MoogleViper Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 2112Killer driver ‘too spoilt’ for prison case sparks anger Ethan Couch caused a crash that killed four people (Picture: YouTube) A teenage drink-driver who caused a crash that killed four people was spared jail after a judge was told he was a victim of ‘affluenza’, sparking widespread anger from critics. Ethan Couch, 16, caused the accident which killed four people after stealing beer from a store in Texas on June 15. He had been spoilt with cars, money and freedoms ‘that no young man would be able to handle’, his defence psychologist told a Texas court. Judge Jean Boyd gave Couch ten years’ probation after he pleaded guilty to intoxication manslaughter. But the sentence has been heavily criticised, with one commentator saying the case illustrated ‘double standards’ between rich and poor kids. Atlanta psychologist Mary Gresham told CNN: ‘I can understand how people would be angry, if 16 year olds from less affluent families are sentenced to juvenile detention and not treatment.’ Suniya Luthar, a professor of psychology at Arizona State University, added: ‘If you have a child who grew up in the inner city, and the parents abused crack, and (the child) was abused all along and grew up at the age of 16 and ran over four people, how likely is it the public or culture would say, “You must understand, what the child did was a result of his upbringing?” ‘It is hard to justify such vastly different approaches taken toward inner-city children versus those in affluence.’ Eric Boyles, whose wife and daughter Hollie and Shelby were among the victims, also criticised the sentence. ‘Money always seems to keep the boy out of trouble,’ he said. ‘Ultimately today, I felt that money did prevail. If [he] had been any other youth, I feel like the circumstances would have been different.’ Couch’s blood-alcohol was three times the legal limit and he was speeding in his Ford F350 truck before the crash. He is set to be enrolled in a private $450,000-a-year (£275,200) rehabilitation centre. Absolutely disgusting verdict. The judge should lose his job. "This guy is used to doing what he wants without consequences... so we'll let him off without consequences." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEVILMURRAY Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 Spoilt with money and all that jazz, yet decided to steal some beer. Baffling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cube Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 So, when to the parents get punished for "child abuse"? As they've clearly been "mistreating" him so badly that he does not "understand" how the world works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbob Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 This is absolutely disgusting, the Judge should be sacked. Money should not influence the decision for the crime committed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pestneb Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 I think the sentence is fine, but the parents should be asked to validate the claims. If they validate said claims, they should be held responsible, and required to both undergo an adequate penalty, and their child is given this clinic treatment to fix him. If they disagree with the analysis, the child undergo's the appropriate penalty, and learns the usuyal way what the consequences of his actions are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbob Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 I think the sentence is fine, but the parents should be asked to validate the claims. If they validate said claims, they should be held responsible, and required to both undergo an adequate penalty, and their child is given this clinic treatment to fix him. If they disagree with the analysis, the child undergo's the appropriate penalty, and learns the usuyal way what the consequences of his actions are. The sentence is not fine, 10 years on probation is not what i would call "acceptable". This teenager was over the drink-drive limit, and killed 4 people after stealing beer from a store. Yes, his parents are partly responsible for this as well. They spoiled him with cars, money etc and gave this child no real understanding of the real world. How i reckon it should have been done. The teenager gets time in prison, whilst in prison he gets rehabilitated (as prison should do as standard to all prisoners). The parents get arrested and done for child abuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goafer Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 So his problem is that he has too much money? I think it's pretty clear what the solution is. Either that or set the little fucker on fire. Then the judge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 'Murica. This is the same country where a homeless man can get life for stealing a loaf of bread (three strikes), but a guy who steals millions of dollars through fraud gets 5 years and a paultry fine. Our system isn't much better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iun Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 This parallels a case in China where Li Tianyi, the son of a famous PLA General was caught driving a BMW at age 15 after he beat the shit out of someone. He got a year in a juvenile detention for the bearing and his parents went unpunished for buying the little shit a car etc. Fast forward two years, and the little bastard gang