Sunday, December 15, 2013

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-echochambers-25374458

On 15 June, Ethan, 16, was driving with a blood-alcohol level three times above the legal limit. He lost control of his speeding pick-up truck and killed four pedestrians. On Tuesday, he was sentenced to serve in a high-priced California drug rehabilitation centre paid for by the parents, with no jail time and 10 years of probation.

It's the court case that has made the "affluenza defence" a household word, as Ethan's lawyers successfully argued he had a diminished sense of responsibility due to his wealth, pampered childhood, and absentee parenting. Ever since the sentence came down, the media have been rolling in shock and outrage.
The judge "pretty much did what his parents had always done," writes Mike Hashimoto of the Dallas Morning News, "which is let him skate". It's an example of a two-tiered legal system in the US, he wrote, where the rich are treated better than the poor

Analysis:

The part of this that really stuck out to me was the absentee parenting. I mean, this kid's parents haven't paid him enough attention that he kills four people and doesn't get a minute of jail time. Instead, the send him to a $450,000 a year rehab program. He doesn't deserve that. He doesn't deserve the luxuries of a rehab facility. He should be in prison. This isn't how you punish someone who killed four people because he was drunk. 

1 comment: