Yates not guilty by reason of insanity

[Guest guest]

Yates not guilty by reason of insanity

Jury reached verdict after three days

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/26/yates.trial.ap/index.html

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- After three days of deliberation, jurors found that

Yates was legally insane when she drowned her young children in a

bathtub.

The jury spent 11 hours Monday and Tuesday trying to determine if Yates was

legally insane. Wednesday morning, they reviewed the state's definition of

insanity and then asked to see a family photo and candid pictures of the

five smiling youngsters.

After about an hour of deliberations, they said they had reached a verdict.

In Yates' first murder trial, in 2002, the jury deliberated about four hours

before finding her guilty. That conviction was overturned on appeal.

In both trials, Yates, 42, pleaded innocent by reason of insanity. Under

Texas law, a person can be found insane if, because of a severe mental

illness, he or she does not know the crime is wrong.

The jury earlier asked to review the videotape of Yates' July 2001

evaluation by Dr. Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist who testified for

the defense that she did not know killing the children was wrong because she

was trying to save them from hell.

Resnick told jurors that Yates was in a delusional state and believed

6-month-old , 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old , 5-year-old and

7-year-old Noah would grow up to be criminals because she had ruined them.

Jurors later asked to review Yates' November 2001 videotaped evaluation by

Dr. Park Dietz, the state's expert witness whose testimony led an appeals

court to overturn Yates' 2002 capital murder conviction last year.

Dietz, a forensic psychiatrist, testified in her first trial that an episode

of the television series " Law & Order " depicted a woman who was acquitted by

reason of insanity after drowning her children. But no such episode existed.

State District Judge Belinda Hill barred attorneys in this trial from

mentioning that issue.

On Tuesday, after jurors asked for the trial transcript involving defense

attorney Parnham's questioning of Dietz about the definition of

obsessions, the judge brought the jury back into the courtroom.

The court reporter then read the brief transcript, in which Dietz said Yates

" believed that Satan was at least present. She felt or sensed the presence. "

Dietz had testified that Yates' thoughts about harming her children were an

obsession and a symptom of severe depression -- not psychosis.

Earlier Tuesday, jurors reviewed the slide presentation of the state's key

expert witness, Dr. Welner, a forensic psychiatrist who evaluated

Yates in May. He testified that she did not kill her children to save them

from hell as she claims, but because she was overwhelmed and felt inadequate

as a mother.

Yates will be committed to a state mental hospital, with periodic hearings

before a judge to determine whether she should be released -- although by

law, jurors are not allowed to be told that.

Prosecutors could not seek death this time because the first trial's jurors

sentenced her to life in prison, and authorities found no new evidence. She

is charged in only three of the deaths, which is common in cases involving

multiple slayings.

Regards,

You don't drown by falling in the water.

You drown by staying there.

[Guest guest]

Yates not guilty by reason of insanity

Jury reached verdict after three days

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/26/yates.trial.ap/index.html

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- After three days of deliberation, jurors found that

Yates was legally insane when she drowned her young children in a

bathtub.

The jury spent 11 hours Monday and Tuesday trying to determine if Yates was

legally insane. Wednesday morning, they reviewed the state's definition of

insanity and then asked to see a family photo and candid pictures of the

five smiling youngsters.

After about an hour of deliberations, they said they had reached a verdict.

In Yates' first murder trial, in 2002, the jury deliberated about four hours

before finding her guilty. That conviction was overturned on appeal.

In both trials, Yates, 42, pleaded innocent by reason of insanity. Under

Texas law, a person can be found insane if, because of a severe mental

illness, he or she does not know the crime is wrong.

The jury earlier asked to review the videotape of Yates' July 2001

evaluation by Dr. Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist who testified for

the defense that she did not know killing the children was wrong because she

was trying to save them from hell.

Resnick told jurors that Yates was in a delusional state and believed

6-month-old , 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old , 5-year-old and

7-year-old Noah would grow up to be criminals because she had ruined them.

Jurors later asked to review Yates' November 2001 videotaped evaluation by

Dr. Park Dietz, the state's expert witness whose testimony led an appeals

court to overturn Yates' 2002 capital murder conviction last year.

