"Rich" kid kills 4, gets probation.

[Canarr]

Of course not. Try actually reading what I posted, please. Seeing as you cut off the last sentence in your quote that summarized my problem. So you either didn't read it or you're willfully ignoring it to be inflammatory. I'm hoping its just the former.

Neither, actually; I read it, just didn't perceive it as the point you were trying to make. I added the two sentences I cut off (emphasis mine):

But my point is there are lots of kids in the same position of being raised by terrible parenting where the only difference between them and this kid is money. Those kids go straight to jail. Those kids sometimes have even worse parents than this kid. They still go straight to jail because no money is involved. So ultimately this case just proves what this kid was raised to believe.

Its also an unsettling precedent for other rich dicks and their children.

My problem with this is, I agree with Andara: in my eyes, there is no point in throwing stupid teenagers into jail for 10-20 years, which is *guaranteed* to turn them into hardened criminals. So, I believe that the other examples stated - that show poor kids being punished much harder than this one - are examples of the justice system being too strict.

[ebonyknight]

And that he isn't sorry to have killed his friends - you're basing this on...what his highly-paid lawyer told him to tell to a judge? That we don't have a photo of him weeping while putting flowers on his victims' graves? That he hasn't tried to kill himself yet?

Sorry, but you can't properly judge a person's mental state by glancing at an internet article.

I don't know...the fact that despite the case being over that he hasn't SAID he is sorry?????

Without that, rehab is useless.

[ebonyknight]

Which is the exact reason why juries are selected to be as objective as possible, and not being emotionally involved in a case.

If you rear-end someone, would you find it fair if that someone decides over what kind of punishment you get?

While true, in theory, the defense's lawyers opted for a bench trial to avoid that. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

[Jester]

Come on, you can't hold a 16-year-old to the same standard of making reasonable life choices than, say, a 30-year-old man.

The courts have found that we can, actually, for more serious crimes. Which is why teenagers are sometimes tried as adults.

Remember, this was not some kid who went joyriding and smashed into a mailbox.

People are DEAD. Others are seriously injured. All because of this nitwit's terrible choices.

Does he have the same reasoning power of a 30 year old? Hard to say. I've met some teenagers with excellent reasoning power, and some 30 year olds with virtually none.

But he's old enough where the law has decided he can, if the situation is serious enough, to be treated on the same footing as an adult.

Four dead innocents say this situation is serious enough.

[Kheldarson]

As we all know, how you are at age 13 or 16 is how you will be for the rest of your life. So why not give life sentences to all 16-year-olds that do bad thing?

Come on, you can't hold a 16-year-old to the same standard of making reasonable life choices than, say, a 30-year-old man.

As Jester put it, if the crime's serious enough, we can. And why?

Because at 16-17 years of age, there's, on average, little difference between the competency of a 16-17 year old in Criminal Court vs. 18-24 year olds. So if we can try an 18 year old as an adult and expect them to understand their crime for the rest of their life, we can certainly expect it of a 16 year old.

The major difference is that, yes, we do want to try to help the child actually be productive and not held back by his mistakes, so Juvenile Court exists. And most cases should be sent there. However. This youth didn't just get caught underage drinking again, he didn't even get caught just DWI. Hell, he didn't get caught having just crashed his car while DWI.

He got caught having done all of these and KILLING innocent people because he felt he was above the law. And given that his underage drinking had already been addressed by the courts, we can't say that he wasn't aware that his behavior could get him in trouble. IT ALREADY HAD. And he'd been given the opportunity to correct the behavior.

So why are we giving him another opportunity to basically "prove himself" when he's already shown what he does with such an opportunity? I mean, fool me once, shame on you, but fool me twice, shame on me. And in this case, we'll probably see his body count rise because he's been taught again that his actions don't have any real consequence.

[Gravekeeper]

Are we sure that's true?

I just can't see this kid asking for permission for anything. It wouldn't surprise me if his father said that to lessen his charges, despite the fact that this opens him up to more liability.

Its true. Its mentioned in the court documents for the lawsuits against the company. It's also mentioned in a number of news stories.

