The outcomes of two capital murder cases involving mentally ill killers were vastly different.
By Dallas Morning News Editorial
Are Andre Thomas and Andrea Yates that dissimilar?
Before killing family members in what they claimed were attempts to save them from evil forces, both were severely mentally ill and hearing voices. However, Thomas, who was found guilty of capital murder, is scheduled to be executed in four months, while Yates, who was found not guilty by reason of insanity, remains confined to a state mental hospital, where she will most likely spend the rest of her life.
In the years since his estranged wife, their 4-year-old son, and her 1-year-old daughter were murdered in 2004, Thomas has goneuged out both of his eyes, swallowing one of them. Yates is a former Houston-area housewife who drowned her five children, ages 6 months to 7, in the family bathtub in 2001 while suffering from postpartum psychosis.
The similarities between the two cases highlight the troubling inconsistencies in the Texas criminal justice system when it comes to adjudicating mentally ill people. And they serve to highlight why the government should not be in the business of putting people to death. The United States Supreme Court declined to hear Thomas’ case in October, prompting Grayson County state District Judge Jim Fallon to set Thomas’ execution date for April 5 last month.
Thomas murdered his estranged wife, Laura Boren, 20, as well as their son, Andre Jr., and Boren’s daughter, Leyha Hughes. He removed a portion of Boren’s lung and the children’s hearts, believing all three were possessed. He then stabbed himself in the chest and died next to his dead wife. When he didn’t, he put the organs in his pocket and walked home. Thomas, who had a history of delusions and previous suicide attempts, turned himself in almost immediately and confessed to the killings. He told cops that he thought God wanted him to kill them.
Thomas went to the ER two days before the killings after stabbing himself in the chest. Thomas escaped from the hospital after a doctor suspected mental illness and ordered a psychiatric evaluation. He gouged out one of his eyes while in custody only a few days after the killings, ranting and delusional.
Nonetheless, Thomas was found competent to stand trial for capital murder less than a year later. The jury rejected his insanity defence, which prosecutors had challenged on the grounds that his mental illness was exacerbated by his voluntary drug use. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals upheld Thomas’ conviction, noting that he was clearly “crazy,” but also “sane” under Texas law. In this state, the standard is whether a defendant understood the difference between right and wrong at the time of the offence.
The fact that Thomas, a Black man, was convicted by an all-white jury is especially troubling. Boren was white, and Thomas’ appellate lawyers claimed that some members of the jury were wrongfully appointed after publicly opposing interracial marriage. Thomas removed and ate his other eye after being convicted and sentenced to death. Andrea Yates also had a history of severe mental illness and suicide attempts dating back to 1999, and in June 2001, shortly after her husband left for work, she held each of her five children underwater.
The former nurse had been hospitalized twice in the months leading up to the killings after being diagnosed with postpartum psychosis, and her doctor advised her not to be left alone. Yates’ condition worsened after her last discharge; she had been scratching bald spots on her scalp and later reported hearing voices speaking directly to her through the television. Yates drowned each of the children one by one after waiting until her husband left for work, laying all but the oldest side by side in a bed. Then she dialed 911.
Yates, like Thomas, immediately confessed after the killings, later claiming that she was trying to save the children from hell. A jury rejected her insanity defence in 2002, after she was found competent to stand trial for capital murder. It did, however, sentence her to life in prison rather than the death penalty. However, her conviction was overturned on appeal three years later after it was discovered that a forensic psychiatrist had given false testimony. A new jury found her not guilty by reason of insanity in 2006. Yates has been a patient at Kerrville State Hospital since 2007, and her lawyer, George Parnham, has stated that she prefers to remain there.
Thomas and Yates are two severely mentally ill people who committed heinous crimes but whose cases have resulted in vastly different outcomes. One of Thomas’ lawyers, Maurie Levin, stated that his defence team will continue to fight to keep Thomas alive. “He is one of the most mentally ill people ever sentenced to death,” she said. “We’re making a strong case that he’s ineligible to be executed.”
It is wrong that a case must be made to save him from death row. This newspaper took a stand against the death penalty in 2007, citing “the fact that it is both imperfect and irreversible.” We’ve long given up hope that inherently flawed humans can be trusted to administer the ultimate punishment. When the cases of Andre Thomas and Andrea Yates are viewed through the same lens of justice and humanity, they reinforce our concerns.