Judge Ito would be overturning in his grave, were he dead

One of the big news stories today in Houston (and the nation, for whatever reason) appears to be the overturning of Andrea Yates’ conviction in the murder of her children. Why? Because a psychiatrist testifying for the prosecution lied about an episode of Law & Order that didn’t exist. I guess that makes sense if you think the jury made its decision believing that Yates was influenced by the television show.

I confess I know little about this case. Despite being a newspaper editor, I’d probably make for a good juror when they get around to trying Yates again. Or maybe not (I’m opposed to the death penalty). I don’t tend to follow these big stories. Maybe I get bored with them once the initial shock is over. And I have a double standard when it comes to the coverage. I don’t like the way television news stations report every twist and turn in a case like this or Scott Peterson’s, as if it’s really important to me. Then again, I understand the desire to hype, because if it were something I could run in my paper, I would cover it to death, too.

2 Comments so far

  1. Eva (unregistered) on January 6th, 2005 @ 4:13 pm

    I believe her husband should be put on trial…

  2. katya (unregistered) on January 7th, 2005 @ 5:43 pm

    Hype sells newspapers and gets people all nervous/crazy/addicted to CNN, both of which mean hypees get to enjoy all of the advertising corporate money can buy. News outlets love money!!! More hype for everyone!!! Hurray!!!

    Her husband should be put on trial? Really? Guess I don’t know much about this case either…. hmmm….

Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.