Being wealthy is now a defense?

Being wealthy is now a defense? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DomKen -> Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/11/2013 1:56:28 PM)
http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2013/12/10/teen-sentenced-to-probation-for-deadly-dwi-crash/ Kid got probation for killing 4 people because his parents have a lot of money and he is used to getting his own way. WTF!

kalikshama -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/11/2013 2:15:54 PM)
While I hope he learned his lesson, I doubt he makes it through the 10 years of probation without fucking up.

jlf1961 -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/11/2013 2:18:36 PM)
Justice in America is blind if you have enough money.

DomKen -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/11/2013 2:46:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Justice in America is blind if you have enough money. True enough but has it ever been so blatant?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/11/2013 3:14:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2013/12/10/teen-sentenced-to-probation-for-deadly-dwi-crash/ Kid got probation for killing 4 people because his parents have a lot of money and he is used to getting his own way. WTF! That is totally fucked up. Totally. I hope there was is civil suit that results in massive money going to the victims' families.

eulero83 -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/11/2013 4:19:53 PM)
It says the parents were considered responsible, will they be prosecuted for something?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/11/2013 4:31:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: eulero83 It says the parents were considered responsible, will they be prosecuted for something? Might be part of a civil suit.

muhly22222 -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/11/2013 5:45:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: eulero83 It says the parents were considered responsible, will they be prosecuted for something? Might be part of a civil suit. I can't see a criminal prosecution here. I don't know what sort of crime this would be. The problem comes in showing any sort of intention on the part of the parents, and almost every crime requires some sort of "mens rea," or some intention to commit the bad act. Even a civil lawsuit would have problems of causation. In order to be held liable, the plaintiff(s) would have to prove that the parents were both actual and proximate causes of the injuries. While it appears that the youth has admitted actual (note that the parents have not, so that couldn't be held against them in a civil case), there are serious problems with proximate causation. The kid stole beer and drove drunk...that would be an intervening, superseding act, which would cut off any liability the parents might have had. Maybe there's an argument that the parents were negligent in allowing him to drive, but even there, the plaintiff(s) would have to show that the parents had good reason to believe he would drive in an unsafe manner.

TheHeretic -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/11/2013 5:48:57 PM)
FR "Is now a defense?" What the hell would make anyone think that the wealthy getting special treatment in criminal cases, if the case ever gets presed at all, is some sort of new development??? Hell, they are probably more likely to be held to some accounting in the modern day than at any other time in history. Oh. Wait. That's right. We are all supposed to talk about inequality now, because the liberals want to change the subject away from all the other shit they have been fucking up. Emails have gone out about, and we can always count on the O'bots and developmentally disabled libbies to obey their talking point emails...

MasterG2kTR -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/11/2013 6:10:45 PM)
I wonder how much the parents paid the judge.......

DesideriScuri -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/11/2013 6:33:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic FR "Is now a defense?" What the hell would make anyone think that the wealthy getting special treatment in criminal cases, if the case ever gets presed at all, is some sort of new development??? Hell, they are probably more likely to be held to some accounting in the modern day than at any other time in history. Oh. Wait. That's right. We are all supposed to talk about inequality now, because the liberals want to change the subject away from all the other shit they have been fucking up. Emails have gone out about, and we can always count on the O'bots and developmentally disabled libbies to obey their talking point emails... Maybe it's just the overtness of this particular case.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/11/2013 6:35:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: muhly22222 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: eulero83 It says the parents were considered responsible, will they be prosecuted for something? Might be part of a civil suit. I can't see a criminal prosecution here. I don't know what sort of crime this would be. The problem comes in showing any sort of intention on the part of the parents, and almost every crime requires some sort of "mens rea," or some intention to commit the bad act. Even a civil lawsuit would have problems of causation. In order to be held liable, the plaintiff(s) would have to prove that the parents were both actual and proximate causes of the injuries. While it appears that the youth has admitted actual (note that the parents have not, so that couldn't be held against them in a civil case), there are serious problems with proximate causation. The kid stole beer and drove drunk...that would be an intervening, superseding act, which would cut off any liability the parents might have had. Maybe there's an argument that the parents were negligent in allowing him to drive, but even there, the plaintiff(s) would have to show that the parents had good reason to believe he would drive in an unsafe manner. If the kid is sued in civil court, won't the parents also be defendants since the kid is a minor? I can't see the parents being sued directly, but aren't they still liable until the kid reaches the age of majority (unless the can demonstrate that they were actively working to prevent the kid's behaviors)?

