"Affluenza" Defense for Vehicular Manslaughter - Teen Gets Probation for 4 Deaths

[Dakine10 5,452]

“There can be no doubt that he will be in another courthouse one day blaming the lenient treatment he received here.”

Tarrant County prosecutor Richard Alpert, in arguing for jail time for Ethan Couch

Yep. The next time he F's up, his lawyers can blame it on this judge for being too lenient. It's the catch 22 defense

[Penny Lane 8,159]

You do it all the time! to bad you dont see what your preachin! From the mouth comes words of love. the hypocricy is always hidden via your acts.

You're a mess.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So do people here think that minors should be put into adult jails?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Marc, I think you should be banned from posting anything that includes a vowel.

[GandD 5,966]

So do people here think that minors should be put into adult jails?

I don't think you can draw black and white lines. A kid that's 17 years and 364 days old shoots a guy in the head and a kid that's 18 years old should receive the same treatment. Enough credit is not given to the judges in some cases. As the law can be difficult to write/apply to ALL situations, our judges should be able to ascertain the common sense application of the law. They will of course make mistakes but they'll get a lot right. Nothings perfect.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I had a friend whose then 17 year old son was looking at a full rape charge (for something that was clearly not that) and was held in an adult jail for weeks pending a hearing. They wanted to jail him for 25 to life for that and the judge would have heard the case. Totally outrageous.

[GandD 5,966]

I had a friend whose then 17 year old son was looking at a full rape charge (for something that was clearly not that) and was held in an adult jail for weeks pending a hearing. They wanted to jail him for 25 to life for that and the judge would have heard the case. Totally outrageous.

No doubt. Its also ludicrous to charge an 18 year old with statutory rape for having consensual sex with their 17 year old girl friend.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

That was basically what it was.

[GandD 5,966]

That's a shame. But you can't really legislate anything to fix that. Human error or opinion will tend to muck up things so what can you do? Make your voice known when such errors affect you.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I've read several cases where closed murder cases in the US haven't been reopened even when there is new evidence that casts clear doubt on the conviction. The prevailing attitude seems to be that the wrong person in the frame is better than noone.

[Peikko 1,575]

Actually, no. You claim that affluence wasn't the basis for the defense. It clearly was. In fact, affluence was the defense. And the verdict was below the minimum of the sentencing guidelines for the crime which is the very definition of getting off easy. These are the two items that are discussed and they are both as clear as can be. He got off easy on the grounds of an affluence defense that a judge oddly happened to buy into.

That looks rough.

Oh good lord:

Couch’s attorneys argued his parents were responsible for the teen’s actions that night because of the way he had been raised. Defense attorneys put a psychologist on the stand who testified Couch was a product of wealth and got whatever he wanted. The psychologist also testified the teen was allowed to drink at a very young age and began driving at 13 years old. Defense attorneys argued Couch needed treatment, not jail and suggested a facility that costs almost half a million dollars a year.

The defense is not 'he's rich so we have to let him off'. The argument is that because he parents did not supervise his upbringing in any meaningful way he has turned into an alcoholic who does not recognise any boundaries. That's not a product of being rich or affluent, that's a product of having bad, basically abusive parents and this can happen in any family, rich, poor or in between. The idea that the judge was swayed by the fact that he was rich is ludicrous and I have no idea why anyone would argue that it is except that they have read the article and bought into this nutty idea.

As for the treatment center - if the issue is that he is an alcoholic, does it really matter what the treatment center looks like? I have no idea why that's relevant.

I hope there is a way to charge the parents for this crime as they are responsible for this tragedy if anyone is.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Oh good lord:

Couch’s attorneys argued his parents were responsible for the teen’s actions that night because of the way he had been raised. Defense attorneys put a psychologist on the stand who testified Couch was a product of wealth and got whatever he wanted. The psychologist also testified the teen was allowed to drink at a very young age and began driving at 13 years old. Defense attorneys argued Couch needed treatment, not jail and suggested a facility that costs almost half a million dollars a year.

The defense is not 'he's rich so we have to let him off'. The argument is that because he parents did not supervise his upbringing in any meaningful way he has turned into an alcoholic who does not recognise any boundaries. That's not a product of being rich or affluent, that's a product of having bad, basically abusive parents and this can happen in any family, rich, poor or in between. The idea that the judge was swayed by the fact that he was rich is ludicrous and I have no idea why anyone would argue that it is except that they have read the article and bought into this nutty idea.

As for the treatment center - if the issue is that he is an alcoholic, does it really matter what the treatment center looks like? I have no idea why that's relevant.

