That’s what Scott Brown, attorney for Ethan Couch and an expert witness psychologist, implied when he used the term “affluenza” to argue against intoxication manslaughter and assault charges for his client. Couch, 16, was on trial after he stole beer from a Walmart last summer, got drunk at a party, and gunned his car into four victims who had stopped on the side of a Burleson, Tex. road to help a stranded motorist. All four died, and both passengers in Couch’s pickup truck who were riding in the open bed were tossed from the vehicle; one is unable to move or talk due to brain injuries.
But even though Couch was behind the wheel, it wasn’t he, argued psychologist G. Dick Miller, who should bear the burden of punishment for the tragedy. Instead, it was his parents, who raised their boy with few limits and even less discipline, indulging him to the point where he was unable to appreciate the importance of rules and laws, not to mention the consequences of breaking them.
And the judge finds a nice vacation package in the mail I assume. With 4 people dead and a couple more messed up - if the kid doesn't go to prison, then the parents should. I mean even the lawyer said it was the parents fault in the defense.
raised their boy with few limits and even less discipline, indulging him to the point where he was unable to appreciate the importance of rules and laws, not to mention the consequences of breaking them.
I just saw a story where two kids were charged with a crime because their friend drove drunk and he killed somebody, and they didn't stop him beforehand.
climber511 wrote:And the judge finds a nice vacation package in the mail I assume. With 4 people dead and a couple more messed up - if the kid doesn't go to prison, then the parents should. I mean even the lawyer said it was the parents fault in the defense.
The one thing that annoys me about the legal system and how people think is, they presume if it is person A's fault, then it is not person B's.
And people wonder where draconian laws like "3 strikes" come from. When you can't count on judges to do their jobs; you take away any discretion regarding sentencing. This what happened in the 1980's and 1990s after decades of idiot judges letting career criminals off with light sentences.
Stupid judges like this will result in drunk driving laws eventually including mandatory time in jail or prison. Instead of removing the idiots and thugs (Police, prosecutors & Judges) in the criminal justice system, the sheeple we bleat for more tough laws. Laws that will be used against them by and ever increasing police state.
Arms are the only true badge of liberty. The possession of arms is the distinction of the free man from the slave.
Another example: MADD hysterics lobbying to lower the blood alcohol limit to 0.08% (and lower). But little is done about the repeat DUI offenders who often Drive While Obliterated.
It's the drivers north of 0.20% who commit the carnage on the roads, not the slightly buzzed driver.
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Batboy2/75 wrote:And people wonder where draconian laws like "3 strikes" come from. When you can't count on judges to do their jobs; you take away any discretion regarding sentencing. This what happened in the 1980's and 1990s after decades of idiot judges letting career criminals off with light sentences.
Stupid judges like this will result in drunk driving laws eventually including mandatory time in jail or prison. Instead of removing the idiots and thugs (Police, prosecutors & Judges) in the criminal justice system, the sheeple we bleat for more tough laws. Laws that will be used against them by and ever increasing police state.
This is a one-off. Not a trend.
Three strikes is a total, stupid failure, brought about by politicians trying to out-tough each other. We have insane incarceration rates and prisons are just training grounds for criminals. Stupid. Need to fix that so we have room for this kid and his parents.
Batboy2/75 wrote:And people wonder where draconian laws like "3 strikes" come from. When you can't count on judges to do their jobs; you take away any discretion regarding sentencing. This what happened in the 1980's and 1990s after decades of idiot judges letting career criminals off with light sentences.
Stupid judges like this will result in drunk driving laws eventually including mandatory time in jail or prison. Instead of removing the idiots and thugs (Police, prosecutors & Judges) in the criminal justice system, the sheeple we bleat for more tough laws. Laws that will be used against them by and ever increasing police state.
This is a one-off. Not a trend.
Three strikes is a total, stupid failure, brought about by politicians trying to out-tough each other. We have insane incarceration rates and prisons are just training grounds for criminals. Stupid. Need to fix that so we have room for this kid and his parents.
Talk about missing the forest, while looking at the trees.
Arms are the only true badge of liberty. The possession of arms is the distinction of the free man from the slave.
Batboy2/75 wrote:And people wonder where draconian laws like "3 strikes" come from. When you can't count on judges to do their jobs; you take away any discretion regarding sentencing. This what happened in the 1980's and 1990s after decades of idiot judges letting career criminals off with light sentences.
Stupid judges like this will result in drunk driving laws eventually including mandatory time in jail or prison. Instead of removing the idiots and thugs (Police, prosecutors & Judges) in the criminal justice system, the sheeple we bleat for more tough laws. Laws that will be used against them by and ever increasing police state.
This is a one-off. Not a trend.
Three strikes is a total, stupid failure, brought about by politicians trying to out-tough each other. We have insane incarceration rates and prisons are just training grounds for criminals. Stupid. Need to fix that so we have room for this kid and his parents.
Talk about missing the forest, while looking at the trees.