Dietz, a forensic psychiatrist, testified in her first trial that an episode

of the television series " Law & Order " depicted a woman who was acquitted by

reason of insanity after drowning her children. But no such episode existed.

State District Judge Belinda Hill barred attorneys in this trial from

mentioning that issue.

On Tuesday, after jurors asked for the trial transcript involving defense

attorney Parnham's questioning of Dietz about the definition of

obsessions, the judge brought the jury back into the courtroom.

The court reporter then read the brief transcript, in which Dietz said Yates

" believed that Satan was at least present. She felt or sensed the presence. "

Dietz had testified that Yates' thoughts about harming her children were an

obsession and a symptom of severe depression -- not psychosis.

Earlier Tuesday, jurors reviewed the slide presentation of the state's key

expert witness, Dr. Welner, a forensic psychiatrist who evaluated

Yates in May. He testified that she did not kill her children to save them

from hell as she claims, but because she was overwhelmed and felt inadequate

as a mother.

Yates will be committed to a state mental hospital, with periodic hearings

before a judge to determine whether she should be released -- although by

law, jurors are not allowed to be told that.

Prosecutors could not seek death this time because the first trial's jurors

sentenced her to life in prison, and authorities found no new evidence. She

is charged in only three of the deaths, which is common in cases involving

multiple slayings.

Regards,

You don't drown by falling in the water.

You drown by staying there.

[Guest guest]

Yates not guilty by reason of insanity

Jury reached verdict after three days

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/26/yates.trial.ap/index.html

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- After three days of deliberation, jurors found that

Yates was legally insane when she drowned her young children in a

bathtub.

The jury spent 11 hours Monday and Tuesday trying to determine if Yates was

legally insane. Wednesday morning, they reviewed the state's definition of

insanity and then asked to see a family photo and candid pictures of the

five smiling youngsters.

After about an hour of deliberations, they said they had reached a verdict.

In Yates' first murder trial, in 2002, the jury deliberated about four hours

before finding her guilty. That conviction was overturned on appeal.

In both trials, Yates, 42, pleaded innocent by reason of insanity. Under

Texas law, a person can be found insane if, because of a severe mental

illness, he or she does not know the crime is wrong.

The jury earlier asked to review the videotape of Yates' July 2001

evaluation by Dr. Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist who testified for

the defense that she did not know killing the children was wrong because she

was trying to save them from hell.

Resnick told jurors that Yates was in a delusional state and believed

6-month-old , 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old , 5-year-old and

7-year-old Noah would grow up to be criminals because she had ruined them.

Jurors later asked to review Yates' November 2001 videotaped evaluation by

Dr. Park Dietz, the state's expert witness whose testimony led an appeals

court to overturn Yates' 2002 capital murder conviction last year.

Dietz, a forensic psychiatrist, testified in her first trial that an episode

of the television series " Law & Order " depicted a woman who was acquitted by

reason of insanity after drowning her children. But no such episode existed.

State District Judge Belinda Hill barred attorneys in this trial from

mentioning that issue.

On Tuesday, after jurors asked for the trial transcript involving defense

attorney Parnham's questioning of Dietz about the definition of

obsessions, the judge brought the jury back into the courtroom.

The court reporter then read the brief transcript, in which Dietz said Yates

" believed that Satan was at least present. She felt or sensed the presence. "

Dietz had testified that Yates' thoughts about harming her children were an

obsession and a symptom of severe depression -- not psychosis.

Earlier Tuesday, jurors reviewed the slide presentation of the state's key

expert witness, Dr. Welner, a forensic psychiatrist who evaluated

Yates in May. He testified that she did not kill her children to save them

from hell as she claims, but because she was overwhelmed and felt inadequate

as a mother.

Yates will be committed to a state mental hospital, with periodic hearings

before a judge to determine whether she should be released -- although by

law, jurors are not allowed to be told that.

Prosecutors could not seek death this time because the first trial's jurors

sentenced her to life in prison, and authorities found no new evidence. She

is charged in only three of the deaths, which is common in cases involving

multiple slayings.

Regards,

You don't drown by falling in the water.

You drown by staying there.

[Guest guest]

Yates not guilty by reason of insanity

Jury reached verdict after three days

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/26/yates.trial.ap/index.html

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- After three days of deliberation, jurors found that

Yates was legally insane when she drowned her young children in a

bathtub.

