Courts, Criminal law, Justice, Society

Illustration: The Inherent Inequity and Injustice of Oligarchy

equal justiceby Gene Howington, Guest Blogger

UPDATED: The recent case of Ethan Couch, 16, out of Burleson, Texas has been previously addressed on this blog (here and here) in general terms of the fundamental unfairness and apparent bias of the plea deal and in psychological terms concerning both the social isolation wealth can engender and the consequent lack of empathy that creates. Let’s look at this in a little more detail as relates to justice and the corrosive effect such rulings have on social order.  The pattern of facts in this case are critical to examining whether or not Couch’s sentence was just and inform whether or not such rulings are corrosive to society as a whole.  To summarize:

Hollie Boyles, 52, Shelby Boyles, 21, Brian Jennings, 41, and Breanna Mitchell, 24, are the primary victims.

From left: Brian Jennings, Breanna Mitchell, Hollie Boyles, Shelby Boyles.
From left: Brian Jennings, Breanna Mitchell, Hollie Boyles, Shelby Boyles.

Just before midnight on June 15, 2013, Mitchell was driving west on Burleson-Retta Road when she had a blowout, forcing her pickup truck into a roadside ditch. Living nearby, Hollie and Shelby Boyles heard the blowout and went to render assistance. Jennings, a Burleson youth minister, was returning from his son’s high school graduation party when he stopped to assist Mitchell as well. All four were on the roadside when they were struck by a pickup truck driven by Ethan Couch. The Ford F-350 pickup was going between 65 and 70 miles per hour in a 40 mile per hour speed zone when it clipped Mitchell’s stranded truck before striking and killing the four bystanders. Couch’s truck then struck Jenning’s pickup truck (in which two young boys were waiting) sending it back into the roadway. There it collided with an eastbound Volkswagon carrying two Burleson girls before going off the south side of the road. Couch’s truck then flipped over, coming to rest against a tree on the north side of the road. Two other teenagers riding in the bed of Couch’s truck were thrown from the vehicle. One suffered broken bones and internal injuries. The other suffered a traumatic brain injury that left them unable to move or talk.

There is no contest concerning who was driving the truck that struck the stranded motorist and her would be aides. Couch admits he was driving.  There was no question about the drinking.  Couch and his friends had been drinking beer after stealing it earlier in the evening from a local Walmart. Three hours after the wreck, Couch’s BAC was .24, approximately three times the legal driving limit.

He could have been sent to prison for 20 years.  Instead, Couch was sentenced to 10 years of probation, a $450,000 out of state recovery program and denied contact with his parents.  All for showing what can only be described as a reckless and wanton disregard for the safety of others that resulted in four deaths and two serious injuries that have brought pain, misery and deprivation to the lives of many family and friends. True, since the crime happened as a minor, Couch’s sentence could have been reviewed and modified at age 18, but he would have seen first hand the harshest consequences for his behavior even if only briefly.

If you are like most people with a normal conscience, your reaction to this sentence was likely some degree of outrage at what can be fairly viewed as the wealthy receiving preferential treatment from the courts and an unjust resolution to a criminal case. But what is justice? Why is justice important?

Justice isn’t a simple matter of black and white although it can be clear cut at times. That is the exception though and not the rule. Often a situation arises where there is no perfectly just solution. Damage done cannot be undone so an approximation of justice is had by a combination of punishments and/or restoring the victims to as whole a state as possible.  It is the duty of the courts in those situations to craft a remedy that is as close to just as possible given the facts of the situation. At the core of justice is the idea of equity.

equity /ˈɛkwɪti/
noun (plural equities)
[mass noun]

the quality of being fair and impartial

To contrast, the antonym . . .

inequity /ɪnˈɛkwɪti/
noun (plural inequities)
[mass noun]

lack of fairness or justice

Aside from the equity component of justice, there is the public safety component.  Dangerous people either need to be rehabilitated (something admittedly our penal systems do a poor job with fulfilling) or, if they are incorrigible, separated from the general public to reduce/eliminate chances of future harm.  There is also a smaller but no less important revenge component. It is important not so much as a matter of karma, but as a psychological social control mechanism. Part of the role of using adversarial courts is to discourage the remedy of self-help that exists at nature. If the punishment is perceived as harsh enough to sate the impulse for revenge in victims and/or their families and friends, they are less likely to seek revenge on the guilty themselves.  “Order” is a part people often forget about or minimize in the phrase “law and order”. Providing justice is a critical component of keeping social order.

