That’s how I’ve always felt about someone who pointed a gun and someone and pulled the trigger. If you’re trying to kill someone, you’re trying to kill someone, whether or not you actually succeed. Our legal system, however, does differentiate with regard to results. If you attempt murder, but don’t succeed, you are charged with attempted murder. If you succeed, you are charged with MURDER. So, even in our legal system, there is this differentiation mini, even though there was not one iota of difference in intent. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, UNTOLD damage was brought to some children by the arbitrary choice to make an example of ONE family, while many others do this same thing DAILY.</p>
<p>The notion that is “for the safety of the children” to host an underage drinking party in your home is absurd. Absurd.</p>
<p>Parents who think that taking away the car keys makes them heroes are deluding themselves. So they think they’ve ensured there will be no drinking and driving? Maybe.</p>
<p>But how many times do we have to read of young adults dying from alcohol poisoning? Walking away from the party and passing out, then dying from exposure - because no one realizes they are missing until it is too late? Or any of the myriad other horrific outcomes from drinking to excess without ever going near a motor vehicle? </p>
<p>I agree with all of those who say that we have to change societal norms step by step. If that means making an example of one family, because they happen to be the ones caught, so be it. This family is a perfect guinea pig, imho. They are repeaters in this game of being the “cool” “helpful” parents. They deserve what they got.</p>
Or, maybe the root cause of the damage was really by the actions of these irresponsible parents. </p>
<p>I don’t think it improves the situation or diminishes the odds that some harm might come to these kids just because lots of other parents perform the same act as these parents.</p>
<p>One could make a similar argument about the kids with mothers in jail regarding all the mothers jailed on drug charges or for other crimes (even shoplifting, check-bouncing, etc.) who have their children taken away from them. </p>
<p>It’s a sad situation with no easy answer but when parents perform illegal acts, often their kids are the greatest victims.</p>
<p>The mom and her husband-at-the time (they are now divorced) were the homeowners/servers and were sentences to 8 years, reduced to 27 mos. The father, who did not live in the residence but supplied some of the alcohol and was aware of the drinking received 30 days. </p>
<p>Serving these kids at 15 and 16 was wrong, wrong, wrong. But the cost of the litigation–this went all the way to the Supreme Court–and the lost wages past and future just seems like a cost/penalty that outweighs the crime. This kid is now a high school drop-out. What a mess.</p>
<p>There is NO one who has spoken a more consistent message–or followed one with her kids–than I have. I do, however, find myself shaking my head in absolute confusion about the mixed messages sent on this VERY forum. For example, the hardasses on this board want these parents serving hard time, while on another recent thread, many of CC’s parents are giggling at the antics of an underage drinker and tagging the use of a fake ID as “cool.” This problem will NOT go away until the messages–both from parents <em>and</em> the courts–are more consistent. Making an example of ONE family–and demolishing it in the process–will do nothing of any value.</p>
<p>Since you’re all so adamantly against underage drinking, what do you think of a student who goes to England for a summer and drinks there? Say a 16 year old, who is allowed to drink (beer). Is that wrong?</p>
<p>Is it the actual act of drinking at that age that you’re all so appalled by, or the fact that such actions break the law? If the former, are all the countries who have lower drinking ages than America (and this is almost every other country, by the way) misguided regarding their drinking ages?</p>
<p>“It’s difficult to argue that the sentence is too harsh for an apparently unrepentent drug pusher.”</p>
<p>I don’t find it difficult. What they did was illegal, and it was wrong. But the costs to the system here, not to mention the family, are just pointlessly high. Two years in jail for two people is going to cost the county something like $150,000, on top of the huge litigation costs. Shoplifting gum is unquestionably illegal and wrong, but that doesn’t mean ten years in jail is a wise sentence, even if the perpetrator is “unrepentant.”</p>
<p>90 days in jail will usually teach someone with no record one hell of a lesson. That’s a much more efficient way to deal with this kind of problem.</p>
<p>btw, do we have any indication of just what this “providing alcohol” entailed? If we’re talking about Jello shots, Everclear, bottles of bourbon being chugged in a dark basement, that’s an infinitely more dangerous environment than a supervised champagne toast around the birthday cake, which is equally illegal, but IMHO not dangerous at all. No one dies of alcohol poisoning or passes out in the snow because of a glass of wine.</p>
<p>I have a question for you. Do you think it is ethical for you to pick and choose which laws should be obeyed–and which ones should be legally punishable? What I mean is, you have been posting prolifically on the thread about in-state tuition for illegal immigrants, and you’ve made your position very clear that illegal immigration is just fine with you and that you support “rights” for those who have chosen to enter this country illegally. </p>
