<p>Actually, both are currently serving their sentences.</p>
<p>Those on parole are still serving their sentence which began in prison, but have been released from prison to remain under parole supervision. You may have heard things like “life sentence, eligible for parole in 25 years” or “life sentence with no possibility of parole”. In the former case, the person would be in prison for 25 years, but may be released from prison under parole supervision after that. Violation of parole conditions means penalties like going back to prison.</p>
<p>Probation is a sentence where the person does not go to jail or prison, but is under probation supervision. It may include additional requirements, such as drug addiction treatment. Violation of the terms of probation means going to jail or prison or other penalties.</p>
<p>But what I think they are asking is which would result in longer prison time: going to prison for 2 years, getting parole, and then screwing up, or being given 10 years probation, and after 3 years or so, screwing up again?</p>
<p>Your First Amendment rights do not extend to privately owned message forums. Your or my posts can be edited or even deleted at will by the administrators and posters can be permanently banned from posting if TOS are violated or administrators decide a given poster is not an asset to the board.</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s clear the judge did indeed “buy the ‘affluenza’ testimony.” In sentencing, she told the boy it was HE, not his parents, who was responsible for his actions. </p>
<p>Rather, I think this is a case where the judge believed rehabilitation was the better course than punishment, which is how the juvenile system is structured. </p>
<p>As for the suggestion that the judge was biased in favor of SES, I’d have to see more than two cases (which are not even similar, by the way) to pronounce that this judge has a “pattern” of disparate sentencing. I don’t know, perhaps she does, but I haven’t seen evidence of that yet.</p>
<p>It does, on its face, seem highly inadequate in terms of consequences for this boy, and if I were a relative of one of the victims, I’d be devastated. However, if the judge has purposely sentenced him to the probation in order to keep him in the system longer than the alternative could have, then perhaps she is the wiser one. Who really believes this kid won’t screw up again, and pretty soon at that? And if he doesn’t, well good for society.</p>
<p>^^^^^I’m thinking he will be more likely to get arrested for being drunk and disorderly or, hopefully, simply caught DWI rather than after an accident. But you’re right, if he doesn’t shape up, he remains a menace to society.</p>
<p>I wonder if he has simply been conditioned by his parents to think that rules don’t apply to him, or if he is a sociopath.</p>
<p>Seems like there is a confusion between government actions (for which the “First Amendment rights” are applicable) and actions by a private entity with respect to something it owns.</p>
<p>Nrdsb4–Maybe. Hopefully. I don’t know why we’re banking on that. And the fact remains that less affluent kids go to jail for far less offenses across the country, routinely, no matter how much this thread has now decided to support the judge.</p>
<p>My point in mentioning that was to explain to Jym626 that unless she’s the owner of this forum, she has no greater standing to dictate or otherwise police what I can say or not say than any other forum participant. </p>
<p>Especially considering what I said doesn’t seem to violate TOS considering other commenters have made similar comments about other public officials or reported behavior being discussed in forum threads. </p>
<p>Especially when it’s a reaction to a public official conducting official business in a manner I disagree with that’s germane to the topic under discussion.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Unfortunately, some folks on CC don’t really want to acknowledge that as it doesn’t conform to their seemingly overly idealistic notions of how our court system is run. </p>
<p>Even when this issue has been publicly acknowledged by many folks who have worked inside the system like former judges, cops, public defenders, etc or by lawyers/legal scholars studying and trying to work to attempt correcting such deficiencies…like the Innocence Project and the ACLU.</p>
<p>^^^^I don’t know that the thread is “now supporting the judge.” There just has not yet been clear evidence that her sentencing has anything to do with SES bias. I don’t know that it’s been ruled out either. The fact that SES plays a part in injustice doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with this incident. It seems to be the easy assumption, but it’s not necessarily the correct one.</p>
<p>I’d like to know more about this judge. Right now, she’s not talking, but I imagine someone will dig into her history. Since she’s been on the bench for 25 years, it should be fairly easy to make some generalizations if she clearly has ruled in a certain consistent pattern.</p>
<p>Personally, while I don’t agree with a prison-only solution, I do believe considering several people were killed because of Ethan Couch’s drunk driving and theft was involved, some prison time in a non-luxurious setting needs to be served alongside rehabilitation efforts to underscore the gravity of his crime to him and to provide some acknowledgement of the victims’ suffering.</p>
<p>I think the “affluenza defense” is laughable and actually offensive as a defense for criminal behavior. There is no such diagnostic condition, though it may well be true that this kid’s upbringing has led him to believe he can do whatever he wants and face no consequences. My personal opinion is that the cure for a kid with a lifetime of no consequences should be a sudden and firm end to that notion. I really wish this kid could have experienced at least a few years of incarceration before heading off to his luxury rehab.</p>
<p>However, again, the judge made no statement supporting an assertion that she “fell for” and agreed with that defense. It seems more likely that she would have ruled for rehabilitation vs. prison regardless of whatever defense this kid’s attorneys proposed. The mother of the victim of the 14 y/o black kid referenced previously stated to a reporter that this judge is “just too easy” on young perpetrators and that it’s her opinion that she has no business being on the bench because of it. I don’t know whether she is basing her assertion solely on her own experience with the judge or if she has knowledge of other similar cases.</p>
<p>Thank you, icbalumnus. And thank you nrdsb4, for your efforts, and for clarifying what I said in posts # 65, 73 and 77. The cries of first amendment rights are just more melodrama/hyperbole. As you repeated/clarified, there is no reason to make unsubstantiated accusations about the motives or behaviors of THIS judge. There is no evidence, other than the ONE reported case described above, where she sentenced a kid to 10 years for causing the accidental death of another, that she has shown any “pattern” of racial or SES bias. This is the fantasmagorical thinking of one poster, and the constant interjecting of these unfounded accusations and insinuations do not add to the discussion about this case. So, my request to you Cobrat, was essentially to “put up or shut up”, meaning provide data to support the uncalled for accusations about THIS judge, or to please show some civil discourse and stop making such uncalled for, offensive accusations. No need to make every discussion about your perceived SES or racial biases, which serves nothing but to potentially derail a thread. The hystrionics about first amendment rights are just that. </p>
<p>Now, back to topic, I thought I heard in the interview with the defense atty that some of the family members of the victims had forgiven Couch in court, which could possibly have contributed in part to the decision the judge made, based on the 3 days of testimony and information presented, that perhaps she felt that rehab was a better choice than incarceration. That said, there are, understandably, some pretty hefty civil suits pending, so forgiveness may go only so far :)</p>
<p>In the other forum I am reading where this is being discussed, they wondered if there was a transcript of the trial accessible, but it seems, thus far, that while it may be public record, there is as yet nothing released that is accessible by those who tried.</p>
<p>Couch was in court for boozing just three months ago.
The same judge also sent an african american youth to detention for ten years, after he punched someone who fell and contracted a fatal head wound.</p>
<p>It’s obvious to me that this thread has become a clash of personalities rather than a reasoned discussion. Which is too bad. I think it derails what could otherwise be a good conversation. The same pattern over and over. It’s getting tiresome, frankly, because I enjoy these discussions until they deteriorate.</p>
<p>The reporter/interviewer brought up the fact that this family is forgiving him (doesn’t mean they don’t want him to accept the consequences of his actions).</p>
<p>Seems you would know a little something about mischaracterizing people…</p>