In a case like this where the judgement is widely seen as being unjust, is there a possibility of appeal? Yes, technically there is although it is rare.  However, it must be timely – usually within 30 days of the judgement although it is 15 days in Texas – and it is usually the prosecution that would bring such an appeal.  That seems unlikely here as Assistant District Attorney Richard Alpert seems reluctant, stating “We are disappointed by the punishment assessed but have no power under the law to change or overturn it. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families and we regret that this outcome has added to the pain and suffering they have endured.” Although ADA Alpert does indeed not have the power to carte blanche change the ruling, he most certainly has the power to appeal it under Texas law to a judge further up the food chain who would have the power to amend the sentence.  However, it is at this point in the story that local politics and legal technicality rears its head. If ADA Alpert were to appeal this ruling, he would be taking to task local judge Jean Boyd and in essence claiming her judgement faulty as it resulted in a miscarriage of justice. This would be a huge brouhaha politically. It also would have a slim chance as – while the sentence is arguably a facially repugnant miscarriage of justice – the sentence is within the bounds of judicial discretion and not per se illegal. An appeal would also incur significant costs to the state, further drag out matters for the families and likely not result in a more just sentence. While it may be the “right thing to do” to bring such an appeal, it may be a legally futile and/or politically Pyrrhic effort. However, given the insular nature of the community and the substantive wealth of the defendant in this case, such a suspect ruling does invite state authorities to go over Judge Boyd’s books and potential relationships with the defendant’s family with a fine tooth comb.  If any impropriety is found, the sentence could be appealed and modified as illegal or vacated and a new trial ordered.

So what are we left with? An ugly situation made uglier by a judge showing what appears to be rank favoritism in sentencing to a criminal defendant based upon said defendant’s wealth (and consequent social status). What we are left with is a failure of the criminal justice system to dispense justice with equality and impartial fairness.

Where to next?  There are civil suits pending.  Five of them as of the writing of this column. The first being filed by the parents of Sergio Molina, the teen left with brain damage after being thrown from the bed of Couch’s pickup. Shaunna Jennings, wife of Brian Jennings, has filed suit on behalf of herself and her children. Marla Mitchell, mother of Breanna Mitchell has filed suit.  Kevin and Alesia McConnell, whose son was also in Couch’s truck at the time of the crash have filed. The fifth filing is by Eric Boyles and Marguerite Boyles, husband and daughter of Hollie Boyles, seeking actual damages including burial and funeral expenses and punitive damages. The Boyles’ suit accuses Ethan Couch of “driving while intoxicated, driving above the speed limit, failing to control his speed, having more than one person in the truck who was under 21 and not related to him, disregarding a restriction on his driver’s license that he only drive with a licensed adult in the front seat, and being in possession of alcohol even though he was underage.”  Also named as defendants are Couch’s father, Fred Couch, and his company Cleburne Metal Works – the registered owner of the truck –  accused of “gross negligence” for entrusting the pickup to an incompetent or reckless driver. Given the admissions and conviction of the criminal trial, winning a civil suit should be a much easier proposition for the parties involved against the Couchs. Fred Couch and family stand to lose a substantial amount of money over Ethan’s crimes.  Maybe even everything, although that cannot be said with any kind of certainty as details of their personal finances are not publicly published.

But is that enough? Can money ever replace the loss of a loved one? No. Not really.  It’s one of those situations where there is no perfectly just solution so a solution as close to just as possible should ideally be crafted. That probation for killing four people is not even close to a just solution is (I think) apparent to anyone with a functioning sense of basic fairness and not a sociopath. The criminal sentence remains inequitable no matter what the civil judgements turn out to be. Ethan Couch will be free on the streets, ready to think his money buys him the ability to get away with homicide. There will be no sense for the families of the victims that their loved ones have been avenged.  As Eric Boyles said through tears at the sentencing hearing, “There…there are just some things that even today…are just too difficult to talk about. At this point, we are trying to take life one day at a time.  I do look forward to the day that we can put some of this behind us.  Today could have been a good start at that…and unfortunately the wounds that it opened only makes the healing process that much greater.”  Boyles also said, “There are absolutely no consequences for what occurred that day. The primary message has to absolutely be that money and privilege can’t buy justice in this country.”

