Tweet
Originally posted by Sean88gt
View Post
Originally posted by Gear_Jammer
View Post
A few thoughts on this:
1. It's important to remember that the range of punishment for intoxication manslaughter in this situation is 2 to a maximum of 20 years. The media would have you believe that the court was supposed to have given him 20 years in prison, but screwed up and only gave him 10 years probation. That's not correct and it's driving me crazy that everyone keeps throwing the 20 year thing out there like it was a given that he was going to get it. What's worse - 2 years in juvenile jail or 10 years of being watched very closely and if you screw up you automatically serve 10 years? I don't know, but that's what the comparison should be and not 10 years probation vs. 20 years in prison. Please don't get me wrong...I think he should have gotten nailed, regardless of whether he comes from a rich, middle class or poor family. Justice is justice regardless of how much $$$ you have. The "Affluenza" excuse/defense is complete BS as it doesn't justify his actions or the lighter punishment he received. It doesn't matter whether your excuse/defense is that you grew up with a silver spoon in your mouth and weren't taught right from wrong because your rich parents never punished you or if it's that you grew up in the ghetto without any parenting and don't know any better, when a kid's actions result in someone being hurt or killed, that's when it's time for the legal system to step in to apply justice and punish the person appropriately. It's just that simple.
People have demonized this kid for what he did, but lest we forget some of our own actions when we were his age and what the results would have been had something gone wrong. When I was his age it was pretty much the norm for everyone to pile in a few cars, get some booze, get as wasted as possible and go do stupid shit. I remember street racing out at Emerald, Manana and a few other places where there were a ton of people going a lot faster than 70 MPH that were probably just as drunk as this kid. If something had gone horribly wrong on a big night at Emerald, a lot more than 4 people could have been killed. I'm not excusing Couch's behavior just because some of us did the same or similar things when we were young, but that we all need to look in the mirror at what we've done before we make this kid out to be as bad as Charles Manson. There but for the grace of God go I....
2. I don't handle personal injury cases, but in short, the victims' families have a right to sue to recover a number of different kinds of damages - actual (i.e. medical and funeral costs), loss of future earning, pain & suffering and punitive. I know Sergio Molina has already filed a lawsuit and I suspect some, if not all, of the other families have filed lawsuits too. The way it works is that the victim and/or the victim's family sues everyone that has any potential liability - Ethan Couch, his parents and whoever else may be at fault. If the defendant has insurance that might cover the damages, the insurance company and its lawyers step in and defend the civil case. Obviously, there are policy limits so anything they are awarded over and above the policy limits falls back on the defendant to pay. In Molina's case they have sued Couch, his parents and his dad's company that owed the truck he was in when the accident happened. Couch's liability is obvious, his parent's is fairly obvious as well, but his dad's company??? WTF? How can his dad's company that merely owed the truck be liable? It's called negligent entrustment and is a viable cause of action when the owner of vehicle (or whatever it may be) knew or should have known that the person they allowed to use it lacked the proper skill, abilities, etc. to operate it in a manner that could cause injury to 3rd parties. Again, I don't handle those types of cases, but that's it in a nutshell. In this case, Couch allegedly had a history of drinking, drinking and driving and driving recklessly. Despite his history, his dad's company (and his parents) allowed him to use the truck - they knew or should have known better. You can argue all you want about whether that shouldn't be the law or how our legal system is all about money, but it is what it is and the families have the right to do it. Does getting $20 million really compensate the victims' families, hell no, but it's the only other legal form of justice they have in this situation.
I could go on, but it looks like I've already written a small book that I'm sure 1/2 of y'all will stop reading after the first paragraph and then slam me for something I said.
1. It's important to remember that the range of punishment for intoxication manslaughter in this situation is 2 to a maximum of 20 years. The media would have you believe that the court was supposed to have given him 20 years in prison, but screwed up and only gave him 10 years probation. That's not correct and it's driving me crazy that everyone keeps throwing the 20 year thing out there like it was a given that he was going to get it. What's worse - 2 years in juvenile jail or 10 years of being watched very closely and if you screw up you automatically serve 10 years? I don't know, but that's what the comparison should be and not 10 years probation vs. 20 years in prison. Please don't get me wrong...I think he should have gotten nailed, regardless of whether he comes from a rich, middle class or poor family. Justice is justice regardless of how much $$$ you have. The "Affluenza" excuse/defense is complete BS as it doesn't justify his actions or the lighter punishment he received. It doesn't matter whether your excuse/defense is that you grew up with a silver spoon in your mouth and weren't taught right from wrong because your rich parents never punished you or if it's that you grew up in the ghetto without any parenting and don't know any better, when a kid's actions result in someone being hurt or killed, that's when it's time for the legal system to step in to apply justice and punish the person appropriately. It's just that simple.
People have demonized this kid for what he did, but lest we forget some of our own actions when we were his age and what the results would have been had something gone wrong. When I was his age it was pretty much the norm for everyone to pile in a few cars, get some booze, get as wasted as possible and go do stupid shit. I remember street racing out at Emerald, Manana and a few other places where there were a ton of people going a lot faster than 70 MPH that were probably just as drunk as this kid. If something had gone horribly wrong on a big night at Emerald, a lot more than 4 people could have been killed. I'm not excusing Couch's behavior just because some of us did the same or similar things when we were young, but that we all need to look in the mirror at what we've done before we make this kid out to be as bad as Charles Manson. There but for the grace of God go I....
2. I don't handle personal injury cases, but in short, the victims' families have a right to sue to recover a number of different kinds of damages - actual (i.e. medical and funeral costs), loss of future earning, pain & suffering and punitive. I know Sergio Molina has already filed a lawsuit and I suspect some, if not all, of the other families have filed lawsuits too. The way it works is that the victim and/or the victim's family sues everyone that has any potential liability - Ethan Couch, his parents and whoever else may be at fault. If the defendant has insurance that might cover the damages, the insurance company and its lawyers step in and defend the civil case. Obviously, there are policy limits so anything they are awarded over and above the policy limits falls back on the defendant to pay. In Molina's case they have sued Couch, his parents and his dad's company that owed the truck he was in when the accident happened. Couch's liability is obvious, his parent's is fairly obvious as well, but his dad's company??? WTF? How can his dad's company that merely owed the truck be liable? It's called negligent entrustment and is a viable cause of action when the owner of vehicle (or whatever it may be) knew or should have known that the person they allowed to use it lacked the proper skill, abilities, etc. to operate it in a manner that could cause injury to 3rd parties. Again, I don't handle those types of cases, but that's it in a nutshell. In this case, Couch allegedly had a history of drinking, drinking and driving and driving recklessly. Despite his history, his dad's company (and his parents) allowed him to use the truck - they knew or should have known better. You can argue all you want about whether that shouldn't be the law or how our legal system is all about money, but it is what it is and the families have the right to do it. Does getting $20 million really compensate the victims' families, hell no, but it's the only other legal form of justice they have in this situation.
I could go on, but it looks like I've already written a small book that I'm sure 1/2 of y'all will stop reading after the first paragraph and then slam me for something I said.
Comment