The facts of the case are straightforward enough:
How could this be, you may ask? What ingenious legal gambit led to this amazing result?
Well, it’s simple. The defense lawyers convinced the judge that the poor boy was simply too spoiled to be expected to take any responsibility for his actions:
Because, obviously, it’s just too late for him to learn about alien concepts like unwanted consequences for one’s actions… :mad: :rolleyes:
Odd, the article doesn’t mention how long the parents’ prison sentence was.
Damn. I bet even the defense lawyers were surprised that worked.
Well, it looks like he got what he wanted. That’s gotta suck on a resume, though. Might make college admission a bit tricky, too.
I’m sure he will never need to work, so I suspect those points are moot.
On the other hand, we can hope that his treatment will have enough effect that he will be tortured by guilt for the rest of his life.
Roddy
Actually, the defense’s case is that he won’t feel guilt for what he’s done.
As an aside, one wonders how much beer these kids were able to steal that one of them was able to get that drunk off his share.
You’re assuming he shared…
Bah. Every time I hear that one of the last lines from the movie ‘Crimes and Misdemeanors’ comes to mind.
My personal opinion is that if you’re found mentally incompetent to be held responsible for a crime, the next step should be an automatic commitment to a mental institution. It may be morally wrong to punish people who aren’t mentally capable of understanding right from wrong but society doesn’t have to let them run around loose either.
Money buys you smooth tongued lawyers.
Does this open his parents up to a civil suit, for raising their son to be a sociopathic, thieving, drunken killer?
I will note that the article mentions that the lawyers brought up his privilege, but never mentions whether that was the argument that swayed the judge’s (jury’s?) opinion. This misconception is the reason why everyone thinks that Dan White’s lawyers actually said that Twinkies made him do it.
I think the punishment is too light but on the other hand I am not convinced that jail will reform a 16 year old. And if he’s a dipshit, he’ll violate it within the period.
Beer: no kidding. Walmart sells a max of what, 30 beers in a pack? Usually 4.2%? All 8 couldn’t have partook, or else they took several somehow.
I don’t think this is about reform. Its about keeping a proven threat to society away from law-abiding citizens.
And get a few dozen people killed this time? Thanks…
The article states that Couch was sentenced to ten years of probation. It also states that the defense presented the “affluenza” defense. ** It does not clearly state, however, if the two were connected.**
The fact that the “affluenze” defense was presented does not actually mean the judge reduced the sentence due to that. It is entirely possible a ten-year suspended sentence was consistent with precedent in this case. It’s also worth noting the teen was to be “sent to a treatment facility” so apparently he didn’t just go home.
Maybe the crack defense team has other attorneys on staff who could handle civil litigation against the parents.
Or would that be considered unethical double dipping?
Me, I’m always looking for a precedent.
“Your honor, this young man was so rich, that he was never taught right from wrong and he thought he could get away with anything. Therefore he should be given only probation for killing those four people.”
“Your honor, this young man was so poor, that he was never taught right from wrong and he thought he could get away with anything. Therefore he should be given only probation for killing those four people.”
I’m sure the next young black kid from the projects who kills four people though some criminally negligent act will be happy to find himself on probation as well.
“So, kid, what are you in for?”
“Manslaughter. And having middle-class parents.”
Exactly what I was thinking. My kids had better never get drunk and kill somebody or they will be fucked.
Your honor, this child was so average, the difference between right and wrong became a negligible technicality.
This also works for the children of nihilist parents.