Discussion in 'The Guru's Pub' started by sykozis, Dec 13, 2013.
No, what is accurate is that he got probation. What I question is the reasoning described in these article. I suspect that being rich was a very, very tiny part of this argument. Some news reporter latched on to that. Remember that there aren't a bunch of news reporters sitting in a courtroom. There is one or none and they have a no legal education and bias toward selling papers, not accuracy.
Unless someone has read the transcripts (which wouldn't be available yet), this is all based on one source. Multiple articles from the same source don't help.
This is how the Twinkie defense started. There was no Twinkie defense.
I mean it is possible, but it is extremely unlikely this was argued as stated and actually did something effective.
They can go after the kid's parants in a civil trial since he is a minor. Civil trial is easier for a favorable judgement for the victim's famalies. Only proof needed is to show that his actions were the cause of their deaths. So the $450,000 per year mental vacation palace is only the beginning of the parent's financial hemorrhaging.
I'm not sure what your point is. Multiple articles from different sources? If you've evidence to the contrary from statements made by relatives such as the father of two of the victims killed, lets hear it. Seriously, I'm not in the habit of posting things that are not accurate. And yes in high profile cases like this it is quite common for reporters to be in the gallery. It is stated that is what the psychologist used as a point for the defense. : Affluenza, a term that a psychologist used this week in asserting that a teenager from a wealthy Tarrant County family should not be sent to prison for killing four people while driving drunk, is not a recognized diagnosis and should not be used to justify bad behavior, experts said Thursday.
On Tuesday, state District Judge Jean Boyd sentenced the 16-year-old to 10 years probation with intensive rehabilitation treatment required.
The families of the people killed have criticized the sentence, which attracted national media attention.
Among the witnesses during a three-day sentencing hearing in a Fort Worth juvenile courtroom was psychologist Gary Miller, called by the defense. Miller testified that as a result of “affluenza,” the boy should not receive the maximum 20-year prison sentence prosecutors were seeking.
The term affluenza was popularized in the late 1990s by Jessie O’Neill, the granddaughter of a past president of General Motors, when she wrote the book The Golden Ghetto: The Psychology of Affluence. It has since been used to describe a condition in which children – generally from richer families – have a sense of entitlement, are irresponsible, make excuses for poor behavior, and sometimes dabble in drugs and alcohol, explained Dr. Gary Buffone, a Jacksonville, Fla., psychologist who does family wealth advising.
Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2013/12/13/5416051/affluenza-defense-in-criminal.html#storylink=cpy
Here's the psychologist admitting to Anderson Cooper of CNN to using the term...
You can argue the judge didn't take that into consideration. That it was used by the defense at his sentencing hearing, is as I noted, a fact.
You're missing the point entirely. The problem is that one journalist, probably the only one in the audience, picks up a sound bite and runs with it.
It doesn't mean that the judge gave such and such sentence because he bought some bull**** "afluenza" defense anymore than the "Twinkie defense" existed. We're almost certainly taking the perspective of a single journalist in the audience -- the likelihood of more than one in a local trial is extremely low.
Its pretty well know in the criminal system that you should take any lay media reporting on the justice system with grain of salt. Yes, I'm sure they mention "afluenza" in the sentencing. They also mentioned Twinkies in the Milk trial.
I'd love to see what the judge actually said during sentencing, but by the time a transcript is produced we'll be past this and we'll just have some urban legend. Seriously, that LA Times article compares it to the Twinkie Defense as if the Twinkie Defense was a real thing.
I'm not saying it didn't happen the way these articles claim, but I am taking it with a heavy grain of salt.
Missing the point? I cited the psychologist STATING he made the argument at his sentencing hearing. He's quoted repeatedly. It DID happen that way. Your argument is correct in that we don't know what weight the judge gave it at sentencing if any. It's a FACT it was argued at sentencing. The Times doesn't equate it to the 'twinkie defense'. It points out that defense wasn't real, that it wasn't argued by the attorney's by linking to the wiki article correctly pointing out the 'twinkie defense' was an invention never argued by the attorneys for White. Come on, this is getting silly.
I don't have a link to the article on my laptop, but the judge did in fact state in an interview exactly why the sentence was given. HeavyHemi is essentially correct, though the judge chose to avoid the term "affluenza"...
I'm amazed the parents didn't do the right thing and refuse to pay for representation.
They've set a very bad example - mess up and we'll clean up the mess.
That's bad parenting day one. He'll never learn, and if he had the capacity to learn he would not have killed anyone. Fact.
it will work itself out in the end, it just takes a little longer
Indeed unfair. At least one can hope the kid learns from his mistake...
He won't learn.
Bad parenting breeds bad children.
When he gets back to school, he'll at least be harassed there.
Murder is murder...little **** deserves death penalty
With his fellow spoiled rich buddies? Nah.
prosecutors try again to jail teen for drunken wreck that killed 4 pedestrians...
Good way to skirt around the 5th amendment.
it would be easier to just buy an indulgence from the master of the ocean tides ( a pardon from obama) or just decree the teen is exempt from the law.. isn't new america great?:bang:
agree, civil lawsuit against his parents are the only recourse.
and its happening now
wouldn't have ever made it out of the courthouse parking lot alive if it were my family...