Too rich to jail

[JollyRoger]

A teenager who killed four people while driving drunk has been sentenced to probation.

Prosecutors were pushing for 16-year-old Ethan Couch to spend 20 years in prison. However, State District Judge Jean Boyd sentenced Couch to a decade of probation.

There was no debate about who was behind the wheel last June, when Couch plowed into and killed four people. Couch has admitted to being the driver, and court records show his blood alcohol level
was .24 at the time of the crash, three times the legal limit for an adult. Prosecutors also presented evidence that Couch and some friends stole beer from a Burleson Walmart on June 15, the night of the crash. After consuming the alcohol, Couch and seven others got back into his pickup to go to another store. During the trip, he hit four pedestrians, killing them. Two teens riding in Couch’s pickup were thrown from the truck and severely injured.

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.

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2013/12/10/teen-sentenced-to-probation-for-deadly-dwi-crash/

So the way to cure a kid that is hampered by being given everything he wants is to give him what he wants? Nice bit of lawyering though.

 

[luiz]

It's kind of funny because they used that very "touchy-feely" argument so dear to part of the left that it's all society's and upbringing's fault to exculpate a privileged kid.

 

[Borachio]

Supposing that, instead, Couch had been maltreated (in fact he has been maltreated, but you'll understand what I mean) by his parents.

Wouldn't that treatment be considered as mitigation for his future conduct?

So, similarly, his parents leading him to believe that he could do no wrong, and was entitled to do anything he chose, might also be mitigation?

Yet, my sympathies do lie with the relatives of his victims.

 

[Symphony D.]

Compare with the story of Justin Carter. Kill 4 people? Walk. Post vague threats on Facebook? 5 months in jail without trial.

Perry's Texas.

 

[Borachio]

The teen had remained in jail because Jack Carter and his wife, Jennifer, said they couldn't afford to post the bond required to free their son.

So money buys a good lawyer. Is this news?

In his first book, On My Honor, published in 2008, Perry drew a parallel between homosexuality and alcoholism, writing that he is “no expert on the ‘nature versus nurture’ debate,” but that gays should simply choose abstinence.[18] In 2002, Perry described the Texas same-sex anti-sodomy law as "appropriate".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Rick_Perry

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Poorer people should think about their poverty privilege before condemning the lawyers in this article. Not everyone has the opportunities to prepare for incarceration, you know.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

These tags are incredible. Grade A JR work.

It's kind of funny because they used that very "touchy-feely" argument so dear to part of the left that it's all society's and upbringing's fault to exculpate a privileged kid.

Well you're right. The issue here is two standards of justice, not whether or not his upbringing led him to believe that his actions do not have consequences. They very well may have, which is why his statement may be true, but that doesn't mean he deserves to get off the hook. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking it, especially in such a deadly case as this. With a traffic citation perhaps, but this is murder. Failure to understand that killing someone has consequences is not merely a failure of upbringing, it's sociopathy.

 

[peter grimes]

The issue here is two standards of justice, not whether or not his upbringing led him to believe that his actions do not have consequences. They very well may have, which is why his statement may be true, but that doesn't mean he deserves to get off the hook. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking it, especially in such a deadly case as this. With a traffic citation perhaps, but this is murder. Failure to understand that killing someone has consequences is not merely a failure of upbringing, it's sociopathy.

Yes, I fully agree that everyone should be judged equally before the law. If this had been a black kid from Dallas drunk driving would we be surprised if he got the full 20 years in prison?

I don't think 20 years in prison is an appropriate penalty in this case. I totally sympathize with the victims and their families - but 20 years basically removes this person from ever being able to be included in society. He'll be out at age 37 and basically unemployable. This is exactly how you design a system to increase recidivism.

As heinous as the crime was, I'd much rather see the person spend far less time in jail -1 year to a 16 year old is like 4 years to someone in middle age. Won't he get enough time to "think about what he's done" if he spends 4 years in prison instead of 20?

All that aside, the real miscarriage here is the overly light sentence. But honestly I'd rather have overly-light sentences than overly harsh ones. All should be applied equally regardless of family wealth, class, color, religion, gender, etc.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Yes, I fully agree that everyone should be judged equally before the law. If this had been a black kid from Dallas drunk driving would we be surprised if he got the full 20 years in prison?

I don't think 20 years in prison is an appropriate penalty in this case. I totally sympathize with the victims and their families - but 20 years basically removes this person from ever being able to be included in society. He'll be out at age 37 and basically unemployable. This is exactly how you design a system to increase recidivism.

As heinous as the crime was, I'd much rather see the person spend far less time in jail -1 year to a 16 year old is like 4 years to someone in middle age. Won't he get enough time to "think about what he's done" if he spends 4 years in prison instead of 20?

