A 16-year-old avoided spending time in prison for killing four people in a car accident in June after the judge bought his lawyers' argument that he was the victim of wealth.
So now ghetto black people will all get away with probation because they are the victims of poverty?
The district attorney in the case charged Erzlinger with two misdemeanors instead of a felony, noting that "felony convictions have some pretty serious job implications for someone in Mr. Erzinger's profession."
Makes sense.
f**k awesome. So this kid had BAC of .24 when he mowed down and killed those 4 people and he gets off the charges by going to a $450k a 'private counseling' session, which is likely to be a nice rehab facility with splendid views. Give me a break. A personal buddy of mine had 2.5 times the legal limit of alcohol when he crashed and killed two people. He's doing 16 years in the pen.
Is it even a surprise that many people already think that there aren't consequences to their actions, when one can get out of killing 4 people with a lawyer using the term "affluenza" as defense?
Psychologist G. Dick Miller testified for the defense that Couch suffered from "affluenza," a condition in which "his family felt that wealth bought privilege and there was no rational link between behavior and consequences," KHOU reported.
...not giving him the proper consequences is only going to exacerbate the affluenza.
Anyway, reality is that wealth DOES buy privilege. This isn't the only example. It happens all the damn time. It happens constantly in small ways that we might not even notice. It happens often in big ways that we might not find as outrageous. Occasionally it's as completely ludicrous as this case, but usually the people involve have better poker faces.
1980 Buick LeSabre 4.1L 5MT
Put your car in your sig!
Learn to launch/FAQs/lugging/misused terms: meta-sig
watkins wrote:Humans have rear-biased AWD. Cows have 4WD
The "affluenza" defense strikes me as ridiculous, but keep in mind that press reports about these types of events don't always get the details right - especially when they are recycling other press reports. (Remember the "Telephone" game?)
For example, the Huffington Post article reports, without elaboration, that the judge "bought" the affluenza defense, but the local CBS article on which it was based does not seem to say that. Also, even if the defendant was tried as an adult, I would expect that his age (16) was a consideration during sentencing.
Does wealth buy privilege? Unquestionably yes, in a general sense. Who could possibly deny that. But the salient question here is whether other under-18 defendants have faced heavier penalties when facing similar charges.
AHTOXA wrote:So now ghetto black people will all get away with probation because they are the victims of poverty?
P.S. AHTOXA, this is a outrageous comment that adds nothing to your otherwise valid point - that a defendant's wealth should not buy a more lenient criminal sentence.
A friend of my brother's got 25 to life, I think, when he killed a group of brothers after driving drunk. I grew up in a mid sized town where most didn't have a ton of money. We would never have gotten off for being "victims" of wealth. Talk about a also in the face. "We're sorry, you've been given everything you've ever wanted. You can't be responsible for being a moron."
It's ridiculous that judges and law enforcement seem to think that the wealthy need to be coddled and not face the consequences of their actions.
17 Mazda6 Touring
18 Mazda3 iSport
InlinePaul wrote:The driving force of new fangled features to sell more cars [is to] cater to the masses' abject laziness!
AHTOXA wrote:So now ghetto black people will all get away with probation because they are the victims of poverty?
P.S. AHTOXA, this is a outrageous comment that adds nothing to your otherwise valid point - that a defendant's wealth should not buy a more lenient criminal sentence.
It might be a bit of a charged comment, but it illustrates the absurdity if this situation. Of course, it was also a very generalizing statement, I get that. I understand the the offender is minor and I am open-minded to other variables that we are not privy of. None the less, I highly disagree with the logic of the ruling, thus the 'comparison'.
AHTOXA wrote:
So now ghetto black people will all get away with probation because they are the victims of poverty?
Actually, I think it's just the opposite. People who live in poverty will not get away with probation because they aren't privileged and not aware of consequences.
As ridiculous as this case seems, I find it fascinating that a rich kid could be so sheltered and so out of touch with reality and consequences that a court wouldn't reasonably punish him for his actions. If I were that kid, I'd go into hiding. Seriously. Someone just may put a bullet in his head since he basically got away with killing those innocent people.
AHTOXA wrote:
So now ghetto black people will all get away with probation because they are the victims of poverty?
Actually, I think it's just the opposite. People who live in poverty will not get away with probation because they aren't privileged and not aware of consequences.
Of course.That was the intent of my comment - to illustrate that the opposite would never happen - that one could never prove (while keeping within financial means of the less privileged) that poverty was to blame for their actions, much like privilege was in this case.
Tone and true intent of a message doesn't always translate well via typed text.
AHTOXA wrote:
Of course.That was the intent of my comment - to illustrate that the opposite would never happen - that one could never prove (while keeping within financial means of the less privileged) that poverty was to blame for their actions, much like privilege was in this case.
Tone and true intent of a message doesn't always translate well via typed text.
Haha...okay, got it. I took your words literally and didn't realize what you were really trying to convey.