LookieNoNookie -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/11/2013 7:06:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Justice in America is blind if you have enough money. True enough but has it ever been so blatant? Socrates once said (I'm paraphrasing here) "kids today, they speak so oddly, dress so unusually and they do NOT respect their elders....I fear for the future". Nothing's changed.

servantforuse -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/11/2013 8:34:28 PM)
Are you serious ? What a stupid comment.

eulero83 -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/12/2013 1:33:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: muhly22222 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: eulero83 It says the parents were considered responsible, will they be prosecuted for something? Might be part of a civil suit. I can't see a criminal prosecution here. I don't know what sort of crime this would be. The problem comes in showing any sort of intention on the part of the parents, and almost every crime requires some sort of "mens rea," or some intention to commit the bad act. I'm familiar with the italian penal code and I've got some problems to understand the common law systems, but if you are responsible of an homice, becuse your actions lead to the death of a person, even without intention to kill, isn't it manslaughter? we have three degrees of prosecuted homicides: intentional homicide that should be your murder, it means the killer had intention to cause death it can be aggravated by premeditation; beyond intention homicide, it means the killer acted with no intention to kill but it is the resoult of an assoult or a beating; negligent homicide, it means the killer acted with no intention to kill or even harm but the death is the resoult of ignoring one of his responsibilities (for example a car driving ovr the speed limit and hitting a pedestrian). The last two should be your concept of manslaughter.

truckinslave -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/12/2013 1:36:07 AM)
I'm going to play devil's advocate. Haven't I been told all my life that poor children are not responsible for their action because of the way they were raised? Why are poor little rich white boys not entitled to the same defense? Had I been this kid's attorney I would have produced "expert witnesses" that testified that his parents, his schools, his media, and his federal government had taught him since birth that personal responsibility was an outdated concept for losers. And truly, from mortgage loans to murder, form defenses as weak as "I didn't understand what I read. I never knew interest rates could go up" to "the Twinkies made me do it", isn't that exactly what we- not just his parents but we- have taught him? If Kathleen Sebelius and Eric Holder and Malik Shabazz and James Winston do not even face charges, why shouldn't this little killer get off easy too? Welcome to the new lawlessness. Being poor is a defense. So is being rich. When there are no objective standards, what else can you expect?

crazyml -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/12/2013 1:46:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave Haven't I been told all my life that poor children are not responsible for their action because of the way they were raised? Why are poor little rich white boys not entitled to the same defense? That is a really, really good point - At least as a way of thinking about the situation in a different way. It certainly raises broader questions about the attitude of young people to actions and consequences. It does seem to me that kids (however rich or poor) consider the potential consequences of their actions far less than my generation did. Perhaps it's because relatively speaking, there are rarely any consequences. Fuck, I had "consequences" for not getting the right grade at school. Where I think it fails, though, is that poor children often try to make that defense but it tends to fail when used in a court.

truckinslave -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/12/2013 1:50:48 AM)
I dunno. I think there's a lotta kids with a couple dozen arrests on their sheets. Of course, I too wonder how much the judge was paid....

joether -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/12/2013 2:53:59 AM)
I was blown away by that verdict. How does a judge....HECK...a human being arrive at the conclusion that 'Since his parents didn't teach him that driving drunk was a stupid idea' he can disobey the laws at will? That kid knew he was breaking the law when he got the alcohol. He knew that driving drunk was illegal. And he got caught for it AFTER killing four people and placing two others in the hospital. There is no way the penalty even remotely fits the crime. Frankly I hope that judge is disbarred! Its the families I feel sorry for the most. This kid so completely disobey the law in so many ways and gets off with a slap on the wrist because he's rich. That is NOT right in this country.

thishereboi -> RE: Being wealthy is now a defense? (12/12/2013 4:19:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Justice in America is blind if you have enough money. True enough but has it ever been so blatant? Well there was the time when Teddy killed his girlfriend and I don't think he got much more than a slap on the hand for it. And I am sure there have been others just as fucked up. It makes me sick that the little fuck is going to get away with this but I am not a bit surprised.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875