Justice has failed.

UPDATE: Apparently others have identified Judge Boyd as the weak link in this failure as well.  NBCDFW.com is reporting the following this morning:

Boyd’s decision has led to public calls for her resignation and an online petition on Change.org demanding that Gov. Rick Perry remove Boyd from the bench.

Under current Texas law, the governor can remove a sitting judge from the bench with approval of two-thirds of Texas House and Senate members.

Boyd, who previously announced she is retiring at the end of her term next year, declined to comment on both the sentencing decision and the calls for her removal when contacted by NBC 5.  Boyd said speaking about the situation would be unethical.

The outrage over the sentencing decision is largely linked to the testimony of psychologist Gary Miller, a witness for the defense who said  Ethan Couch suffered from ‘affluenza,’ a term suggesting his parents’ wealth and privilege taught him there were no consequences for bad behavior.”

As guest blogger Mike Spindell points to in his column addressing the “affluenza” defense, the defendants here are unlikely to be substantively changed by losing money.  Their insular life creates a type of delusional sense of superiority and entitlement that is only reinforced by this judgement and a form of anosognosia that keeps them from realizing just exactly how wrong they are in thinking “some animals are more equal than others”.

This case is a fine illustration of what is wrong with oligarchy in general and plutocracy in the specific.  When the few are given preferential treatment by the legal systems of a country, it breeds discontent as injustice always does. Unequal treatment under the law has a corrosive compounding effect on society.  With each injustice, social order decays just a little and the potential for social unrest grows.  Rome was not built in day, so the saying goes, but just so she was not destroyed in a day either.  It was an incremental process as is has been in all states fallen to discord, rebellion and revolution. That is the ultimate danger of a bifurcated justice system to social stability and the cost of “social anosognosia”. The oligarchs, no matter their particular political flavor, ignore social justice for personal gain at huge risk to themselves and to society as a whole. It is their arrogance that makes them think their walls and security will hold because they have money and “privilege” when history shows again and again that if you ignore the needs of the many – including the needs of the many for impartial justice – the many will eventually rise up and slay the oligarchs.  From Rome, to France, to Russia, to our own American Revolution, it seems that people like Judge Boyd and others in positions of governmental and economic power have either forgotten the lessons of history, ignored them in their arrogance or are simply unaware that they are eating away at the pillars of civilized society with favoritism and venality.

One day, gravity will finish the job they started unless we as a society start doing something to ensure justice is equitable, fair and impartial.

We can start by engineering our legal system so that such manifest miscarriages of justice as handed down by Judge Boyd are easier to challenge and both the bench and the wealthy are not held sacrosanct because of position or wealth and afforded deference that they are not due in an egalitarian society.

What do you think?

~submitted by Gene Howington, guest blogger

Source(s): csmonitor.com, CNN.com, NBCDFW.com (1, 2),  DFW.CBSlocal.com, KHOU.com, cleburnetimesreview.com, heavy.com

148 thoughts on “Illustration: The Inherent Inequity and Injustice of Oligarchy”

  1. Good article Gene. Does it amaze anyone else that a child from money is tried as a minor at the age of 16, but how many children from modest means and children of color have been tried as adults at that very same age?

  4. GeneH,

    Excellent piece of work!

    But you guys are making it rough on me, your combined works are so good I’m trying to save back what I can for future reference. I just wish I could get my file system fixed for easier retrieval.

    I haven’t forgotten about that issue of “USC Preamble” being declared law by the Supreme Court. (around 1900)

    Can anyone tell me a better way to look up precedent setting cases?

    Blouise,

    Nice find on that boy’s priors as that makes a heck of a difference in this case.

  5. Blouise,

    Thanks for that critical bit of additional information. Already being on probation for two other alcohol related offenses in this instance most certainly qualifies as aggravating circumstances that should have made probation not even an option.