<p>Therefore, I find your stance on this thread to be a bit disingenuous. I mean, all of a sudden the law should hold some meaning and be upheld—and virtually NO punishment is too great for these unrepentent “drug pushers”??</p>
<p>It would appear that your personal biases influence your decisions about which laws are necessary to uphold, but the problem is, not everyone thinks just like you do. If we used that standard for law enforcement, then there basically wouldn’t BE any. </p>
<p>IMHO, you’re either in favor of upholding the laws of this land…or you are not. You appear to be in favor of overlooking many other lawbreakers because of your own political agenda, even while you want to throw the book at these people, regardless of how little sense it makes to do so.</p>
<p>I think 90 days (or even 30 days) in county jail would have been a fair sentence. The prosecutor felt that 90 days was a fair sentence. 90 days in jail for a suburban couple would seem like an eternity. </p>
<p>The judge obviously felt it imperative to “throw the book” at the couple and sentenced them to 8 years (later reduced to a little over 2 years). Excessive, I think.</p>
<p>But, seriously, what kind of parents would serve 15-16 year olds alcohol at a party?!!</p>
<p>When Hanna and I are on the same page there must be something to it. Punishment yes but give then the same consideration and breaks any first timer gets–which is usually a constructive lesson rather than being made an example.</p>
<p>The 90 day sentence would have sent the wake-up call to the parents in their community that serving alcohol to minors was not going to be tolerated. It’s not as if these parents would walk out of jail in three months, and have their old lifes back either. They would have a permanent criminal record. 27 mths in jail, $300,000 in lawyers fees, lost jobs, and whatnot is far too high a price to pay for their crime in my opinion. I don’t see the justice in that.</p>
<p>Why do folks assume these are “first-timers”? With drunk drivers, there are usually 20-30 offenses before a single one is caught and brought into court.</p>
<p>They COULD have walked out in three months (actually probably much less). The prosecutor offered them an arrangement by which they would, but they would have no part of it. “I suggested an appropriate punishment but they chose to take the matter to the court instead of working with us.” The were offered “consideration”, and snubbed their noses at it.</p>
<p>The actions in the crime was exactly the same as if one of the kids had driven away and killed someone. Except it wasn’t just one kid.</p>
<p>Like the drug pushers they are, they rolled the dice, and lost.</p>
<p>Same for any criminal… You think most robbers get arrested on their first job? Car thieves, rapists, on and on. That is an absurd comment and goes against our entire justice system. The crime is what it was–not what it might have been. We don’t arrest people for what they might have done, now do we? I see people everyday at 2nd and Pike that are probably up to no good but they are not arrested for looking shady. The cops have to wait until something can be proven. You can’t prove a maybe. If somebody had left and killed someone there are laws that apply to that and they are more severe.</p>
<p>They could have gotten out without spending $10k (rather than $300k), in much less than 90 days, without a divorce. Perhaps even without a single misdemeanor on their records. They CHOSE not to. Drug pushers sometimes make poor choices. Well, the judge (not the prosecutor, but the judge) decided to impose a sentence within the normal sentencing range. He knew what the crime was, he had the background to crime, and acted within clearly set judicial limits.</p>
<p>Actually it is a little unclear if they turned down the deal or the judge overruled it.
"The prosecutor agreed to charge the couple with 16 counts of contributing, and recommended a 90-day sentence.</p>
<p>But when the Robinsons pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor, the judge, angry that the party occurred a month after their son’s classmate died in an alcohol-related accident, sentenced them to eight years behind bars."</p>
<p>THEN they appealed that surprise sentence and got the current sentence.</p>
<p>You know, I DO feel sorry for this family. I feel sorry that these parents felt that their ONLY option to keep their kid safe on his 16th birthday was to allow alcohol at a party at their home. I feel sorrier for the teenager who was going to drink NO MATTER WHAT on his 16th birthday. But most of all I feel sorry for the mother of the 16-yr old who had died one month earlier–and yet, this was not enough of a wake-up call even to the people in this town who knew this girl well (including the Robinson boy who had been her boyfriend). And I am not so sure that even a 90-day sentence would have done the trick for this family, either, even though it should have. Yes, I think they may have been victims; I am just not sure what they were victims of. Although I think the original punishment was harsh (6 months per count but to be served consecutively rather than at the same time and thus 8 years), can we honestly say that the next 4 years spent appealing this sentence are what destroyed this family? Or were they on a path to self-destruction before this ever happened?</p>
<p>I don’t know how much alcohol/what kind they served, but I have to agree with the Canadian poster. It is much more difficult here in the US to buy alcohol than it is to buy sex or drugs. I am not saying that these parents did right, but what a punishment? I grew up in Europe, on family occasions/dinners I was always given wine diluted with water. It is much healthier than coke products :-)</p>