Drunk Teen Kills 4, Gets Probation

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
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.
 
tlongII said:
Sending a 16 year old to prison for something he didn't intentionally do would serve no good purpose.
Click to expand...

Was it the theft of the beer that was unintentional, the underage consumption thereof, or the driving while intoxicated?
 
tlongII said:
Sending a 16 year old to prison for something he didn't intentionally do would serve no good purpose.
Click to expand...

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?
 
tlongII said:
Sending a 16 year old to prison for something he didn't intentionally do would serve no good purpose.
Click to expand...

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.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Was it the theft of the beer that was unintentional, the underage consumption thereof, or the driving while intoxicated?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Eastoff said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
I would say the same thing if the kid was black or a girl.
 
tlongII said:
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.
Click to expand...

Do the crime, do the time. Those four people he killed have no future whatsoever.
 
tlongII said:
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.
Click to expand...

I don't get the distinction if he does it again then he goes to jail. What purpose does it serve putting him in jail if he fucks up again that is not served by putting him in jail the first time.

The fact that he can fuck up again, drink and kill innocent people again is why I want him behind bars. I don't want to see if he fucks up again. Interesting question: Is the judge's job to think what is best for the defendant or to protect the community?
 
I personally don't think the community is at great risk. You don't need to put a 16 year old in prison for 10 years for him to learn his lesson.
 
tlongII said:
I personally don't think the community is at great risk. You don't need to put a 16 year old in prison for 10 years for him to learn his lesson.
Click to expand...

It isn't about learning his lesson. It's about repaying a debt to society. He killed people. This isn't a case of shoplifting or running into a fire hydrant and then leaving the scene of the crime. He killed four people. Those people are gone. He's lucky to be alive at all. He doesn't deserve to go on an live his life like nothing happened.
 
tlongII said:
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.
Click to expand...

So if a man robs a bank with a gun, and he accidentally shoots and kills four people, should he not go to jail either? I mean he didn't mean to shoot anyone. He thought the gun was on safety.
 
Mediocre Man said:
So if a man robs a bank with a gun, and he accidentally shoots and kills four people, should he not go to jail either? I mean he didn't mean to shoot anyone. He thought the gun was on safety.
Click to expand...

Don't forget, the man is only 16, so that makes it alright.
 
Natebishop3 said:
It isn't about learning his lesson. It's about repaying a debt to society. He killed people. This isn't a case of shoplifting or running into a fire hydrant and then leaving the scene of the crime. He killed four people. Those people are gone. He's lucky to be alive at all. He doesn't deserve to go on an live his life like nothing happened.
Click to expand...

What debt is being repayed to society? How do you measure such a repayment?
 
tlongII said:
What debt is being repayed to society? How do you measure such a repayment?
Click to expand...

4 dead people that would not be dead if he had not driven drunk.

That's a huge debt, and he damn sure isn't repaying it by serving probation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dviss1
OT What if he was black??
5 6 7
Replies
186
Views
10K
MARIS61
MARIS61
PDXFonz
Dog shields family from gunfire
Replies
13
Views
1K
oldmangrouch
O
SlyPokerDog
OT We're just killing people now for stupid reasons
2 3
Replies
68
Views
4K
SlyPokerDog
SlyPokerDog
truebluefan
Lisa Robin Kelly, of 'That '70s Show,' dead at 43, her agent says
Replies
2
Views
611
truebluefan
truebluefan
EL PRESIDENTE
Homosexual Sexual relations are banned in India.
Replies
11
Views
563
EL PRESIDENTE
EL PRESIDENTE

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top