An insanity defense requires that an individual not be aware of their actions during a mental episode, and that is how Andrea Yates got away with the murderous drowning of her five children. On the other end of the spectrum, there is self-defense, which states that “based on the recognition that individuals have an inherent right to protect themselves and that to reasonably defend oneself from unlawful attack is a natural response to threatening situations” (Schmalleger & Hall, 2014) and protection of property; and this is the defense that Markus Kaarma attempted to use in order to justify the killing of a repeat intruder into his garage. In June 2001, Andrea Yates – a mother of five young children who had a history of mental issues and battled postpartum depression – drowned her children in the household bathtub in order to, as she claimed, save their souls from Satan (CNN, 2007). “Yates turned herself in immediately after the drowning deaths… because she thought her own death would fulfill a Biblical prophecy: If she were executed, Satan would be executed” (CNN, 2007) – during her psychosis, she believed that she was doing the right thing. Yates’ first trial, after only a few hours of deliberation, resulted in the jury finding her guilty of capital murder, but did not believe she should receive the death penalty, but rather life in prison (CNN, 2007). However, after an appeal and during her second trial, she was acquitted of the capital murder charges, and was only charged with the deaths of three out of five children as a result of her “insanity”, and sentenced to a lifelong stay in a treatment facility to receive mental help (CNN, 2007). How did she accomplish this; how was she only charged with three out of five deaths? There were numerous medical professionals that recognized that Yates had reoccurring mental issues including postpartum depression that could