that involved a murder while sleepwalking. When the police linked him to the murder of his wife, Steinberg did not deny killing his wife but argued that he was not responsible for her murder because he claimed that he did not remember what happened and that he was sleepwalking at the time he committed the crime. Despite inventing the story about an attempted break-in at his home, the jury found him not guilty on the basis of being temporarily insane at the time of the murder, and walked away as a free man (Guy, 2015).

Theory is an attempt to explain the world around us. It is defined as a set of concepts, definitions, and propositions that projects a view of phenomena by designating specific interrelationships among concepts for purposes of describing, explaining and predicting phenomena. In the world of healthcare the nurse through the understanding of theories attempt to explain why nurses do what they do. Nursing theories are the creative products of nurses who seek to thoughtfully describe relationships and interactions that exist within nursing practice (Ingram, 2009).

The insanity defense was created to help protect people from the law, specifically those who due to serious mental illness could not be held accountable for their actions, regardless of how horrific they were. (Insanity, Religion, Terrorism 238) There should be no prejudice based on the mental deficiencies, incompetency, and mental illness of a person. Rather, the law should be malleable to be inclusive of everyone. The Constitution of United States represents the national framework of the government. The abolition of the insanity defense violates the Fourteenth Amendment, which is the Due Process Clause. Due Process Clause explicitly states no person shall be “deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law”, due process meaning fair procedures. Within the Constitution also lies the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishments. To put a mentally ill or incompetent person on stand is a cruel and unusual punishment. Therefore although the public does not have a full comprehension of how the insanity defense works, in order to abide by the United States Constitution insanity defense MUST be available in a criminal matter.

The drastic reduction of stable manufacturing work in American cities remains one of the biggest, if not the foremost, issue linked to poverty. The growth in blue-collar factory, transportation and construction jobs that were traditionally held by men has dissipated for a variety of reasons, from Globalization to the rise in Illegal Immigration. This structural change in the inner-city job market is of particular interest because of the amalgamation of both Economics and Poverty/Segregation issues. Without clearly defining and addressing this crucial structural issue, the war on poverty will be extremely difficult to successfully address and overcome.

The insanity defense has been quite a controversial subject. It has been used by some of the most baleful criminals in history. Its controversy derives from the belief that people who plead insanity are excused from the fault of their crimes. Surprisingly however, this defense is rarely used because of how hard it is to prove legal insanity. Less than one percent of criminals choose to plead insanity and of those who choose to plead insanity the success is quite low at 25 percent.( Rolf. p. 2) This defense has been around for centuries. It can be dated back to the 14th century. Kings were willing to pardon crimes to those who were deemed “mad”. By the 18th century the “ wild beast” test was developed by some English courts. However, the

The purpose of the insanity defense is to protect the defendants that are found to be mentally ill. Although insanity may be difficult to prove, it gives the opportunity for others to prove that they are not mentally competent to understand the severe degree of their actions. An accused that is not mentally stable, is not able to stand trial like every other criminal. They have to find a different approach during their trial. They cannot think rationally, and they are not in contact with reality so therefore, they have the chance to use the plea. The defense is idea to those who actually have a mental disorder or have a history of dealing with a mental disorder.

The insanity defense of Andrea Yates: The country was absolutely appalled when it heard that Yates, a mother of five children, had killed each of her children resulting in a horrific family slaughter. There were extremely polarized feelings about this case- sympathy (concluding

"Insanity is defined as a mental disorder of such severity as to render its victim incapable of managing his affairs or conforming to social standards." (Insanity, pg. 1) It is used in court to state that the defendant was not aware of what he/she was doing at the time of the crime, due to mental illnesses. But insanity is a legal, not a medical, definition. There is a difference between mental illness and going insane. Many problems are raised by the existence of the insanity defense. For example, determining the patient's true mental illness (whether they are faking or not), placement of the mentally ill after trial, the credibility of the psychological experts, the percentage of cases that are actually successful,

My major is professional development. I enjoy engaging and building rapport with people and understanding their values to make a difference to better their environment. In education I have learned to encourage others, explore and use interactive activities to demonstrate various ways to experience diversity. Interdisciplinary studies allows me to analyze, educate, and integrate cultural in a diverse communities. This semester I am taking an introduction to interdisciplinary studies, an interpersonal skills in leadership, analytical and information literacy, interdisciplinary critical thinking, and a capstone internship partnership courses, which helps me professionally. My capstone internship is, in counseling, at an elementary school. I like volunteering and working with community outreach programs. Education is a complex problem I will identify how to improve academic struggles in academics and peer victimization. My educational and career goals are in teaching elementary k-6 and work in my community to improve awareness in developing partnership. I didn’t met the requirements to pursue a teaching a degree, therefore, I changed my degree path to interdisciplinary studies. My career goal is to foster new ideas through networking, continue my career path in teaching, and receive a Master’s in Education.

In criminal cases where an insanity defense is used, the defense must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not responsible for his or her actions during a mental health breakdown. There are two forms of an insanity defense, cognitive and volitional. In order for an individual to meet the requirements for cognitive insanity it must be proven that the defendant had to be so impaired by a mental disease at the time of the act that they did not know the nature of what they were doing. If they are fully aware of their actions, one must prove that they didn’t know what they were doing was wrong. Volitional insanity, also known as irresistible impulse, states that the defendant is able to differentiate between right or wrong at the time, but suffered from a mental disease that made them unable to control themselves. Volitional insanity is common in crimes of vengeance, where very few states allow the use of this defense. The insanity defense should not be confused with incompetency. In incompetency cases, the individual is not able to understand the nature and consequences of the case, nor adequately able to help an attorney with his or her defense. The insanity defense reflects the approach that an individual who can’t acknowledge the consequences of their actions should not be punished for the crime. In most jurisdictions a professional is bought in to determine if the defendant was not able to differentiate between right or wrong at the time of the

My conclusion is that yes, Yates is sick, but I feel a strong possibility of her understanding the wrongness of her actions to the rest of society but in her opinion acted in the greater good based on religiously psychotic feeling of heaven and hell which was a foundation of making a decision to take her children’s lives while understanding it was wrong and should have been dealt with by a swifter and stronger hand of justice. My opinion aside this is the conclusion and information brought forth by unbiased research as to the case and analysis of Yates. Only one of a twelve mental health experts who testified concluded that the Yates was legally sane when she drowned her five children in the family bathtub.