This case is a fluke, which is why it is so newsworthy. It is also complicated the kid being a kid, i.e., a minor. But we are doing just fine at putting kids in jail.
Batboy2/75 wrote:And people wonder where draconian laws like "3 strikes" come from. When you can't count on judges to do their jobs; you take away any discretion regarding sentencing. This what happened in the 1980's and 1990s after decades of idiot judges letting career criminals off with light sentences.
Stupid judges like this will result in drunk driving laws eventually including mandatory time in jail or prison. Instead of removing the idiots and thugs (Police, prosecutors & Judges) in the criminal justice system, the sheeple we bleat for more tough laws. Laws that will be used against them by and ever increasing police state.
This is a one-off. Not a trend.
Three strikes is a total, stupid failure, brought about by politicians trying to out-tough each other. We have insane incarceration rates and prisons are just training grounds for criminals. Stupid. Need to fix that so we have room for this kid and his parents.
Talk about missing the forest, while looking at the trees.
This case is a fluke, which is why it is so newsworthy. It is also complicated the kid being a kid, i.e., a minor. But we are doing just fine at putting kids in jail.
He swings and misses!
Do you really think I see this as a trend? That Judges across the land are letting well healed, spoiled, drunken brats off the hook or that a national epidemic trust funders are drinking too much and killing innocent people with their parents luxury cars?
I was commenting on another American trend.
Arms are the only true badge of liberty. The possession of arms is the distinction of the free man from the slave.
nafod wrote: But we are doing just fine at putting kids in jail.
I detect sarcasm.
In all reality though, there are times that kids belong in jail. And I'm not talking about reform school. I'm talking "you are being punished by isolation from the rest of society" jail.
In this case, the doer also happens to be an entitled douchebag as well. Still guilty of vehicular manslaughter and should be in jail.
As for the 'rents, they are likely culpable due to how they raised the little shit, but I cringe at derivative punishment in most cases. Where do you stop on that slippery slope?
Blaidd Drwg wrote:90% of the people lifting in gyms are doing it on "feel" and what they really "feel" like is being a lazy fuck.
"A good man always knows his limitations..." -- "Dirty" Harry Callahan
Batboy2/75 wrote:And people wonder where draconian laws like "3 strikes" come from. When you can't count on judges to do their jobs; you take away any discretion regarding sentencing. This what happened in the 1980's and 1990s after decades of idiot judges letting career criminals off with light sentences.
Stupid judges like this will result in drunk driving laws eventually including mandatory time in jail or prison. Instead of removing the idiots and thugs (Police, prosecutors & Judges) in the criminal justice system, the sheeple we bleat for more tough laws. Laws that will be used against them by and ever increasing police state.
This is a one-off. Not a trend.
Three strikes is a total, stupid failure, brought about by politicians trying to out-tough each other. We have insane incarceration rates and prisons are just training grounds for criminals. Stupid. Need to fix that so we have room for this kid and his parents.
Talk about missing the forest, while looking at the trees.
This case is a fluke, which is why it is so newsworthy. It is also complicated the kid being a kid, i.e., a minor. But we are doing just fine at putting kids in jail.
He swings and misses!
Do you really think I see this as a trend? That Judges across the land are letting well healed, spoiled, drunken brats off the hook or that a national epidemic trust funders are drinking too much and killing innocent people with their parents luxury cars?
This is the most mind blowing thing I have fucking seen in a long time. The kid is innocent because he never learned consequences... so the solution involves not enforcing consequences?!?!?! What the fuck kind of fucktard logic is this shit.
There is some truth to the fact that if this kid went to jail for 20 years he probably would not be a contributing member of society, but when you FUCKING KILL 4 INNOCENT PEOPLE it is not about helping him become a contributing member of society, it is about punishment and repercussions for his actions. Besides if his parents are so rich he is set for life regardless. 20 years being violated in a prison is not long enough if you ask me.
Shit like this makes me think of the movie Law Abiding Citizen...
"I swear by my life and by my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine"
Depending on how the kid was charged as an "adult" or as a "minor" If he was charged as a minor he would walk after 18 anyway so 10 years probation would be longer than his jail term. I have seen drunk drivers kill people and get manslaughter charges typically with weekend jail time and probation I think the "affluenza" term is what put this case newsworthy.
The victims families should go after this kid and his family in civil court. Not sure if they could sue the family and the kid. It depends on whose name was on the car title and insurance etc.
Take care and please.....................stay safe.
Drew0786 wrote:Depending on how the kid was charged as an "adult" or as a "minor" If he was charged as a minor he would walk after 18 anyway so 10 years probation would be longer than his jail term. I have seen drunk drivers kill people and get manslaughter charges typically with weekend jail time and probation I think the "affluenza" term is what put this case newsworthy.
The victims families should go after this kid and his family in civil court. Not sure if they could sue the family and the kid. It depends on whose name was on the car title and insurance etc.
Oh, they will sue. Some deep pockets there, and the criminal defense basically argues that the parents (the ones with the money) are at fault. Teed it up, essentially.