rapes a Karaoke waitress. THEN he gets ten years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fierce_LiNk Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 The Judge is doing the legal service and process a disservice with this verdict. He could have made a statement by giving this person the sentence that he deserved, which would have been a length prison sentence. All that it suggests is that there are two worlds out there and as long as you have money you can "buy your freedom". The disappointing thing is that this could have been used as a warning shot to others. The law is the law, no matter your background. His blood level alcohol limit was three times the legal limit. Three times. That's not him being a "victim of his own wealth" or however you phrase it, that's pure recklessness. I wouldn't be able to sleep at night if I handed out that sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serebii Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 (edited) 'Murica. This is the same country where a homeless man can get life for stealing a loaf of bread (three strikes), but a guy who steals millions of dollars through fraud gets 5 years and a paultry fine. Our system isn't much better... America is crazy. They're charging a guy for assault because, when unarmed (he was disorientated or something), the police shot at him, missed, and hit two bystanders, so they are charging him with the assault. I really don't get America http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/nyregion/unarmed-man-is-charged-with-wounding-bystanders-shot-by-police-near-times-square.html?_r=0 Yeah he was causing a disturbance, but still. Their legal system is essentially equivalent to the wild west. Power and money rules all. Logic, reason and the law are secondary. Edited December 16, 2013 by Serebii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent Gibbs Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 So for Theft, Driving while under the influence and 4 counts of vehicular manslaughter/homicide he got 10 years probation.... nobody in their right mind can say that is a just sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arab_freak Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 http://kfor.com/2013/12/16/victims-families-file-multimillion-dollar-lawsuits-against-affluenza-teen/ DALLAS (NBC) – After a controversial sentence by a Texas judge, the families of the victims who were injured or killed in a drunk driving crash are now suing a teen who claimed “affluenza” prevented him from knowing the consequences for his actions. Five civil lawsuits have been filed, including three lawsuits from the families of the four victims who were killed. Eric Boyles is suing Couch for more than $1 million in damages after his wife and daughter were killed when they were hit by Couch’s vehicle. The Molina family is seeking damages of $20 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rummy Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Christ Moogle, I didn't expect such a serious story when I came in here. Absolutely fucking disgusting, I'd go far enough to call it a complete miscarriage of justice. Obviously not seen the whole facts of the case but I can't see how one can find his money and rich upbringing enough of a mitigating circumstance to say that at 15 he had no idea of the true consequences of his actions. Wouldn't be surprised if some of that money actually bought his freedom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goafer Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 (edited) Wouldn't be surprised if some of that money actually bought his freedom. I imagine it was more a case of that money bought him a really good lawyer who could use some totally bullshit excuse for piss poor behaviour. The whole story really boils my piss. Hope both he and the judge die cold and alone, and in the case of the kid, without a penny to his name. If he'd killed my wife and kid, I'd be out for blood. Justice has failed, so vengeance is all that's left. The argument is that he's too rich and pampered to understand the consequences of his actions, but the judge has further prevented him from understanding the consequences by giving out this joke of a sentence. The judge is every bit as guilty as the parents and a massive hypocrite to boot. There WILL be some sort of backlash against it. It might not be something obvious, but it adds even more tension to the rich/poor divide and it'll have consequences. Eventually there will come a tipping point and everything will kick off, just like the London riots. Edited December 17, 2013 by Goafer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent Gibbs Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 i hope the civil cases bankrupt him and his family, then he can't use that defence any more what annoys me is that if this were some poor kid from the wrong side of the tracks, he'd be given a long sentence, and if it was his third strike he'd get life or no doubt the death penalty in Texas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daft Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Mo money, mo problems. Thnk dis if it maks u crai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent Gibbs Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Mo money, mo problems. Thnk dis if it maks u crai avery dam time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fierce_LiNk Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Mo money, mo problems. Thnk dis if it maks u crai I cri, evrytiem. Y cn't dey obay da law?!?! Y do dey no do dis?!?!?!?