Spoiled rich white kid kills 4 drunk driving gets no jail time

[zinfamous]

Big dick, posts Huffington Post.

Exclaims, we need to fix the drunk driver problem,

Goes home, sobers up.

-John

haiku, self-reflects.

 

[waggy]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/13/us/texas-affluenza-ethan-couch/index.html

A Texas judge on Wednesday tentatively ordered Couch to spend 720 days in jail -- nearly two years -- as a condition for his continued probation for a 2013 drunken-driving crash that killed four people and seriously injured two others.


so he gets to spend a while in jail. This is ONLY FOR MOVING TO AN ADULT JAIL.



so does he get in trouble for fleeing to mexico? nope according to county prosecuter that ended as soon as the little shit turned 19. so he gets away with it.


holy fuckensticks. this fuck murders 4 poeple. gets a slap on the wrist, breaks probation and runs away to mexico and can't be punished for it?

good god.

 

[Darwin333]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/13/us/texas-affluenza-ethan-couch/index.html

A Texas judge on Wednesday tentatively ordered Couch to spend 720 days in jail -- nearly two years -- as a condition for his continued probation for a 2013 drunken-driving crash that killed four people and seriously injured two others.


so he gets to spend a while in jail. This is ONLY FOR MOVING TO AN ADULT JAIL.



so does he get in trouble for fleeing to mexico? nope according to county prosecuter that ended as soon as the little shit turned 19. so he gets away with it.


holy fuckensticks. this fuck murders 4 poeple. gets a slap on the wrist, breaks probation and runs away to mexico and can't be punished for it?

good god.

From everything I read back when this story was going on I didn't think that they could even give him two years.

Edit: Ok, read the article and I think I understand. Originally they were saying that the max he would get was 180 days BUT the judge considered each of the murders a different "case" so he got 180 days times 4 and they run consecutively but the media was assuming that they would view it as a single case and not 4 separate ones. The lawyers are going to argue that it should be viewed as one case but shouldn't something like this be set in stone by black letter law?

Edit #2: Anyone know how Texas county jail works? If he is sentenced to 720 days how many of those days will he actually serve in jail?

 

[waggy]

From everything I read back when this story was going on I didn't think that they could even give him two years.

from what i read it has nothing to do with the murders themselves or fleeing to mexico. It's part of the transition from probation. he needs to spend time when going into an adult jail. 140 minimum. The judge gave him 180 PER count.

though that may change.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

~2 years, that's just sickening and a slap in the crotch to every non-violent offender spending more than 1 year locked up.
Pure unadulterated texas bullshit.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Mom's released from home confinement but still needs to wear the tracker and not drink or drug(s).

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime...d-from-home-confinement/ar-BBvZPDS?li=BBnb7Kz

 

[SMOGZINN]

This seems appropriate.
Wealthy Teen Nearly Experiences Consequence

 

[shortylickens]

This seems appropriate.
Wealthy Teen Nearly Experiences Consequence

Onion articles arent really supposed to be posted in P&N. More appropriate in OT.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

This seems appropriate.
Wealthy Teen Nearly Experiences Consequence

Haha I approve

 

[SMOGZINN]

Onion articles arent really supposed to be posted in P&N. More appropriate in OT.

Sometimes parody can state an argument much more eloquently than earnest debate. I'm not one to post memes or flippant remarks in serious debates, but this I felt, like political cartoons, transcended its medium to make a point that needed making.

 

[FerrelGeek]

You know, this sh*t isn't just confined to TX. Remember the kid in CA that barely got anything for raping a girl? And there's this little sh*t from MA. Sorry, it's a Fox News link; don't freak out on me.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/08/23/18yo-david-becker-accused-raping-two-teens-gets-no-jail-time

~2 years, that's just sickening and a slap in the crotch to every non-violent offender spending more than 1 year locked up.
Pure unadulterated texas bullshit.

 

[werepossum]

This seems appropriate.
Wealthy Teen Nearly Experiences Consequence

Oh, that is just TOO appropriate.

I hate to say it, but best thing for the world is if this kid dies in prison. Or even better, if just when he escapes into his mother's arms, her ankle bracelet suffers a rare catastrophic failure and removes them both from the gene pool.

You know, this sh*t isn't just confined to TX. Remember the kid in CA that barely got anything for raping a girl? And there's this little sh*t from MA. Sorry, it's a Fox News link; don't freak out on me.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/08/23/18yo-david-becker-accused-raping-two-teens-gets-no-jail-time

And the guy in Vermont who got only probation after repeatedly raping his stepdaughter from age six to age ten because he was such a low risk to reoffend. (Apparently she was a particularly hot six year old. Go figure.)

Judges should wear radio-controlled explosive collars with every un-affiliated audience member holding a remote. If every audience member pushes the, um, kill switch, then bam, it's time for a special election. There's a SciFy channel movie in there somewhere . . .

 

[master_shake_]

hey remember the DEA special agents drug dealer daughter.

still waiting for something to happen.

anything.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I hope the kid does a Edward Kennedy and realizes he's made a major mistake then turns his life around and works toward amending his ways.
I know its unlikely. I am a believer people can change and be forgiven.

