[url]http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/13/us/texas-affluenza-ethan-couch/[/url]
[quote=CNN]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.
However, District Judge Wayne Salvant said he'd give the defense two weeks to make an argument against the order.
"Nothing is set in stone, so I might reconsider," he said at a court hearing in the case in Tarrant County, Texas.
The jail time is the latest twist in the deceptively complex and well-publicized sentence Couch received in 2013: 10 years of probation for intoxication manslaughter, instead of prison, after his lawyers cited a now notorious "affluenza" defense, suggesting he was too rich and spoiled to understand the consequences of his actions.[/quote]
Drunk driving, four counts of manslaughter, and fleeing the country netted only 2 years. The current sentence is amenable, but it's fucking ridiculous.
Better than nothing, at least. :T
[QUOTE=Grandzeit;50130472]Better than nothing, at least. :T[/QUOTE]
At least no sentence wouldn't be pretending to be justice.
This is not the punishment for drunk-driving, killing four people and seriously injuring two others to the point where they can't move or speak.
This punishment is only because
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/RNqD0Nl.png[/IMG]
He was still let off scot-free from the DUI and given a probation. He violated the probation resulting in this this punishment that is "subject to decrease" according to the Judge.
[editline]14th April 2016[/editline]
[IMG]http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/12/18/ap_808565028521_custom-bbadbbbcf8a9d43aacffa9319387c225deab61da-s900-c85.jpg[/IMG]
[quote]after his lawyers cited a now notorious "affluenza" defense, suggesting he was too rich and spoiled to understand the consequences of his actions[/quote]Does anyone at all actually think that's a legit reason?
[QUOTE=rndgenerator;50130492]Does anyone at all actually think that's a legit reason?[/QUOTE]
The rich and powerful do. Anyone with common sense, however, do not. It's an all too obvious way of saying "Guy's rich, you can't put him in jail." That's literally their argument.
Stupid little fucker keeps getting off easy. Doubt he'll serve the full two years either.
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;50130650]Stupid little fucker keeps getting off easy. Doubt he'll serve the full two years either.[/QUOTE]
He might tried to run away again to a diffrent country this time. :v:
The sentance should be longer, 2 years is no more than a slap on the hand to this kid.
[QUOTE=Spetsnaz95;50130529]The rich and powerful do. Anyone with common sense, however, do not. It's an all too obvious way of saying "Guy's rich, you can't put him in jail." That's literally their argument.[/QUOTE]
Not accurate, they aren't saying he shouldn't be jailed because he's rich. They're saying he shouldn't be jailed because, due to being rich, he was detached from the reality that his actions have consequences.
Which is horse shit.
It is understandable that due being rich he is/was detached from reality but it's not legit excuse.
Da fuck kind of judgement is that.
[QUOTE=Quark:;50130709]Not accurate, they aren't saying he shouldn't be jailed because he's rich. They're saying he shouldn't be jailed because, due to being rich, he was detached from the reality that his actions have consequences.
Which is horse shit.[/QUOTE]
if you think about that excuse, wouldn't it really just end up proving he's an even greater danger to the public into the future
[QUOTE=rndgenerator;50130492]Does anyone at all actually think that's a legit reason?[/QUOTE]
I studied law for 3 years and never read a single case law spouting this nonsense.
Is Affluenza even a legitimate excuse? Are the rich really seen as incompetent idiots? What even determines that He had this "Illness"?
Or is it just a cop out?
[QUOTE=ADSmaster724;50131025]Is Affluenza even a legitimate excuse? Are the rich really seen as incompetent idiots? What even determines that He had this "Illness"?
Or is it just a cop out?[/QUOTE]
it is essentially a cop out argument, they claim to have no idea of the consequences of their actions because they happen to be rich, and thus detached from the reality most other people live in. It's basically a load of garbage.
Imagine being the dude permanently paralyzed because some douchebag kid with douchebag failures for parents just decided he does whatever he wants and then basically gets of Scott free.
If I'd done that id have a life sentence
[editline]14th April 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;50131180]it is essentially a cop out argument, they claim to have no idea of the consequences of their actions because they happen to be rich, and thus detached from the reality most other people live in. It's basically a load of garbage.[/QUOTE]
If they want to play the affluenza card then the parents should be tried for failing to raise a child even remotely correctly
[QUOTE=Quark:;50130709]Not accurate, they aren't saying he shouldn't be jailed because he's rich. They're saying he shouldn't be jailed because, due to being rich, he was detached from the reality that his actions have consequences.
Which is horse shit.[/QUOTE]
If we follow that flawed logic the media couldn't target videogames when a gruesome crime happens. Somebody dismembers a small kid with a katana and the killer used to play videogames? We cant blame him, the games detached him from reality!
jesus, this judge was a fucking moron
I hope bad things happen to him in prison.
What kind of fucking judge keeps believing this shit? I almost doubt he believes it at all, he's probably gotten a nice hefty paycheck from a certain someone for keeping their boy out of even a fraction of the usual sentence.
[QUOTE=dai;50130810]if you think about that excuse, wouldn't it really just end up proving he's an even greater danger to the public into the future[/QUOTE]
I always thought that if he's too rich to be within reality, he should be locked up in a mental hospital forever. He's already killed people, and had a poor person done this in the past (hint: they have), they would have been jailed for a long-ass time.
Oh my god this is
The worst thing
When I first heard "Affluenza" I assumed it was a disease affecting the immune system, now I know that it is a disease affecting the legal system.
[Quote]Ethan Couch’s rehab visit in 2014 cost state taxpayers more than $150,000 because the “affluenza” teen’s parents were financially unable to pay for the court-ordered treatment[/quote]
His parents aren't even that rich.
[QUOTE=dai;50130810]if you think about that excuse, wouldn't it really just end up proving he's an even greater danger to the public into the future[/QUOTE]
lmao exactly. if he can be shown to be disconnected from reality and his actions, then he isn't fit to be a member of society. if he is proven in court, he should be summarily institutionalized if that's the card he wants to use.
[QUOTE=Snapster;50132119]His parents aren't even that rich.[/QUOTE]
idk about you but I don't have $150,000 just laying around
[QUOTE=butre;50141608]idk about you but I don't have $150,000 just laying around[/QUOTE]
Idk about you, but "affluenza" is only supposed to affect kids whose parents are insanely wealthy.
[QUOTE=Penultimate;50142828]Idk about you, but "affluenza" is only supposed to affect kids whose parents are insanely wealthy.[/QUOTE]
having the liquid assets to buy a house in the bank ready to go is a whole lot more insanely wealthy than it takes to spoil a child and make him disconnected from reality
[editline]16th April 2016[/editline]
not that "affluenza" is a real thing mind you
[QUOTE=rndgenerator;50130492]Does anyone at all actually think that's a legit reason?[/QUOTE]
Hear a million-dollar lawyer tell it to you, I guarantee you will find it hard to reject it.
[QUOTE=Penultimate;50142828]Idk about you, but "affluenza" is only supposed to affect kids whose parents are insanely wealthy.[/QUOTE]
Source? Because you don't need to be insanely rich, just rich enough, to become detached from reality.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