The jury spent 11 hours Monday and Tuesday trying to determine if Yates was

legally insane. Wednesday morning, they reviewed the state's definition of

insanity and then asked to see a family photo and candid pictures of the

five smiling youngsters.

After about an hour of deliberations, they said they had reached a verdict.

In Yates' first murder trial, in 2002, the jury deliberated about four hours

before finding her guilty. That conviction was overturned on appeal.

In both trials, Yates, 42, pleaded innocent by reason of insanity. Under

Texas law, a person can be found insane if, because of a severe mental

illness, he or she does not know the crime is wrong.

The jury earlier asked to review the videotape of Yates' July 2001

evaluation by Dr. Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist who testified for

the defense that she did not know killing the children was wrong because she

was trying to save them from hell.

Resnick told jurors that Yates was in a delusional state and believed

6-month-old , 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old , 5-year-old and

7-year-old Noah would grow up to be criminals because she had ruined them.

Jurors later asked to review Yates' November 2001 videotaped evaluation by

Dr. Park Dietz, the state's expert witness whose testimony led an appeals

court to overturn Yates' 2002 capital murder conviction last year.

Dietz, a forensic psychiatrist, testified in her first trial that an episode

of the television series " Law & Order " depicted a woman who was acquitted by

reason of insanity after drowning her children. But no such episode existed.

State District Judge Belinda Hill barred attorneys in this trial from

mentioning that issue.

On Tuesday, after jurors asked for the trial transcript involving defense

attorney Parnham's questioning of Dietz about the definition of

obsessions, the judge brought the jury back into the courtroom.

The court reporter then read the brief transcript, in which Dietz said Yates

" believed that Satan was at least present. She felt or sensed the presence. "

Dietz had testified that Yates' thoughts about harming her children were an

obsession and a symptom of severe depression -- not psychosis.

Earlier Tuesday, jurors reviewed the slide presentation of the state's key

expert witness, Dr. Welner, a forensic psychiatrist who evaluated

Yates in May. He testified that she did not kill her children to save them

from hell as she claims, but because she was overwhelmed and felt inadequate

as a mother.

Yates will be committed to a state mental hospital, with periodic hearings

before a judge to determine whether she should be released -- although by

law, jurors are not allowed to be told that.

Prosecutors could not seek death this time because the first trial's jurors

sentenced her to life in prison, and authorities found no new evidence. She

is charged in only three of the deaths, which is common in cases involving

multiple slayings.

Regards,

You don't drown by falling in the water.

You drown by staying there.

[Guest guest]

yah know... she should be found not guilty based on lack of community

support.... the whole family ESPECIALLY the husband, the church and neighbors

were culpable for this! And I won't go off on the religious aspect anyway.

What she did makes it hard for any mother with emotional problems hang onto her

kids. There are some very well meaning people who will use this case to justify

the saving of children from their birth parents.... just frustrating... I would

like to add more but I got to run.

Obviously I have mixed feelings about the ruling.

Stella Farias

stella@...

-Secretary

Washington Families United

Office Address

1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 212

Olympia, WA 98501

Ph# 360-705-3233

http://www.washingtonfamiliesunited.org

~~Helping families in crisis stay together~~

http://newsblog.washingtonfamiliesunited.org

forward articles to submissions@...

www.embellishingoutrage.com

Personal Webspace

Yates not guilty by reason of insanity

Yates not guilty by reason of insanity

Jury reached verdict after three days

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/26/yates.trial.ap/index.html

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- After three days of deliberation, jurors found that

Yates was legally insane when she drowned her young children in a

bathtub.

The jury spent 11 hours Monday and Tuesday trying to determine if Yates was

legally insane. Wednesday morning, they reviewed the state's definition of

insanity and then asked to see a family photo and candid pictures of the

five smiling youngsters.

After about an hour of deliberations, they said they had reached a verdict.

In Yates' first murder trial, in 2002, the jury deliberated about four hours

before finding her guilty. That conviction was overturned on appeal.

In both trials, Yates, 42, pleaded innocent by reason of insanity. Under

Texas law, a person can be found insane if, because of a severe mental

illness, he or she does not know the crime is wrong.

The jury earlier asked to review the videotape of Yates' July 2001

evaluation by Dr. Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist who testified for

the defense that she did not know killing the children was wrong because she

was trying to save them from hell.

Resnick told jurors that Yates was in a delusional state and believed

6-month-old , 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old , 5-year-old and

7-year-old Noah would grow up to be criminals because she had ruined them.

Jurors later asked to review Yates' November 2001 videotaped evaluation by

Dr. Park Dietz, the state's expert witness whose testimony led an appeals

court to overturn Yates' 2002 capital murder conviction last year.

Dietz, a forensic psychiatrist, testified in her first trial that an episode

of the television series " Law & Order " depicted a woman who was acquitted by

reason of insanity after drowning her children. But no such episode existed.

State District Judge Belinda Hill barred attorneys in this trial from

mentioning that issue.

On Tuesday, after jurors asked for the trial transcript involving defense

attorney Parnham's questioning of Dietz about the definition of

obsessions, the judge brought the jury back into the courtroom.

The court reporter then read the brief transcript, in which Dietz said Yates

" believed that Satan was at least present. She felt or sensed the presence. "

Dietz had testified that Yates' thoughts about harming her children were an

obsession and a symptom of severe depression -- not psychosis.

Earlier Tuesday, jurors reviewed the slide presentation of the state's key

expert witness, Dr. Welner, a forensic psychiatrist who evaluated

Yates in May. He testified that she did not kill her children to save them

from hell as she claims, but because she was overwhelmed and felt inadequate

as a mother.

Yates will be committed to a state mental hospital, with periodic hearings

before a judge to determine whether she should be released -- although by

law, jurors are not allowed to be told that.

Prosecutors could not seek death this time because the first trial's jurors

sentenced her to life in prison, and authorities found no new evidence. She

is charged in only three of the deaths, which is common in cases involving

multiple slayings.

Regards,

You don't drown by falling in the water.

You drown by staying there.

[Guest guest]

yah know... she should be found not guilty based on lack of community

support.... the whole family ESPECIALLY the husband, the church and neighbors

were culpable for this! And I won't go off on the religious aspect anyway.

What she did makes it hard for any mother with emotional problems hang onto her

kids. There are some very well meaning people who will use this case to justify

the saving of children from their birth parents.... just frustrating... I would

like to add more but I got to run.

Obviously I have mixed feelings about the ruling.

Stella Farias

stella@...

-Secretary

Washington Families United

Office Address

1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 212

Olympia, WA 98501

Ph# 360-705-3233

http://www.washingtonfamiliesunited.org

~~Helping families in crisis stay together~~

http://newsblog.washingtonfamiliesunited.org

forward articles to submissions@...

www.embellishingoutrage.com

Personal Webspace

Yates not guilty by reason of insanity

Yates not guilty by reason of insanity

Jury reached verdict after three days

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/26/yates.trial.ap/index.html

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- After three days of deliberation, jurors found that

Yates was legally insane when she drowned her young children in a

bathtub.

The jury spent 11 hours Monday and Tuesday trying to determine if Yates was

legally insane. Wednesday morning, they reviewed the state's definition of

insanity and then asked to see a family photo and candid pictures of the

five smiling youngsters.

After about an hour of deliberations, they said they had reached a verdict.

In Yates' first murder trial, in 2002, the jury deliberated about four hours

before finding her guilty. That conviction was overturned on appeal.

In both trials, Yates, 42, pleaded innocent by reason of insanity. Under

Texas law, a person can be found insane if, because of a severe mental

illness, he or she does not know the crime is wrong.

The jury earlier asked to review the videotape of Yates' July 2001

evaluation by Dr. Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist who testified for

the defense that she did not know killing the children was wrong because she

was trying to save them from hell.

Resnick told jurors that Yates was in a delusional state and believed

6-month-old , 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old , 5-year-old and

7-year-old Noah would grow up to be criminals because she had ruined them.

Jurors later asked to review Yates' November 2001 videotaped evaluation by

Dr. Park Dietz, the state's expert witness whose testimony led an appeals

court to overturn Yates' 2002 capital murder conviction last year.