 

[Sonikku]

I hate to say it, but best thing for the world is if this kid dies in prison. Or even better, if just when he escapes into his mother's arms, her ankle bracelet suffers a rare catastrophic failure and removes them both from the gene pool.

Both are unlikely, but I would sooner wish he finds redemption instead. So long as someone lives there is always the possibility that they can change their ways and learn from their mistakes. But a dead man can never change. He remains forever foolish.

 

[disappoint]

Both are unlikely, but I would sooner wish he finds redemption instead. So long as someone lives there is always the possibility that they can change their ways and learn from their mistakes. But a dead man can never change. He remains forever foolish.

Uh...noooo. Actually he remains forever dead.

 

[werepossum]

Uh...noooo. Actually he remains forever dead.

And recidivism is remarkably low among the dead.

 

[woolfe9998]

It just occurred to me that there is a silver lining to this ridiculous "affluenza" defense. Reading through the wiki on this case, I notice that the families of the dead and injured filed 5 separate civil lawsuits against the Couch family, each of which was settled for an undisclosed amount. Auto insurance likely did not fully cover these claims due to policy limits and the fact that an auto liability policy typically only covers a maximum of 2 claimants per accident. Meaning the Couches would have had to dip into their personal assets to pay off these claims. The main problem with such claims involving a minor is that the minor obviously has no real assets, so the plaintiffs must prove negligence on the part of the parents. Typically this is hard to do.

However, this "affluenza" defense which the punk used in the criminal court essentially blames the punk's behavior on the parents for not raising him right. Meaning that Couch himself, and his expert witnesses, are the prime evidence against the parents in a civil suit. My bet is that the plaintiffs got a lot more money because of this. The essence of this defense is to throw the defendant's asshole parents under the bus, so I guess it isn't all bad.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

It just occurred to me that there is a silver lining to this ridiculous "affluenza" defense. Reading through the wiki on this case, I notice that the families of the dead and injured filed 5 separate civil lawsuits against the Couch family, each of which was settled for an undisclosed amount. Auto insurance likely did not fully cover these claims due to policy limits and the fact that an auto liability policy typically only covers a maximum of 2 claimants per accident. Meaning the Couches would have had to dip into their personal assets to pay off these claims. The main problem with such claims involving a minor is that the minor obviously has no real assets, so the plaintiffs must prove negligence on the part of the parents. Typically this is hard to do.

However, this "affluenza" defense which the punk used in the criminal court essentially blames the punk's behavior on the parents for not raising him right. Meaning that Couch himself, and his expert witnesses, are the prime evidence against the parents in a civil suit. My bet is that the plaintiffs got a lot more money because of this. The essence of this defense is to throw the defendant's asshole parents under the bus, so I guess it isn't all bad.

Maybe but I don't think it would be a tough case when he is a minor and his blood alcohol level was around .25

 

[bshole]

Maybe but I don't think it would be a tough case when he is a minor and his blood alcohol level was around .25

I still remember when I was going to college in Milwaukee. I had 6 people jammed into my AMC Gremlin. Every one of us was drunk off our ass. I was the driver, it was 2:30 in the morning. The guy sitting beside me had a fat chick on his lap. I took a corner at 25 mph or so and the door couldn't take her weight and popped. She flew out. She survived with no real injuries except her pride. I think her fat and winter wear protected her. It scared the ever living shit out of me though. It would probably have ruined me. Of course, it was just as much the cars fault. I can't be too hard on the kid. Kid's do stupid shit, that is why they are kids. He never intentionally killed anybody.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I still remember when I was going to college in Milwaukee. I had 6 people jammed into my AMC Gremlin. Every one of us was drunk off our ass. I was the driver, it was 2:30 in the morning. The guy sitting beside me had a fat chick on his lap. I took a corner at 25 mph or so and the door couldn't take her weight and popped. She flew out. She survived with no real injuries except her pride. I think her fat and winter wear protected her. It scared the ever living shit out of me though. It would probably have ruined me. Of course, it was just as much the cars fault. I can't be too hard on the kid. Kid's do stupid shit, that is why they are kids. He never intentionally killed anybody.

Key point is you showed remorse. This guy has not.

 

[woolfe9998]

Maybe but I don't think it would be a tough case when he is a minor and his blood alcohol level was around .25

No, trust me, it's always tough to prove the parents were negligent, particularly if the child is in his teens. It's not like parents will go into a deposition admitting that they're shitty parents. And kids with perfectly good parents do stupid shit all the time. The easiest way in a case like this would be if the kid had a history of accidents and/or DUI's and the parents let him use the car anyway but that wasn't the case here. The kid had a prior for minor in possession of alcohol but not DUI or reckless driving. Regardless, I guaranty the plaintiffs' counsel used the affluenza defense from the criminal trial to bolster the case for liability of the parents. It's kind of a home run. If the parents wanted to argue that there weren't neglient, they'd be arguing against the position their son took in criminal court, and against his expert witnesses. If I was a plaintiff's attorney, I'd be ecstatic to have that kind of evidence against the parents.