68 replies to this topic

[Sweeney]

The Arrow is the "in" vigilante right now. Archery is big this season.

[Yung]

Is it really? I've been watching that show since the Pilot. I didn't realize it was actually popular.

[Bone]

What is really the point of putting a 16 year old in prison for a non-intentional crime? I understand a 10 year probation should match a 10 year driving ban.

I hate drink drivers but I don't see the point of incarnating a youth for the pure sake of revenge disguised as justice.

 

I don't necessarily think incarceration was the solution in this situation. What I find disturbing is the justification for the sentence and knowledge that a poor person/minority would be given time in prison.

 

 

another day, another rich people get away with crime. but 10 years probation still sound kinda harsh, though.

 

 

i don't think norway is so experienced in handling these sorts of stuff. have you seen their prisons? they look even better than my house! really shows how rare crimes happening there.

 

Or, one of the reasons their crime rate is so low is that their prison system focuses on rehabilitation and they don't have a prison-industrial complex designed to keep people in the system?

[Drakonid]

I'm going to leave this here;
 
http://www.wfaa.com/...-235688241.html

Way to focus on something not relevant to the case.

[Florg]

Way to focus on something not relevant to the case.

Never said it had any relevance to the case, did I?

 

More so an insight into previous decisions made by the same judge in a fairly comparable situation.

 

I never claimed what relevance it had to this case or anything else.

[Drakonid]

Never said it had any relevance to the case, did I?
 
More so an insight into previous decisions made by the same judge in a fairly comparable situation.
 
I never claimed what relevance it had to this case or anything else.

I mean your quote regarding the previous case, sure, the guy was black, but his intentions were different and according to the article, showed no remorse. The cases are not comparable at all.

[Florg]

I mean your quote regarding the previous case, sure, the guy was black, but his intentions were different and according to the article, showed no remorse. The cases are not comparable at all.

(well the quote was merely to supply a snippet for those who don't like reading to give a general idea of what the article was about)

 

I would disagree with you that they aren't comparable on any level.

 

Just because he intended to cause harm to a single individual should not warrant giving him a harsher penalty than someone who didn't intend on hurting anyone and, because of his decisions to 1) Drink underage 2) Take medication that wasn't prescribed to him 3) Get in a car and drive around, it resulted in him killing 4 people, paralyzing 1 and injuring another.

If he had only injured or killed a single individual, I could possibly understand a lighter sentence because his intention wasn't to cause harm to someone but using the ideology that in cases like this, intent should determine level of punishment, than all DUI offenders who killed someone shouldn't go to jail. None of them intend to cause harm to other people.

Sure the cases aren't exactly a like. One intended to cause harm, the other didn't but I see no logical basis for sending the first kid to jail while giving the second probation after killing and injuring multiple people. I don't see how intent can give a basis for these punishments.

Edited by Florg, 14 December 2013 - 11:22 AM.

[GhostMommy]

The intent in a DUI case is they started drinking.   You started drinking, you took illegal meds and you didn't give your keys to a designated driver.   That was the intent.  No one held him down and poured tequila down his throat.  

 

However, to say that anyone "shows remorse" is as much a cultural/behavioral thing.   When Uncle Yart was on trial,  the lawyer had a coach to teach him how to act as if he had remorse.   Uncle Yart will tell you that the pervert deserved what he got at his hand, but at trial Uncle was coached on how to act like what he did was just being "overwhelmed by the situation" that he "lost control" at the thought of sick dog that would harm children.  Uncle Yart's only real regret is that he got caught, he has no remorse over hurting anyone that would hurt my cousins. 

[Drakonid]

stuff

Okay, maybe not in any level, but the cases are quite different.
Anyway, you seem to think that I believe the sentence for the rich kid was fair, and that's not the case, I think it's a load of crap, but I do think that the sentence for the other guy was reasonable.

[antitranscendentalist]

I just think it's bad that this kids life is basically over now but then again, my sympathy leaves because he thought he was immune to the rules and did that. The whole situation is just bad...

[NapisaurusRex]

Victims’ families file multimillion dollar lawsuits against “affluenza” teen

[Dan]

Victims’ families file multimillion dollar lawsuits against “affluenza” teen

 

And rightly so... Throw him in a cell with the other murderers and I wonder how he'll feel about it all then.

[GhostMommy]

Dan, you can file a civil suit no matter if they are or are not in jail.  The suit is not for the sin, but for the financial loss caused by the act.  All a civil suit can do is get money.

[Dan]

Dan, you can file a civil suit no matter if they are or are not in jail.  The suit is not for the sin, but for the financial loss caused by the act.  All a civil suit can do is get money.

 

Yeah, I understand, thank you...  -- and I agree that the victims' families should get every penny they deserve.

[Kat]

I was reading the post about this on reddit, it came out that he was also driving a company work truck when he killed those people! They are so fucked now.. not only financially, but their reputation is permanently stained. Maybe now he will be cured of his "affluenza" 

 

Adding the top post of the thread on reddit because I like it so much:

 

Lawyers for affluenza teen: He has so much money he doesn't know any better.

Lawyers for victims: We can fix that.

Edited by Kat, 17 December 2013 - 02:28 PM.

[Mishelle]

It's really crazy to me that there is such thing as $400,000+ rehabilitation facilities. It seems to me like they strive more to be like vacation resorts rather than actual rehabilitation clinics. Either way I hope this family gets taken for everything they have and maybe they'll learn what boundaries and laws are.

[Frizzle]

Why should the family have to pay for one of it's members mistakes? Would you be happy to be made homeless or skint because you're Aunt has a gambling/theft problem? Besides, how does that make amends or even improve the current situation?

[Sweeney]

Why should the family have to pay for one of it's members mistakes? Would you be happy to be made homeless or skint because you're Aunt has a gambling/theft problem? Besides, how does that make amends or even improve the current situation?

Don't be silly, Lee. Why on Earth would you think the Justice System is for justice?! Everyone knows it's all about revenge.

[luvsmyncis]

Why should the family have to pay for one of it's members mistakes? Would you be happy to be made homeless or skint because you're Aunt has a gambling/theft problem? Besides, how does that make amends or even improve the current situation?

 

In this particular case, the offender is underage therefore, he is still under the guardianship of his parents. They should be held responsible. Anyway, it's what their lawyer would have wanted...

 

Lawyers for Couch, 16, had argued that the teen's parents should share part of the blame for the crash because they never set limits for the boy and gave him everything he wanted.

 

Share the blame!