A Texas jury has found Deanna Laney not guilty by reason of insanity in the stoning deaths of her two children and maiming of a third. What's the difference between Ms. Laney and Andrea Yates? None that we can see. Both were deeply religious, both home-schooled their children. Yates' lawyer, George Parnum, explains the similarities here.

What's the difference in their cases? First, Deanna Laney was tried by a Tyler, Texas jury that was not qualified as a death-penalty jury because the state didn't seek the death penalty in her case. Andrea Yates' jury was a death-qualified jury. Studies show that death qualified juries are more likely to convict in the guilt phase. We think it's likely death qualified jurors are also less likely to find a defendant not guilty by reason of insanity.

The second difference in the cases is that in the Laney case, all of the experts (those retained by the prosecution, defense and judge) agreed that Ms. Laney was insane. In the Yates case, the prosecution's expert did not agree with the insanity finding. It's interesting that the prosecution used the same expert in both cases, psychiatrist Park Dietz.

Call it what you want, but both women were delusional and likely insane. We fail to see any difference between their cases. One goes to jail for life. One goes to a mental hospital until such time as medical doctors determine she's no longer insane. One has a chance at treatment and recovery, one doesn't.