Neither, actually; I read it, just didn't perceive it as the point you were trying to make. I added the two sentences I cut off (emphasis mine):

That still does not say what you said I said.

Though I will apologize for being snippy with my original response. Was having a rough night.

My problem with this is, I agree with Andara: in my eyes, there is no point in throwing stupid teenagers into jail for 10-20 years, which is *guaranteed* to turn them into hardened criminals. So, I believe that the other examples stated - that show poor kids being punished much harder than this one - are examples of the justice system being too strict.

I wasn't debating that. Though there should be a happy middle ground between the two extremes.

However, in fairness, we're not talking about these kids ending up in the general prison population. They're ending up in juvenile detention centers which do have rehabilitation programs. Its not great, but its not the hardened criminal machine you're talking about that is some federal penitentiaries.

In the case in question though, the judge doesn't like the juvenile rehab programs offered by her own state. So she tries to ship kids off to fancy places in other states on the parent's dime.

Sorry, but you can't properly judge a person's mental state by glancing at an internet article.

He expressed no remorse in the courtroom and at no point did he address the court to expression remorse, condolences or apologies. He has not done so in private to the victims or the surviving family members of victims.

Family members were permitted to address him and the judge before sentencing. He would not answer them. Even when asked direct questions.

His entire defense was that he's a remorseless maladjusted asshole. So either he is a remorseless maladjusted asshole, or his entire legal team and their witnesses lied their asses off in court.

[Jester]

In the case in question though, the judge doesn't like the juvenile rehab programs offered by her own state. So she tries to ship kids off to fancy places in other states on the parent's dime.

Which at initial glance makes it seem like she's a very compassionate judge. Until you remember that last part...fancy out-of-state places at the parents' expense. Which is all well and good if you're a kid from a wealthy family. Kind of sucks balls if you're not.

Kind of throws that whole "equal justice for all" thing right on its ear. This judge, and others like her, are making more and more people question or even downright laugh at the so-called American ideals of "justice is blind" and "all men are created equal."

My suggestion to all of you is to not end up in this judge's courtroom if your bank account isn't pretty hefty.

His entire defense was that he's a remorseless maladjusted asshole. So either he is a remorseless maladjusted asshole, or his entire legal team and their witnesses lied their asses off in court.

Are we taking bets on this one? Because I know how I'd be wagering.

[KitterCat]

Surely I'm not the only one here thats thought the kids symptoms sound like he's a sociopath? Personally I'm all for locking him up in a mental facility untill these symptoms he's displayed stop, and I dont think that facility needs to be some 5 star resort. Whether the symptoms stop in a year or 20 would depend on how long he should stay in. Maybe throw him in one of the facilities that this judge seems to be so against in her own state, after all if there good for everyone else they should be good for him.

[Kelmon]

He expressed no remorse in the courtroom and at no point did he address the court to expression remorse, condolences or apologies. He has not done so in private to the victims or the surviving family members of victims.

Family members were permitted to address him and the judge before sentencing. He would not answer them. Even when asked direct questions.

His entire defense was that he's a remorseless maladjusted asshole. So either he is a remorseless maladjusted asshole, or his entire legal team and their witnesses lied their asses off in court.

But you're pretty much making my point for me with that. If my defense depended on me being as unlikable as possible, I would do exactly as he did.

Of course, in his situation, I would have killed a buch of people too, and I would most likely be unable to face the families of my victims to tell them that "I'm soooooo sorry". Besides, I see such apologies in court as a meaningless, self-serving gesture anyway.

[Canarr]

That still does not say what you said I said.

Though I will apologize for being snippy with my original response. Was having a rough night.

I wasn't saying you said that; I was merely asking, because I interpreted your statement that way and wanted to make sure. Didn't mean to be trolling; and I'll happily chalk it up to a misunderstanding.

I wasn't debating that. Though there should be a happy middle ground between the two extremes.

However, in fairness, we're not talking about these kids ending up in the general prison population. They're ending up in juvenile detention centers which do have rehabilitation programs. Its not great, but its not the hardened criminal machine you're talking about that is some federal penitentiaries.

