It's good to be rich in Texas

[StPaulHusker]

So a 16 year old kid in Texas gets Vodka Sam drunk and crashes his car and kills 4 people. He was 3 times over the legal limit. He gets 10 years PROBATION becasue a psychologist testified that because he comes from a wealthy family, he "suffers" from Affluenza disease that gives him among other things, a lack of motivation.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/12/12/families-outraged-over-teen-probation-only-sentence-in-dwi-crash/

[carlfense]

Survivors of those killed in the accident drew little comfort from that assurance. Eric Boyles, who lost his wife and daughter, said the family's wealth helped the teen avoid incarceration.

 

"Money always seems to keep you out of trouble," Boyles said. "Ultimately today, I felt that money did prevail. If you had been any other youth, I feel like the circumstances would have been different."

It may not keep you out of trouble . . . but it's certainly useful for minimizing consequences.

[StPaulHusker]

This is Texas. I thought they loved incarcertating people and the death penalty and stuff like that.

[carlfense]

This is Texas. I thought they loved incarcertating people and the death penalty and stuff like that.

If they're poor or look different . . . sure. But not the job creators.

[sd'sker]

when i first heard this story, i thought there had to be more to it. but surely there was not. pretty disturbing. not only do you start out with every advantage being wealthy, but you can use that as an excuse for criminal behavior now.

 

we are living in a two tier society, folks.

[Conga3]

So a 16 year old kid in Texas gets Vodka Sam drunk and crashes his car and kills 4 people. He was 3 times over the legal limit. He gets 10 years PROBATION becasue a psychologist testified that because he comes from a wealthy family, he "suffers" from Affluenza disease that gives him among other things, a lack of motivation.

 

http://www.foxnews.c...e-in-dwi-crash/

 

Certainly that is how the article is written...and that seems to be how some of you read the article.

 

The article fails to mention the other testimony given in the case...likely other character witnesses, etc...because the author didn't want to present to you a complete summary of the case and its outcome, only the rather shocking testimony given by one psychologist.

 

We don't know the judge wouldn't have given the kid 10 years probation without that quack-job's pseudo-diagnosis...or what is typical punishment for a juvenile in this situation.

 

---

 

More than likely, that testimony didn't swing the judge's decision - you typically have to have half a brain to be judge.

 

Absurd things get said all the time in court but that doesn't mean they hold any weight.

 

No doubt, having money to afford the best defense attorneys is an advantage those with enough money enjoy, but to conclude from a poorly written article our society has become a sort of caste system is rather silly.

 

I would guess juveniles in manslaughter cases avoid prison sentences all the time - I can at least think of one I knew about personally.

[carlfense]

The article fails to mention the other testimony given in the case...likely other character witnesses, etc...because the author didn't want to present to you a complete summary of the case and its outcome, only the rather shocking testimony given by one psychologist.

How many poor defendants would you guess have the ability to hire expert witnesses such as this psychologist? (Character witnesses wouldn't really apply in this sort of case, so I'm not sure where you're heading with that.)

 

We don't know the judge wouldn't have given the kid 10 years probation without that quack-job's pseudo-diagnosis...or what is typical punishment for a juvenile in this situation.

This is true . . . but we can just as easily infer that as you can deduce the following:

More than likely, that testimony didn't swing the judge's decision -

 

. . . you typically have to have half a brain to be judge.

True. Just don't spend too much time around them or you'll see that they're just as capable of error as the rest of us.

 

Absurd things get said all the time in court but that doesn't mean they hold any weight.

But the problem is that if the testimony is permitted it's tough to block it from memory. The cat is out of the bag, so to speak.

[carlfense]

No doubt, having money to afford the best defense attorneys is an advantage those with enough money enjoy . . .

Ya, think?

[sd'sker]

Absurd things get said all the time in court but that doesn't mean they hold any weight.

But the problem is that if the testimony is permitted it's tough to block it from memory. The cat is out of the bag, so to speak.

what other testimony would have allowed the judge to enter the sentence he did? it seems fairly apparent that this testimony was persuasive. obviously the high-priced defense attorneys thought so.

[Conga3]

@ carlense - Listen, I know you believe everything you read on foxnews.com and you defend their journalistic abilities as 'fair and balanced', but in this rare case they might have simply written a story in a way that was 'shocking' in order to get hits on their web site.

 

Remove the tidbit about the 'Affluenza' testimony, and this isn't national news.

[Conga3]

Absurd things get said all the time in court but that doesn't mean they hold any weight.

But the problem is that if the testimony is permitted it's tough to block it from memory. The cat is out of the bag, so to speak.

what other testimony would have allowed the judge to enter the sentence he did? it seems fairly apparent that this testimony was persuasive. obviously the high-priced defense attorneys thought so.

 

Are you assuming that juveniles charged with manslaughter is guaranteed prison time?

 

I believe probation is typical - regardless of the defense lawyer. If you're a first time offender and can get a few people to testify you'd be better off contributing to society outside of prison than stamping license plates for the next 10 years...I think it's within most defendants reach to stay out of prison regardless of family wealth - but I've been wrong before.

 

This kid got 10 years probation, rehab and for the next 10 years the risk of 10 years in prison if he violates probation. That's not insignificant.

 

Maybe a HB legal beagle can weigh in on this...

[sd'sker]

@ carlense - Listen, I know you believe everything you read on foxnews.com and you defend their journalistic abilities as 'fair and balanced', but in this rare case they might have simply written a story in a way that was 'shocking' in order to get hits on their web site.

 

Remove the tidbit about the 'Affluenza' testimony, and this isn't national news.

or remove the 'tidbit' about a person involved in vehicular manslaughter, resulting in 4 deaths, while intoxicated 3 times the legal limit, not being punished with any jail time, and this is not national news.

[carlfense]

Remove the tidbit about the 'Affluenza' testimony, and this isn't national news.

So if they remove the most unusual aspect of the story it wouldn't be as interesting?

 

Wealth is a significant advantage in defending a criminal case. That's my takeaway . . . but I didn't really need this story to learn that.

[HSKR]

It's better to be rich in California

 

[sd'sker]

while no one is arguing that the rich in california are not afforded similar advantages to the rich in texas, there are obvious differences between oj and the above-referenced defendant. specifically, one was acquitted by a jury and the other pled guilty to vehicular manslaughter and was given a lighter sentence, reportedly because of the very fact that he comes from a wealthy family. not only could he afford high-powered defense attorneys, like oj, but his mere opulence was, reportedly, a favorable consideration in his sentencing.

 

i am thoroughly confused as to how oj is relevant to this in the first place, though.