"Rich" kid kills 4, gets probation.

[ebonyknight]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.1544508

"Wealthy brat Ethan Couch killed four people, including a mother and daughter, while blacked-out drunk and driving 70 mph on a rural road in June. Defense attorneys said the boy suffered from 'affluenza' and blamed the boy's parents, saying they gave him everything he wanted and didn't teach him about consequences.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/wealthy-16-year-old-killed-4-drunken-crash-spared-jail-article-1.1544508#ixzz2nGZnhUpS"

Wow, I thought news outlets were supposed to just report news. Not comment on it. I agree with the sentiment, but....

Anyway. It just amazes me how this country makes such strides in social and legal equality and then seemingly gets staggered with these incidents. Granted this is a new story, but I just don't understand how these things happen. How, can anyone kill 4 people and just get probation? I really just despise the "If/would/were" argument, but seriously. If this kid weren't rich, would he really have gotten the same sentence? I mean 10 years on probation isn't a gift, but is this the appropriate sentence for killing 4 people while driving drunk? He had a BAL of .24/ stole the beer he used to get drunk and had been taking Valium to boot. I just don't get it.

Maybe I was seeing what I wanted to see, but while watching this story on the news this morning, they were showing the kid going through security and he just had this look on his face, like "why do I have to go through all this bother....."

[TheHuckster]

New York Daily News is known for its tabloid-y presentation. They don't just editorialize the news, they do it and are proud of it. If you want a less sensationalized article, try CNN or something similar.

I think if the parents did make him a spoiled brat, then they should share the blame, but that doesn't excuse his actions one bit. If anything, it should be more important to throw the book at him because it's clear his parents won't.

[Kelmon]

I have no idea what a usual sentence for such an act is in the US, or in that state in particular. Going by our legal system, a 2-3 year sentence would be common for this if you're an adult, which i feel is reasonable.

But I don't really see anything wrong with this kind of sentence for a 16-year-old. Letting him rot in prison is not bringing anybody back to life, and will likely ruin any chance of redeeming him.

[TheHuckster]

I have no idea what a usual sentence for such an act is in the US, or in that state in particular. Going by our legal system, a 2-3 year sentence would be common for this if you're an adult, which i feel is reasonable.

Drunk driving related crimes are generally treated more harshly than other similar negligent homicide cases. At least in the state I'm in, being in a DWI crash that results in death will very likely revoke your license indefinitely, and you could be imprisoned for at least 7 years, if not longer.

DWI is one of those crimes that needs as much of a deterrent as possible IMO, since for many people it's very "easy" to commit the act. Go out drinking with friends, have a little too much, and realize you never designated a DD (or he/she didn't keep the promise) and now you have to get home... commence the rationalizations like "I'm not that drunk" or "Its 2am, there's not that many people out on the road" or "If I call a cab, my car is going to be left in the parking lot and might get towed for overnight parking or charge me up the wazoo in parking fees."

It's one of those crimes that I think some of the most "innocent" people (albeit very careless and with very poor judgement) could commit, yet could have the most grim consequences. Frankly, I'd say the risk of killing one's self and/or others should be enough of a deterrent but we see time and time again that's not the case for everyone.

[ebonyknight]

It's one of those crimes that I think some of the most "innocent" people (albeit very careless and with very poor judgement) could commit, yet could have the most grim consequences. Frankly, I'd say the risk of killing one's self and/or others should be enough of a deterrent but we see time and time again that's not the case for everyone.

Every time I saw one of these stories, I always asked how do the perpetrators manage to seemingly always come out unscathed, while the victims get killed. Someone gave me an answer. Due to them being drunk they were oblivious to the danger, and were thus "relaxed" during the crash. This apparently highly reduces the chance of injury.

Unfortunately, not that it matters, the other 4 were out on the road changing a tire when they were run over. The 911 call had another bystander answering the operator as to how many people were hurt. He started counting and stopped at three and ended up just saying multiple people were killed, as their bodies were strewn all over the road. In his own car there were seven other teens, hurt two critically when he impacted doing almost TWICE the speed limit.

Granted, a lot of the time the person has to live with what they did (most are not hard criminals after all), but this kid just doesn't seem to really care. I can't see how this is a "just" sentence, but the judge hasn't given his side of the story yet.

[Kelmon]

DWI is one of those crimes that needs as much of a deterrent as possible IMO, since for many people it's very "easy" to commit the act.

That implies that people are able to think clearly about the consequences of this act, which they aren't. Longer and longer jail sentences won't change that. No one gets in their car while being drunk, thinking "Oh well, if i kill someone it's only 7, not 20 years".

[Andara Bledin]

I have no idea what a usual sentence for such an act is in the US, or in that state in particular. Going by our legal system, a 2-3 year sentence would be common for this if you're an adult, which i feel is reasonable.