Dietz, a forensic psychiatrist, testified in her first trial that an episode

of the television series " Law & Order " depicted a woman who was acquitted by

reason of insanity after drowning her children. But no such episode existed.

State District Judge Belinda Hill barred attorneys in this trial from

mentioning that issue.

On Tuesday, after jurors asked for the trial transcript involving defense

attorney Parnham's questioning of Dietz about the definition of

obsessions, the judge brought the jury back into the courtroom.

The court reporter then read the brief transcript, in which Dietz said Yates

" believed that Satan was at least present. She felt or sensed the presence. "

Dietz had testified that Yates' thoughts about harming her children were an

obsession and a symptom of severe depression -- not psychosis.

Earlier Tuesday, jurors reviewed the slide presentation of the state's key

expert witness, Dr. Welner, a forensic psychiatrist who evaluated

Yates in May. He testified that she did not kill her children to save them

from hell as she claims, but because she was overwhelmed and felt inadequate

as a mother.

Yates will be committed to a state mental hospital, with periodic hearings

before a judge to determine whether she should be released -- although by

law, jurors are not allowed to be told that.

Prosecutors could not seek death this time because the first trial's jurors

sentenced her to life in prison, and authorities found no new evidence. She

is charged in only three of the deaths, which is common in cases involving

multiple slayings.

Regards,

You don't drown by falling in the water.

You drown by staying there.

[Guest guest]

yah know... she should be found not guilty based on lack of community

support.... the whole family ESPECIALLY the husband, the church and neighbors

were culpable for this! And I won't go off on the religious aspect anyway.

What she did makes it hard for any mother with emotional problems hang onto her

kids. There are some very well meaning people who will use this case to justify

the saving of children from their birth parents.... just frustrating... I would

like to add more but I got to run.

Obviously I have mixed feelings about the ruling.

Stella Farias

stella@...

-Secretary

Washington Families United

Office Address

1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 212

Olympia, WA 98501

Ph# 360-705-3233

http://www.washingtonfamiliesunited.org

~~Helping families in crisis stay together~~

http://newsblog.washingtonfamiliesunited.org

forward articles to submissions@...

www.embellishingoutrage.com

Personal Webspace

Yates not guilty by reason of insanity

Yates not guilty by reason of insanity

Jury reached verdict after three days

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/26/yates.trial.ap/index.html

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- After three days of deliberation, jurors found that

Yates was legally insane when she drowned her young children in a

bathtub.

The jury spent 11 hours Monday and Tuesday trying to determine if Yates was

legally insane. Wednesday morning, they reviewed the state's definition of

insanity and then asked to see a family photo and candid pictures of the

five smiling youngsters.

After about an hour of deliberations, they said they had reached a verdict.

In Yates' first murder trial, in 2002, the jury deliberated about four hours

before finding her guilty. That conviction was overturned on appeal.

In both trials, Yates, 42, pleaded innocent by reason of insanity. Under

Texas law, a person can be found insane if, because of a severe mental

illness, he or she does not know the crime is wrong.

The jury earlier asked to review the videotape of Yates' July 2001

evaluation by Dr. Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist who testified for

the defense that she did not know killing the children was wrong because she

was trying to save them from hell.

Resnick told jurors that Yates was in a delusional state and believed

6-month-old , 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old , 5-year-old and

7-year-old Noah would grow up to be criminals because she had ruined them.

Jurors later asked to review Yates' November 2001 videotaped evaluation by

Dr. Park Dietz, the state's expert witness whose testimony led an appeals

court to overturn Yates' 2002 capital murder conviction last year.

Dietz, a forensic psychiatrist, testified in her first trial that an episode

of the television series " Law & Order " depicted a woman who was acquitted by

reason of insanity after drowning her children. But no such episode existed.

State District Judge Belinda Hill barred attorneys in this trial from

mentioning that issue.

On Tuesday, after jurors asked for the trial transcript involving defense

attorney Parnham's questioning of Dietz about the definition of

obsessions, the judge brought the jury back into the courtroom.

The court reporter then read the brief transcript, in which Dietz said Yates

" believed that Satan was at least present. She felt or sensed the presence. "

Dietz had testified that Yates' thoughts about harming her children were an

obsession and a symptom of severe depression -- not psychosis.