In the case in question though, the judge doesn't like the juvenile rehab programs offered by her own state. So she tries to ship kids off to fancy places in other states on the parent's dime.

Personally, I find 10 years of probation not a bad middle ground; depending on the conditions of the probation, I guess. If he needs to actually kill someone again to be in violation, then it's not much use. But if any kind of transgression can land him in actual jail, then it's not necessarily a bad thing; would force him to stick to the straight and narrow.

[Jester]

Probation generally requires that you stick to certain guidelines. Violating it would not have to be something as serious as killing someone else. That would be a separate crime, subject to different charges, though of course it would be a violation of the probation he's under.

This being an alcohol-related crime, it's almost a certainty that his probation requires him to abstain from alcohol. Since he has a history with drugs, he'll probably have to abstain from those as well. (That's usually part of any probation involving alcohol anyway.) He'll also likely be require to complete the rehab program he's been assigned to, and be required to comply with the rehab facility's rules. And almost certainly he'll be prohibited from contacting the victims or their families for any reason, though there may be exceptions made to this if some of them are friends or family, or those victims request to be exempted. He will also almost certainly be required to check in periodically with some kind of court-appointed probation officer, and to take periodic drug and alcohol tests.

Any violation of the above would likely be considered a violation of his probation, and would land him back in court, though, depending on the transgression and its severity, it might not mean automatic jail time.

[Gravekeeper]

Any violation of the above would likely be considered a violation of his probation, and would land him back in court, though, depending on the transgression and its severity, it might not mean automatic jail time.

To put another interesting hitch in this. This judge is not running for re-election, she's retiring at the end of her term next year. Additionally, she won the last election by default because no one ran against her. So it really doesn't matter much what she does on her way out as she's already finished with her career. This also means its unlikely this kid will end up in front of her again unless he swiftly fucks up in rehab.

I found a tidbit comment that's been added to some articles floating around a couple news sites that's allegedly an account from an FWPD officer on scene and follow up at the hospital. Take it with a grain of salt but it would fit:

This kid was taken to the hospital for the blood draw for his test. Even after considerable time, his blood alcohol level was over 4x the legal. The whole time he was at the hospital, he was telling people the pills he took and how much alcohol he drank and was bragging about how he could hold his liquor, and after the blood draw, he asked if they were going to give him a ticket…and laughed. He knew nothing. He didn’t know he hit anyone. He didn’t know he had paralyzed one of his buddies in the truck. He remembered nothing.

Sounds like the crash scene was really bad for the officers too. Its one thing to hear about it, and I've seen some shots of the kid's truck on the news. But digging up a picture of the SUV he hit? You wouldn't even know it was a vehicle if it wasn't for the errant tire nearby.

He hit *people* at that speed. The bodies of which were found 60 yards away from the point of impact. I mean fuck, man. How much damage do you have to do and how much of it should society tolerate before your ass is locked up first, rehabilitated second.

Instead he literally gets a pony.

[Andara Bledin]

Instead he literally gets a pony.

In this case, he already had a pony.

It might be interesting to check his competency to see if he shouldn't be on a leash for entirely different reasons.

[Gravekeeper]

Oh God. The affluenza psychologist crawled out from under his rock and appeared on CNN.

Watch him weasel around for 20 minutes and refuse to admit that his client killed anyone. While saying with a straight face that he will be deprived of his X-Box.

[wolfie]

Kind of throws that whole "equal justice for all" thing right on its ear. This judge, and others like her, are making more and more people question or even downright laugh at the so-called American ideals of "justice is blind" and "all men are created equal."

I believe Anatole France had a good idea about how the legal system works: In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.

Sounds like the crash scene was really bad for the officers too. Its one thing to hear about it, and I've seen some shots of the kid's truck on the news. But digging up a picture of the SUV he hit? You wouldn't even know it was a vehicle[/URL] if it wasn't for the errant tire nearby.

If things had been slightly different (no passengers, and he'd hit the Peterbilt of Natural Selection), this thread wouldn't exist. It would have been a "squib" story - "DUI driver killed, trucker escapes with minor injuries". No slick lawyer could have gotten him out of that one.