All that aside, the real miscarriage here is the overly light sentence. But honestly I'd rather have overly-light sentences than overly harsh ones. All should be applied equally regardless of family wealth, class, color, religion, gender, etc.

I agree. I don't know how they were able to prosecute a child as an adult (WTH, Texas?), and I don't think a 16 year old who did something stupid like this could possibly deserve 20 years in the slammer. A premeditated and grievously executed murder, or some other sort of truly excessive crime, perhaps; but this is a drunk driving accident. The kid deserves a good punishment, yes, but not this harsh (20 years, not the actual settlement obviously...). Certainly a few years in jail, and probably many years of probation thereafter.

 

[Farm Boy]

As heinous as the crime was, I'd much rather see the person spend far less time in jail -1 year to a 16 year old is like 4 years to someone in middle age. Won't he get enough time to "think about what he's done" if he spends 4 years in prison instead of 20?

All that aside, the real miscarriage here is the overly light sentence. But honestly I'd rather have overly-light sentences than overly harsh ones. All should be applied equally regardless of family wealth, class, color, religion, gender, etc.

I agree with all of the above. Especially with regards to this being an overly light sentence. Hope you fair well on this though, I'm pretty sure a thread wound up getting locked after I expressed that sentiment in that case with the idiot high school footballers being raised to believe they were privileged to rape instead of murder.

 

[.Shane.]

All that aside, the real miscarriage here is the overly light sentence. But honestly I'd rather have overly-light sentences than overly harsh ones. All should be applied equally regardless of family wealth, class, color, religion, gender, etc.

It's all relative. What, pray tell, is the right amount of time for taking 4 lives?

 

[Formaldehyde]

It's kind of funny because they used that very "touchy-feely" argument so dear to part of the left that it's all society's and upbringing's fault to exculpate a privileged kid.

What's so "kind of funny" about the blatant hypocrisy we have come to expect from the right-wing authoritarian "law and order" crowd?

If the kid didn't have rich parents who were capable of hiring the very best in legal defense, he would have likely spent a large portion of his adult life in prison just like everybody else. This is true even in a state such as Texas which has some of the most draconian criminal justice laws in the country.

 

[caketastydelish]

So money buys a good lawyer. Is this news?

Bingo. And people think I'm crazy for recommending we socialize the justice system.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

Couch’s attorneys argued his parents were responsible for the teen’s actions that night because of the way he had been raised.

The point does have merit. So, how much jail time do the parents face ?

 

[AdamCrock]

Funny how I read "Too rich to fail" - Apparently thou when You are rich You can go on about GTA style killing spree and in the end it's the poor man's fault for sticking their noses out of their humble strawn huts when rich man is driving in style ....

 

[Arachnofiend]

Yes, I fully agree that everyone should be judged equally before the law. If this had been a black kid from Dallas drunk driving would we be surprised if he got the full 20 years in prison?

I don't think 20 years in prison is an appropriate penalty in this case. I totally sympathize with the victims and their families - but 20 years basically removes this person from ever being able to be included in society. He'll be out at age 37 and basically unemployable. This is exactly how you design a system to increase recidivism.

As heinous as the crime was, I'd much rather see the person spend far less time in jail -1 year to a 16 year old is like 4 years to someone in middle age. Won't he get enough time to "think about what he's done" if he spends 4 years in prison instead of 20?

All that aside, the real miscarriage here is the overly light sentence. But honestly I'd rather have overly-light sentences than overly harsh ones. All should be applied equally regardless of family wealth, class, color, religion, gender, etc.

Judge didn't have an option. Texas (and most other states, I think) have a minimum jail time for these types of offenses and most of them are as ludicrously extreme as this one. Judge had a choice between 20 years or none at all and he picked the latter.

 

[AdamCrock]

^ Hammurabi is turning in his grave

 

[Azale]

JR was the right man for this job. I wonder what the wheelchair fascist thinks about all this.

Bingo. And people think I'm crazy for recommending we socialize the justice system.

That is actually probably your least crazy idea

 

[Cutlass]

I think Peter and Cheezy are on the right track here. But I think the kid should have gotten between 10 and 20 years prison sentence. He'd probably be out in 8. But in addition to the penalty to the perp, there is also the deterrent to consider. A Texas judge just said that the rich can get a free ride on killing. But the kid really does deserve a long sentence. And now all the other rich kids are going to expect a free pass.

 

[Birdjaguar]

The point does have merit. So, how much jail time do the parents face ?

Yes, I'd like to see the parents prosecuted.

JR, any chance of a civil suit taking the parents for a bunch of cash?