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReZourceman Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 I think I've missed the joke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arab_freak Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 I think I've missed the joke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rummy Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 I cri, evrytiem. Y cn't dey obay da law?!?! Y do dey no do dis?!?!?!?!?! boi frew law at wol, a bootiful dimon ring was insid, I imagine it was more a case of that money bought him a really good lawyer who could use some totally bullshit excuse for piss poor behaviour. The whole story really boils my piss. Hope both he and the judge die cold and alone, and in the case of the kid, without a penny to his name. If he'd killed my wife and kid, I'd be out for blood. Justice has failed, so vengeance is all that's left. The argument is that he's too rich and pampered to understand the consequences of his actions, but the judge has further prevented him from understanding the consequences by giving out this joke of a sentence. The judge is every bit as guilty as the parents and a massive hypocrite to boot. There WILL be some sort of backlash against it. It might not be something obvious, but it adds even more tension to the rich/poor divide and it'll have consequences. Eventually there will come a tipping point and everything will kick off, just like the London riots. Well...even with a great lawyer a judge still isn't/shouldn't be an idiot. For such a ridiculous judgement I can conclude he's either fucking incompetent, or corruption is at hand. I'd be highly inclined to believe the latter, and for some reason I judge it more being that it's texas(completely baseless on my part). It's a shame because the civil cases probably won't bother them too much, he really should have faced much harsher punitive measures from the criminal case. I'd love to know what happens out of this down the line, but I imagine the media will forget it by time there's anything of note to report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayseven Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 The devil's advocate has been arguing that they were potentially facing less than 10 years of jailtime due to their age, and this sentence is supposed to affect their life for longer... but personally I'd rather see they serve 8 years then face 10 years of probation. I mean they're not going to rush out and commit the same crime again... but clearly the scales have been heavily tipped by the number of deaths, and thus the mass of potential that has been extinguished. If the kid goes on to cure cancer or make hangover-free alcohol then hey, sure, why not... but the potential for his contribution to society is already tampered by his actions already, so I do kind of agree he should've been thrown to the dogs a little and forced to make some form of retribution... But I would stress that I'm sure the kid's not rubbing his hands and giggling with glee that he "got away with it," and he's preparing himself to get out there and do it again. People worry that he's now afforded an opportunity to fuck up once more. I know it's not exactly the same... but put yourself in his shoes. You just got let off - what do you feel? What do you do next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goafer Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 I know it's not exactly the same... but put yourself in his shoes. You just got let off - what do you feel? What do you do next? Well if the whole "he doesn't understand the consequences of his actions because he's too spoilt" thing is to be believed, he'll just carry on with what he was doing before, since yet again he's been taught that his actions carry little consequence. If anything, the sentence reinforces the view he already has, since he has almost literally got away with murder (x4 no less). It all boils down to the fact that he's killed 4 people and hasn't gone to prison. I'm all for him getting the help he needs, but that help should be given in a place where he's no danger to the public (prison). Normally I tend to side with the courts, since they've seen all the evidence etc, but this whole trial seems like a farce to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 Well if the whole "he doesn't understand the consequences of his actions because he's too spoilt" thing is to be believed, he'll just carry on with what he was doing before, since yet again he's been taught that his actions carry little consequence. If anything, the sentence reinforces the view he already has, since he has almost literally got away with murder (x4 no less). It all boils down to the fact that he's killed 4 people and hasn't gone to prison. I'm all for him getting the help he needs, but that help should be given in a place where he's no danger to the public (prison). Normally I tend to side with the courts, since they've seen all the evidence etc, but this whole trial seems like a farce to me. He's been sent to a long-term in-patient facility with no contact with his parents so he's not going to be out and about driving again so he's no danger to the public there. Of course he should have been sent to prison but he's not walking about scot-free right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts