Susan Murphy-Milano...

Is Andrea Yates going to get a new trial or will she plead out to some sort of deal? This makes no sense, regardless of what an expert testified too, the fact remains she murdered her five children.

You remember, Yates  the Texas woman that drowned her kids and then tried to plead insanity before the entire world.  Oh yes, and let’s not forgot a book or movie of the week deal coming to a home near you replaying the tragic events of innocent lives lost.    Her excuse was that she was insane at the time, and plead insanity.

A person is innocent until they are proven guilty. What I don’t understand how a small error, not done on purpose, negates a whole trial when that error had absolutely nothing to do with whether of not she killed her kids and knew what she was doing.

From the story:

A three-judge appeals court in Texas sided with a defense claim that Yates had been convicted three years ago partly on the false testimony of a prosecution expert witness. The state's First Court of Appeals struck down the convictions earlier this year, saying erroneous testimony by prosecution expert Dr. Park Dietz may have swayed the jury against her.

Dietz testified about a "Law & Order" episode in which a woman was acquitted by reason of insanity for drowning her children. No such episode exists.

Dietz said he became confused after prosecutors told him there was a "Law and Order" episode with that plot. Dietz -- who's also a consultant to the "Law & Order" producers, said he wrote that information down in his notes.

The Newport Beach, Calif., forensic psychiatrist called the error an "honest mistake." But regardless of his misstatement, he said he has no doubt Yates knew right from wrong when she drowned her children.

Dietz had attempted to correct his testimony. In a letter Dietz sent to the Harris County District Attorney's Office shortly after he testified, he admitted to his mistake.

It was a stupid error.  It changed nothing.  It would have been different had Dr. Dietz intentionally lied or if it proved she was nuts. 

"We don't believe isolated testimony on cross examination by one of our witnesses had such an impact that it defeated the reliability of all of the other testimony that was presented during the trail. So, that's why we're going to continue to pursue the matter. And that's one of the biggest reasons why we're disappointed," [ADA] Curry said. In other words it was a rock solid vase despite the erroneous remark.

A juror from the original trial said previously that testimony about that "Law & Order" episode did not affect their verdict.

Leona Baker said Dietz's testimony had no effect on the way jurors reached their verdict, and that she was disappointed the conviction was overturned.

"Personally, it made me feel a little discounted in what I did and what I invested my whole life in for a month," Baker said.

Andrea Yates deserves to spend the rest of her life in jail.  I would have voted to suspend her habit of wasting good oxygen.

This is pointless.  All it will do is wind up costing the taxpayers another huge chunk to come to the same result.  And we have better things to waste dollars on now don’t we?   Where is the outrage for the children, where are those voices who have come out against the death penalty or the war in Iraq?  Where are they when we need them? 

Susan Murphy-Milano www.movingoutmovingon.com