Shop Products
Houzz Logo Print
iheartgiantschnauzer

Affluenza?

The Twinkie defense has led us to the affluenza defense? When did this become a legitimate psychological defense? I don't even know where to begin on this....

Poor spoiled rich kid kills 4 pedestrians and receives 10 years probation because he suffers from affluenza. Am I the only person disgusted by this outcome?

Comments (19)

  • graywings123
    10 years ago

    I think people get light sentences in vehicular homicides because of the lack of intent.

  • iheartgiantschnauzer
    Original Author
    10 years ago

    Gray -

    If a middle class or impoverished teenager had been 3x over the limit do you honestly think they would have received no jail time for killing a youth pastor and three other pedestrians? They couldnt claim that their spoiled upbringing led to a life without consequnces and a need for intense psychotherapy.

    I'm not suggesting te kid neede to receive the full 20 year sentence, but not even receiving a symbolic 60 day sentence (honestly I think he should have received atleast 4 years) is ridiculous.

  • neetsiepie
    10 years ago

    Ugh...this is such a sore subject for me. Yes. This happens. Much, much more frequently than is publicized.

    My eldest DD works as the victims assistance coordinator for the courts. She sees this stuff first hand, cases are pled out for those who can afford the good attorneys, and those who need PD's get harsher sentences. Simple matter of cost issues. The paid atty can spend all the time in the world on the defense and the courts (DA's) know this. PD's are working for far less-only paid by the State at a fraction of their billable rate-so they put out the best deal they know the DA will take to get out of the case.

    My own son was a victim of something like this. In his case-the punishment certainly did not fit the crime and he paid dearly for trying to take care of his responsibilities as an adult and not have his parents bail him out, so to speak.

    (In a nutshell, my son was convicted of 5 felonies and sent to prison for 13 months, that he served in full at a MAXIMUM SECURITY PRISON because when he was a 17/18 stupid skateboarder kid, he and buddies put stickers on telephone poles and stop signs as part of an act known as 'slap tagging').

  • iheartgiantschnauzer
    Original Author
    10 years ago

    Pesky-

    The lopsided punishments doled out based on socioeconomic status or race is staggering. And the average budget a PD can allot to a defense directly influences how effective a defense can be. all matters worthy of discssion In this particukar case a withness for the defense was a psychologist discussing hiw the defendent suffered from affluenza. If slaptagging/trespassing it vandalism or destruction if property can land a kid in jail for months or years it seems gross and wanton endangerment while DUI and then killing 4 and injuring others should have received at a minimum some token of jail time. I can't believe the "affluenza" defense negated any need for punitive jail time.

    So now the cure for being spoiled an callous rich kid is years away from the indulgent parents and therapy.... The notion of "affluenza" is offensive to me. Must we excuse all poor decisions am bad behavior away with some psychological condition that turns the perpetrator into the victim?

    This post was edited by iheartgiantschnauzer on Thu, Dec 12, 13 at 10:58

  • cooperbailey
    10 years ago

    Graywings got it right.
    In MD Gross negligence needs to be proven or it is just pay fines in traffic court. Unfortunately only MD, OK and Puerto Rico all have this unreasonable burden of proof in vehicular homicide cases. The DA told us the best they could hope for was that the driver would show up in traffic court rather than pay fines ahead of the court date. Then higher fines could be levied and more points assigned.
    My mom was killed and the driver of the other car paid a small fine.
    It's not always about rich vs poor, it is often about bad laws or in this instance lack of statutes, since the determination of gross negligence is based on case law and is up to the judge to find. A month before my DM was killed there was a notorious accident in Woodlawn in which a car jumped the sidewalk and killed 6 or 7 people at a bus stop. Yep, Driver paid a fine. end of story.

  • iheartgiantschnauzer
    Original Author
    10 years ago

    Cooper- sorry to hear about your mother.

    I'm not sure I agree with you here. In texa where this case took place the boy was found guilty if intoxicated manslaughter. The maximum punishment was 20 years and te boy would have been eligible for parole in 2 years. The judge agreed with the "affluenza" defense and sentenced te boy to 10 years probation as the judge feared the boy would not get proper therapy in the corrections system.

  • marlene_2007
    10 years ago

    When I first heard the headline teaser on CNN yesterday, I assumed that it was exaggerating the true story so that people would stay tuned. To my extreme disgust, it had not been exaggerated. The defendant had not been taught by his parents to say he was sorry when he did something wrong, instead he was given money. The defendant basically is a victim of bad parenting. If this is the rationale of the judge in handing down such an insult of a sentence, I wonder if the parents can now be prosecuted for Affluenza. (sarcasm added).

    Cooper, I am so so sorry about your mom. How horrible.

    ILGS, this is OT but I was thinking of you at 3:00 a.m. I hope you are doing well.

  • iheartgiantschnauzer
    Original Author
    10 years ago

    Marina thanks! My docs are trying to taper down the prednisone now so I haven't had quite as many sleepless nights. But ive had a nasty infection this week so we may have to amp the dose back up... fune balancing act right now. anyway, Hope you get a better night's sleep tonight!

    And yes suing the parents over "affluenza" is the next frontier!

  • marlene_2007
    10 years ago

    IHGS, you have an amazing attitude. I will continue to hold you in my thoughts!

  • neetsiepie
    10 years ago

    Oops...sorry for the mini rant. Not enough coffee this am. Hadnt looked to the definition of this new `defense`.

    My rant about economic criminal prosecution was not appropriate to the topic. I`d not heard of this defense-will do some reading up on it. Thanks.

  • graywings123
    10 years ago

    Pesky, your post was not "not appropriate." This young adult likely got special treatment because his parents have money.

    The only positive that can come out of this situation is that if he is still a minor, the parents are looking at some wrongful death civil lawsuits aimed at them.

  • blfenton
    10 years ago

    The parents of this young adult have been bailing him out of trouble since he was 13. This is a kid who has never had to say sorry or take responsibility for any thing because his parents have taught him that it wasn't necessary.

    The courts have now told him that he doesn't have to take responsibility for his actions. He gets 10 years probation, no loss of drivers license no nothing except time in a rich kids counselling rehab facility to the tune of $500,000 paid for by Daddy.

    Four people killed, one person in a complete state of paralysis with the only communication being eye-blinks, another one with numerous broken bones and injuries. This kids parents are currently facing $20 million worth of law suits. And he gets to sit in some cushy rehab facility with all the other rich kids who are being hidden away by their parents and the courts.

    At least send him to a state facility with over-worked social workers, frazzled counselors and the other middle-income kids. He actually deserves less than that.

    This whole thing absolutely disgusts me.

  • maire_cate
    10 years ago

    If they are going to accept 'affluenza' as a legitimate defense then it seems to me that the parents are the cause of this condition...therefore...prosecute them.

    It makes as much sense as letting the kid go.

  • TxMarti
    10 years ago

    ihgs, that story has been the subject of tv news reports and talk radio here the past few days. When even prosecutors express their disappointment over the judge's decision, you know it was the wrong decision. But that judge is probably set for life now, as if she weren't already.

    You can bet that anyone else would have gotten life. There are even people in prison with life sentences who have done much less.

    That kid has been trouble for years and his parents kept bailing him out. Maybe two years away from him will straighten him out, but I doubt it.

    Edited to correct he=she

    This post was edited by marti8a on Fri, Dec 13, 13 at 21:19

  • iheartgiantschnauzer
    Original Author
    10 years ago

    Pesky, your comments were appropriate. No need to apologize. For the record I appreciate tangential conversations.

    Bl, glad I'm not alone in my disgust. Marie, exactly my thoughts. Seems this judge's decision would have to strengthen any civil suits brought against the mother and father.

    I wonder if the law suits will even make a dent in the networth of the parents or will be covered by an umbrella insurance policy ...

    This post was edited by iheartgiantschnauzer on Fri, Dec 13, 13 at 1:08

  • joaniepoanie
    10 years ago

    I could rationalize this outcome if it were a poor kid from the projects with uneducated parents and all the ills those might bring....but this kid came from a wealthy background and probably the best schools...he is educated, his parents are presumably educated....he knows the difference between right and wrong....the don't drink and drive message has been pervasive for 30 years. Plus, this wasn't his first brush with trouble. The judge had an opportunity to teach him what his parents failed to and to send the larger message .....that there are consequences for bad behavior and being wealthy doesnt give you free reign because you have the $ to get out of any bad situation. The judge failed the victims, the community, and perhaps mostly, this kid...and his parents. He/she should be forced to step down.

  • demifloyd
    10 years ago

    I could rationalize this outcome if it were a poor kid from the projects with uneducated parents and all the ills those might bring....but this kid came from a wealthy background and probably the best schools...he is educated, his parents are presumably educated....he knows the difference between right and wrong..

    *

    Poor and uneducated people aren't capable of knowing right from wrong?

    Different standards should exist for conviction of a crime and/or sentencing because one's parents were poor and uneducated?

    This post was edited by demifloyd on Fri, Dec 13, 13 at 16:18

  • 4boys2
    10 years ago

    Give him 20 yrs jail he's out in 2.
    Give him 10 yrs probation and he slips he goes in for 10.

    Yes it's not fair or equal.
    Yes money played a role.
    His parents have the ability to pay for the long term treatment facility that he will be released to.

    I would rather have that child away from his parents than an angry 18 yo being let out of jail.

    And again it's not fair.
    I wish that the system could afford that opportunity to ALL young offenders.
    Rich or poor.

  • texanjana
    10 years ago

    Seems to be par for the course here in Texas. White, wealthy, walk free. The girl in the linked article killed the sister of a friend of my oldest son. Sickening.

    Here is a link that might be useful: Gabrielle Nestande Drunk Driving Hit & Run

0