This is getting a lot of attention down here. Most think they will appeal on the basis of too lenient of sentence, and or go after the family in civil court.
Unbelievable that the judge gives this kid probation. The defense says he is a product of his parents and was taught wealth buys privilege . . . and the judge gives probation? Doesn't that just reinforce what the parents taught him. He steals beer, drinks to a level of .24 and then crashes his pickup killing 4 people. I don't understand how this person is not in prison. His wife, Hollie Boyles, and daughter, Shelby, left their home to help Breanna Mitchell, whose SUV had broken down. Brian Jennings, a youth pastor, was driving past and also stopped to help. All four were killed when the teen's pickup plowed into the pedestrians. Couch's vehicle also struck a parked car, which then slid into another vehicle driving in the opposite direction.
Sending a 16 year old to prison for something he didn't intentionally do would serve no good purpose.
ITS GOOD TO BE RICH AND WHITE IN AMURRICA. YOU CAN HIRE DOCTORS TO GIVE THE COURT BULLSHIT EXCUSES ABOUT YOUR WHITE PRIVLEDGE SON.
With the path taken by the defense, the families have a pretty solid civil case I would guess. The problem is wealth and privilege? Not for long.
yeah, man..just a kid.. Here is another "kid" down MMs way http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Lugo-BEHEADED-4-victims-freed-heading-US.html
Was it the theft of the beer that was unintentional, the underage consumption thereof, or the driving while intoxicated?
It would protect the public. With him in prison there is no chance of him doing it again and killing innocent people again.
It would make his peers think twice about following his lead, it would help our Justice System retain some credibility, and it would prevent him from personally killing anyone else while he was incarcerated. That's 2 good purposes. I'm sure we can think of others. As for intentions, are you claiming he didn't intend to get drunk or that he didn't intend to drive?
He intentionally drank. He intentionally drove drunk. Both are against the law and he knew it. Those four people are dead because he was selfish. 16 is old enough to know right from wrong.
Besides, hs folks are rich. Rather than having to read "Us" in prison, I am sure his folks can smuggle in Smithsonian.
I can understand the "driving while intoxicated" as a sort of temporary insanity kind of thing. But theft of beer and underage consumption. He needs to face manslaughter charges.
Temporary insanity only really applies to things that are completely outside your control. For example, a father who sees his young daughter being raped, flies off the handle and beats the guy to death. In my mind, that's temporary insanity. Drinking alcohol when you're too young to drink in the first place, and then driving, would not qualify as temporary insanity in any way, shape, or form.
I generally oppose sending teens to prison for lengthy periods of time - but not even juvenile detention? Would this happen if this was a poor black kid? And would people here defend it? What if it was a girl? So you couldn't just say boys will be boys, high spirits, literally in this case? The defense attorney actually raised in the youth's defense that he previously was stopped driving drunk with a passed out drunk unclad 14 year old girl in the passenger seat and faced no consequences. Oi vey. It's a totally different issue, but here in Oakland a 16 year old set an agender teen's clothing on fire while the teen was dozing on a bus and is trying to claim it was a "prank" gone wrong. I have a 14 year old niece and she is smart enough to know setting clothing on fire is not a prank. 16 and 17 is old enough to know better. Not fully mature, but not a child.
He didn't intend to kill anybody. It was a mistake. Putting a 16 year old kid behind bars for 10 years would serve no purpose. If he fucks up while on probation then put him behind bars.