Earlier Tuesday, jurors reviewed the slide presentation of the state's key

expert witness, Dr. Welner, a forensic psychiatrist who evaluated

Yates in May. He testified that she did not kill her children to save them

from hell as she claims, but because she was overwhelmed and felt inadequate

as a mother.

Yates will be committed to a state mental hospital, with periodic hearings

before a judge to determine whether she should be released -- although by

law, jurors are not allowed to be told that.

Prosecutors could not seek death this time because the first trial's jurors

sentenced her to life in prison, and authorities found no new evidence. She

is charged in only three of the deaths, which is common in cases involving

multiple slayings.

Regards,

You don't drown by falling in the water.

You drown by staying there.

[Guest guest]

yah know... she should be found not guilty based on lack of community

support.... the whole family ESPECIALLY the husband, the church and neighbors

were culpable for this! And I won't go off on the religious aspect anyway.

What she did makes it hard for any mother with emotional problems hang onto her

kids. There are some very well meaning people who will use this case to justify

the saving of children from their birth parents.... just frustrating... I would

like to add more but I got to run.

Obviously I have mixed feelings about the ruling.

Stella Farias

stella@...

-Secretary

Washington Families United

Office Address

1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 212

Olympia, WA 98501

Ph# 360-705-3233

http://www.washingtonfamiliesunited.org

~~Helping families in crisis stay together~~

http://newsblog.washingtonfamiliesunited.org

forward articles to submissions@...

www.embellishingoutrage.com

Personal Webspace

Yates not guilty by reason of insanity

Yates not guilty by reason of insanity

Jury reached verdict after three days

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/26/yates.trial.ap/index.html

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- After three days of deliberation, jurors found that

Yates was legally insane when she drowned her young children in a

bathtub.

The jury spent 11 hours Monday and Tuesday trying to determine if Yates was

legally insane. Wednesday morning, they reviewed the state's definition of

insanity and then asked to see a family photo and candid pictures of the

five smiling youngsters.

After about an hour of deliberations, they said they had reached a verdict.

In Yates' first murder trial, in 2002, the jury deliberated about four hours

before finding her guilty. That conviction was overturned on appeal.

In both trials, Yates, 42, pleaded innocent by reason of insanity. Under

Texas law, a person can be found insane if, because of a severe mental

illness, he or she does not know the crime is wrong.

The jury earlier asked to review the videotape of Yates' July 2001

evaluation by Dr. Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist who testified for

the defense that she did not know killing the children was wrong because she

was trying to save them from hell.

Resnick told jurors that Yates was in a delusional state and believed

6-month-old , 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old , 5-year-old and

7-year-old Noah would grow up to be criminals because she had ruined them.

Jurors later asked to review Yates' November 2001 videotaped evaluation by

Dr. Park Dietz, the state's expert witness whose testimony led an appeals

court to overturn Yates' 2002 capital murder conviction last year.

Dietz, a forensic psychiatrist, testified in her first trial that an episode

of the television series " Law & Order " depicted a woman who was acquitted by

reason of insanity after drowning her children. But no such episode existed.

State District Judge Belinda Hill barred attorneys in this trial from

mentioning that issue.

On Tuesday, after jurors asked for the trial transcript involving defense

attorney Parnham's questioning of Dietz about the definition of

obsessions, the judge brought the jury back into the courtroom.

The court reporter then read the brief transcript, in which Dietz said Yates

" believed that Satan was at least present. She felt or sensed the presence. "

Dietz had testified that Yates' thoughts about harming her children were an

obsession and a symptom of severe depression -- not psychosis.

Earlier Tuesday, jurors reviewed the slide presentation of the state's key

expert witness, Dr. Welner, a forensic psychiatrist who evaluated

Yates in May. He testified that she did not kill her children to save them

from hell as she claims, but because she was overwhelmed and felt inadequate

as a mother.

Yates will be committed to a state mental hospital, with periodic hearings

before a judge to determine whether she should be released -- although by

law, jurors are not allowed to be told that.

Prosecutors could not seek death this time because the first trial's jurors

sentenced her to life in prison, and authorities found no new evidence. She

is charged in only three of the deaths, which is common in cases involving

multiple slayings.

Regards,

You don't drown by falling in the water.

You drown by staying there.