Ethan couch here in Tx is on the run he got ten years probation for a car wreck that he caused while drunk, killing four people. His lawyers says he is too rich to go to jail or prison claiming affluenza. Should he be locked up?

9

9 Answers

Jann Nikka Profile
Jann Nikka answered

In his case he should have been sentenced to QUADRUPLE Life.

He deliberately murder 4 people.

He showed no remorse, no emotions, didn't apologized and didn't show sorrow during the trial. Secondly, to claim you are too rich to know right  from wrong or you didn't know drinking and driving is deadly wrong. Is PURE BULLDODO.

Now that he has violated his parole he needs to be in prison. Others have gotten far worst punishment for a lesser offense. Which did not involving deliberately taking a life. 

He willfully murder  4 people.

Thrice Gotcha Profile
Thrice Gotcha answered

that POS deserves to be in solitary 24 hours a day for 10 years at the very least he has no compassion or remorse for what he has done

John Doe Profile
John Doe answered

Not only was he drunk driving, he actually killed people because he's an idiot. YES he needs to be in jail! I don't want him or anyone else taking MY life into their hands because they want to drink and drive, I don't care how much money they have.

Walt O'Reagun Profile
Walt O'Reagun answered

I'm split on locking up drunk drivers.
I think it would be more "just" if they had all their driving privileges revoked, and had their wages garnished to pay the victims of their crime.

And with GPS monitoring, it would be a simple matter to determine IF they were driving ... Or taking public transportation.

3 People thanked the writer.
Didge Doo
Didge Doo commented
Four people dead, others injured, one wit permanent brain damage? Loss of licence would hardly be adequate. (Just saw your answer. I received no notification.)
Walt O'Reagun
Walt O'Reagun commented
In this specific case ... I would take ALL his money as restitution for the victims. And since his mother helped him flee the country, I would take all HER money as well.

That would solve their "affluenzia" problem.
Didge Doo Profile
Didge Doo answered

I remember that case. It made a big splash on this side of the Pacific. It's hard for anybody outside the US to understand how his parents were able to buy him out of prison.

I'd lock him up and leave him there, and I'd throw the judge in with him. I can only guess at the size of the bribe he took to accept an "affluenza" defence -- and to set a precedent for other wealthy louts.

4 People thanked the writer.
View all 4 Comments
Didge Doo
Didge Doo commented
A different situation I think, Walt. Even so, as you pointed out, it did set a precedent.
The problem with the banks, of course, is that if too many fail we could end up with another 1929.
The people who made the bad decisions should certainly have been held accountable.
Walt O'Reagun
Walt O'Reagun commented
I was thinking more along the lines of the government actually using the wording "too bid to fail" ... which, to the public, was interpreted as "too rich to be punished".
Didge Doo
Didge Doo commented
Sorry, that was intended to be a comment; I didn't realise it had posted as an answer.
Araya Lioness Profile
Araya Lioness answered

There have been men who were sentenced for lesser crimes. He should definitely have been imprisoned. It's completely unfair and spits in the face of the justice system and the victims.

Essentially, the richer you are, the more you get away with.

Answer Question

Anonymous