Discussion in 'Members' Lounge' started by SlushboxTeggy, Dec 12, 2013.
Sentence in Texas teen's fatal DWI wreck stirs ire
The best way to deal will a rich kid who feels he's entitled, is clearly to let him off of criminal charges that every other citizen would have to face, no matter what.
This part is important though.
The reason the defense is pissed off is, he's effectively getting a more realistic punishment here that would be more harmful to him down the road if he decides to fuck up again. All he would have to do if he got a jail sentence is keep out of trouble for a few years -then he's back out on the streets by the time he's 18, has his juvenile record expunged, and by the time he's 21 he has a wide open clean record with which to do whatever he wants - including but not limited to getting shitfaced and running over more pedestrians. He gets in any trouble for the next ten years, and he's actually going to get what he has coming - which is certain to happen.
I agree it's bullshit...but it's not the worst scenario out of the available options.
but they will lock you up for years for some reefer in your pocket in most states.
The DAD of a kid is going to jail for a party at his house... and it's not even certain he was there at the time... because a kid died in a wreck after.
Wow. This is garbage.
But remember, this is Texas- and now his face is plastered all over the internet for everyone with guns to go see- everyone with guns meaning apparently the entire population of the state except me. Oh well.
At least you're free to make that choice.
Or they could have tried him as an adult, like they most likely would have done to someone else, and he could have rotted in jail for 20 years.
Last I checked, adults are able to get probation too.
And what's to guarantee a conviction? What if they tried him as an adult, and they got a jury full of yuppie "It's the parents' fault" types, and he got acquitted? Then he's back out on the street with NOTHING against him.
People don't realize that prosecutors have a LOT to take into account, and in some circumstances it's better to err on the side of caution and ensure that there is SOME punishment and future potential for conesquence, versus risking letting the guy back on the streets clean and clear.
They can't just say "He did it, send him to jail for the rest of his life!" and be done with it - they have to give him the same treatment as they would as someone that the public would view as innocent. If you want the courts to just throw anyone who looks to be guilty in jail, then don't cry when someone who's innocent but has seemingly convincing evidence against them gets locked up - the system is in place to prevent that. And, in that same breath, because of the opposite end of the spectrum (i.e. 'keeping innocent people from getting shafted'), sometimes people who ARE guilty may not be as harshly punished as some would like.
But it's still better than him being tried as an adult, acquitted, and then injuring or killing MORE people. You mean to tell me that if a 16 year old got 20 years as an adult, you don't think he'd make parole in a few years? Please.
edit: and actually, that's the exact reason I have a CONVICTION on my record - I was legitimately innocent as could be, and the officer's dash camera proved that...but my attorneys had to get the recording thrown out because there was a brief moment when I got a case of "Can't shut the fuck up" and said something that would have been harmful to my case, despite my innocence. I had the option of going to trial and facing a jury with the knowledge that I was completely innocent, and that we had a pretty damn decent defense - but there was the possibility of jail time, and on the day of my trial I'd been dealing with the court system for over a year(including being out on bail, being on temporary probation, having to go to the courthouse once a week to pee, being constantly monitored 24/7, etc)...and I had the option of pleading guilty and getting off with 'time served' and paying a few fines and having a conviction on my record...OR I could go ahead and go through the trial, and hope that the twelve jurors weren't complete fuckwit imbeciles and that they'd see the truth and find me not guilty - but I'm aware of the general 'intelligence and comprehension' capabilities of people who weren't bright enough to get off of jury duty - so, despite my innocence, I opted to plead guilty and be done with it.
Think of it this way, the people who serve as jurors are the same people that put mustard, pickles, and onions on the cheeseburger you ordered as 'meat and cheese only.' That's who is deciding your innocence or guilt, NOT well-educated intelligent types. Think about the mentality of the people that make you say "AAAAAAAARRRRGGGHHHHHH I don't want to live on this planet anymore!" and now think that those people are going to be looking at this pussy-ass little high school kid, probably crying, while his lawyers throw out "It's mommy and daddy's fault! He didn't know any better!"
Ask yourself seriously, as completely fucking stupid as the majority of the population is now, would it legitimately surprise you AT ALL to see that kid go to trial and have a jury find him not guilty?
Yeah. I'll take probation, and with that the added consequences if and when he fucks up again.
I am sorry that you had to plead guilty to something that you did not do, but I still feel that probation is not enough punishment. I just think it sucks that all he has to is keep his nose clean for ten years and it will be like it never happened.
I agree with that 100%, but I do want to make a correction. An acquittal doesn't get you off clean and clear. Even though my assault charges were dropped (not not guilty, dropped outright) 5 years ago, it still pops up when a cop pulls me over. Because apparently anyone with a violent charge is "violent prone" for the rest of their life. Maybe it varies state to state.
Some people actually WANT to serve on a jury. for nullification purposes.
i love jury duty
Separate names with a comma.