Anecdotal, but I know a man who got 4 years for a DWI incident that resulted in a death. Despite the fact that the police couldn't actually prove that he was the driver, seeing as he was in the passenger seat, with matching impact to the windshield. But he was poor and highly unsympathetic as a defendant, so it was an easy conviction on their part.

[HYHYBT]

I'd love to hear the prosecution's case for that one....

[hinakiba777]

10 years probation for the death of four people doesn't seem enough. I'm not saying that Ethan should have served jail (though maybe), I'm just saying that maybe some additional stuff. Yes he is being sent to rehab, but it's at a BEAUTIFUL resort. That place looks nicer than my best vacation, then again at half a million it would be nice.

Somehow I really don't think he is going to learn any consequences from any of this. I am sure he will violate his probation, though I feel like he might never be charged for Violation of Probation if it does happen.

[Andara Bledin]

It's worth noting that as part of his sentence, he's being taken away from his parents and forced to take part in long-term rehab. That's a bit more than "just probation."

If he does violate probation, I suspect that he'll get the max for making the judge look bad. Then again, he might be able to buy his way out.

The worst part, really, is that more juveniles aren't afforded the same options to prove that they can be worthwhile human beings as opposed to being turned into career criminals, which is about the only thing our prisons are really good at.

[Greenday]

For those who don't think the kid should have gotten more than probation, let me ask you this way: Exactly what punishment do you believe a 16 year old, who probably has very little experience in drinking, making decisions while drinking, and driving in general, that made a bad decision in what will be one of the first drunk experiences he ever has in his life? This isn't the type of person who should obviously know better all around. I'm sure had you asked him days before the accident he'd say he knows driving drunk is bad. Everyone will say that. But this is not someone experienced enough in life to make an informed decision.

As such, I don't blame the judge for not ruining the kid's entire future.

[TheHuckster]

That implies that people are able to think clearly about the consequences of this act, which they aren't. Longer and longer jail sentences won't change that. No one gets in their car while being drunk, thinking "Oh well, if i kill someone it's only 7, not 20 years".

There are serious consequences for being caught DWI while not killing someone, too. The least of which is at least a suspended license, higher insurance premiums, fines, and at least some probation. In my experience, when I observe people talk about the "consequences of driving while intoxicated" they're talking about simply getting pulled over and failing the sobriety test, and having to face the judge in such a case.

More often I hear, "Hey, man, put the keys down. You don't want to get arrested, do you?" rather than, "You don't want to kill anyone or yourself, do you?"

[Gravekeeper]

As such, I don't blame the judge for not ruining the kid's entire future.

Dude, he *stole* the beer they were drinking and had 3 times the legal limit in his system plus valium. He killed 4 people and injured 11. There were *7* passengers in the truck with him. Including people in the truck bed.

This was not his first experience with alcohol. The article we're talking about says he was permitted to drink all the time. He has a history of being a total little shit. Prior to this he was caught by police with a naked, unconscious 14 year old girl in the truck with him.

So, he stole alcohol from Walmart, took it home and got liquored up to three times the legal limit. Decided to go joyriding for more beer. Likely stole his father's truck ( The truck is a company vehicle from his father's company. ), loaded it up with 7 buddies and than hit a stranded motorist at 70 mph killing her and the 3 people that had stopped to help her. Plus injuring everyone involved that lived. Paralyzing one friend for life and leaving him with brain damage and putting another into a vegetative state.

If all of the factors here were the same, parents not teaching responsibility, letting him get away with everything, etc. But the family was NOT rich. This kid would be behind bars. End of story.

[Andara Bledin]

Of course he was a little shit. He'd been taught from day one that he could do whatever the fuck he wanted to and nothing bad would happen to him. He would have had to have been an extraordinary individual to have such an upbringing and manage to form a decent sense of morality.

He's being hit with consequences for his actions for pretty much the first time ever. Let's at least give him the chance to prove that he's capable of not being a shit before throwing him in prison. It's not like he's gotten off scot free. If he proves he's not capable of behaving, the option to throw his ass in prison is still on the table.

[Tanasi]

I agree with GK there's no excuse for this kid. Let him serve time in a juvi facility until he's 18 and then over to the big house.
Locally a recent UT graduate ran over two women and a man that were on the side of the road. He killed the man and the pregnant woman. The other woman lived but later killed herself from the guilt of having lived. The pregnant woman was busted open and her unborn baby was flung down the road. The boy came from money but his parents wisely left him to his own devices and I think he got 20 plus years.
Personally if you kill someone(s) while intoxicated the default should be at least life without parole or death. There's no excuse for driving while intoxicated, none!!!