I hope there is a way to charge the parents for this crime as they are responsible for this tragedy if anyone is.

No, the defense was that the teen suffered from "affluenza". Read the articles for crying out loud.

[Karee 4,190]

Oh good lord:

Couch’s attorneys argued his parents were responsible for the teen’s actions that night because of the way he had been raised. Defense attorneys put a psychologist on the stand who testified Couch was a product of wealth and got whatever he wanted. The psychologist also testified the teen was allowed to drink at a very young age and began driving at 13 years old. Defense attorneys argued Couch needed treatment, not jail and suggested a facility that costs almost half a million dollars a year.

The defense is not 'he's rich so we have to let him off'. The argument is that because he parents did not supervise his upbringing in any meaningful way he has turned into an alcoholic who does not recognise any boundaries. That's not a product of being rich or affluent, that's a product of having bad, basically abusive parents and this can happen in any family, rich, poor or in between. The idea that the judge was swayed by the fact that he was rich is ludicrous and I have no idea why anyone would argue that it is except that they have read the article and bought into this nutty idea.

As for the treatment center - if the issue is that he is an alcoholic, does it really matter what the treatment center looks like? I have no idea why that's relevant.

I hope there is a way to charge the parents for this crime as they are responsible for this tragedy if anyone is.

Yeah blame the parents. Another way this kid can avoid taking any responsibility for his actions. His parents and the courts have set a precedent that he can blame his poor upbringing for any bad decisions he makes.

I predict this kid has a long future in prison ahead of him, because he's surely been given the message by the legal system and his parents that there are minimal consequences for killing multiple people.

I don't think the kid should've gotten 20 years either, but he should spend a few years in prison.

I was in constant legal trouble as a teenager and never took any of it seriously because they just kept letting me go over and over and over with rehabs, and what not. I was a master at manipulating my parents and blaming everything on them. They bought it hook line and sinker. So did the courts. When I turned 18 I was in legal trouble again and was given probation. Of course I still didn't take it seriously due to my previous experience. After a few minor probation violations, a federal judge gave me the max prison sentence (5 years) for violating my probation. Probably the best thing that ever happened to me looking back on it now.

While on the surface it seems like they're helping this kid, they're actually setting him up for failure.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

While on the surface it seems like they're helping this kid, they're actually setting him up for failure.

Bingo. From what I've read, this multiple kill and maim wasn't his first offense. And with this sentence, the judge pretty much made sure that it won't be his last.

[Ban Hammer 13,407]

Texas man who lost wife and daughter to rich kid drunk driver fuming over sentence

The Texas father whose wife and daughter were killed after being hit by a drunk driver criticized Tuesday’s probation ruling sparing the teen repeat offender responsible from prison time because of his rich upbringing.

“For 25 weeks, I’ve been going through a healing process,” Eric Boyles told CNN host Anderson Cooper Wednesday night. “And so when the verdict came out, I mean, my immediate reaction is, I’m back to Week 1. We have accomplished nothing here. My healing process is out the window.”

Boyle’s wife and daughter, Hollie and Shelby Boyles, along with two other people, were killed on June 15 when 16-year-old Ethan Couch’s pickup slammed into them while they were trying to help a stranded motorist. Couch’s blood-alcohol level was measured at the time at 0.24, more than three times the adult limit. Another victim was left paralyzed and one more suffered broken bones and internal injuries.

But while not disputing that Couch had broken the law by drinking as a minor and driving under the influence, a psychologist testifying on his behalf argued that he had developed a condition called “affluenza” because his family’s wealth had led him to grow up with a feeling of entitlement.

District Judge Jean Boyd refused to honor prosecutors’ call for a 20-year jail sentence for the teen, instead ordering him to seek long-term behavior therapy away from his parents. Cooper said during the interview that Boyd was, in effect, sending Couch to “a spa” and referred to him at one point as a “criminal.”

“That’s the incredible thing,” Cooper said to Boyles. “He has prior experiences with alcohol and the law. This is not his first offense. So you have a multiple offender who has killed four people who is not going to spend any time in jail — simply because, it seems to me, his family has money.”

“There are absolutely no consequences for what occurred that day,” Boyles responded. “The primary message has to absolutely be that money and privilege can’t buy justice in this country, that it’s not okay to drink and drive and kill four people, and severely injure another, and not have any consequences. That’s not the American dream that we grew up to participate in.”

Watch the interview, aired on CNN on Wednesday

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/12/11/texas-man-who-lost-wife-and-daughter-to-rich-kid-drunk-driver-fuming-over-sentence/