    I not only want Judge Boyd to resign now, I want a thorough investigation and, if merited, criminal obstruction charges against her.

  7. If this was a juvenile case… Delinquency matter…. And the prosecutor didn’t seek to have him removed to the adult side of the court…. Then by law the judges hands are really tied….. In my opinion it will be just a matter of time before he is sentence to the full 10 years…. At his age…. He hasn’t had a sufficient enough of a consequence….. But for the oil leases these folks would be what is call TT…..

  8. Would lay judges from “Main Street” ideology be better than those professional judges from “Wall Street” ideology:

    Mr. Hancock, 83, has the longest tenure of any judge in New York state, even though he never attended law school. He is part of a vanishing breed in the metropolitan New York area, a lay judge in a region thick with high-powered lawyers. Statewide, however, there are still about 1,800 nonlawyer judges in charge of local courts.

    “When I started, all they said was, ‘Here are some books,’ ” said Mr. Hancock, a retired chemist who worked at a Texaco research subsidiary in this town 70 miles north of Manhattan. “I knew the family attorney and I consulted him. He opened his law library to me and that’s how I learned.”
    …
    When he was first elected in 1937, he conducted court in his mother’s kitchen, was paid $5 a case and settled a half-dozen civil complaints each week. These days, there is a gleaming courthouse in town and Mr. Hancock dons a black robe before hearing a nearly endless stream of cases. But little else has changed in 56 years: Judge Hancock still pounds his fist like a gavel and throws his voice like a punch. And the voters are clearly satisfied with his decisions; he has won 14 consecutive elections, including several races against lawyers.

    The system of lay judges is as old as the Colonies, though it has undergone considerable revision. New Jersey and Connecticut have eliminated their nonlawyer local court systems. Judges in city courts throughout New York State must be lawyers, as must judges in Nassau County, where state courts now operate in place of town courts. Even in the suburbs of big cities, where nonlawyer judges are allowed, lawyers are increasingly winning election to the bench.

    “You pretty much have to go north to Putnam and Orange counties before you find them anymore,” said Edward B. Borelli, assistant deputy counsel of the state’s Unified Court System.

    In Westchester County, there is only one remaining nonlawyer judge, Eric D. Scaringi, a 79-year-old retired railroad worker who has presided over the Village of Buchanan’s court for 28 years and whose decisions have withstood challenges from the likes of William M. Kunstler.

    (NY Times). I don’t see it as a panacea, because any of us can become corrupt once exposed to power.

  9. “Instead, Couch was sentenced to 10 years of probation, a $450,000 out of state recovery program and denied contact with his parents.”

    The judge should have ordered intensive counseling for the entire family.

  10. I offer the following as relates to the victims:
    People who have an official, professional relation to other men’s sufferings–for instance, judges, police officers, doctors –in course of time, through habit, grow so callous that they cannot, even if they wish it, take any but a formal attitude to their clients; in this respect they are not different from the peasant who slaughters sheep and calves in the back-yard, and does not notice the blood. With this formal, soulless attitude to human personality the judge needs but one thing–time–in order to deprive an innocent man of all rights of property, and to condemn him to penal servitude. Only the time spent on performing certain formalities for which the judge is paid his salary, and then–it is all over. Then you may look in vain for justice and protection in this dirty, wretched little town a hundred and fifty miles from a railway station! And, indeed, is it not absurd even to think of justice when every kind of violence is accepted by society as a rational and consistent necessity, and every act of mercy–for instance, a verdict of acquittal–calls forth a perfect outburst of dissatisfied and revengeful feeling?
    –Anton Chekhov: WARD NO. 6

  12. hskiprob 1, December 15, 2013 at 10:21 am

    The Citizens, in my opinion, must have a way in which to overrule bad decisions by Judges at all levels, including appellate.
    …
    ============================

    Lay judges

    In most civil-law countries, judges at all levels are professionally trained in the law, but in many other countries they are not. In England, part-time lay judges greatly outnumber full-time professional judges. Called magistrates or justices of the peace, they dispose of more than 95 percent of all criminal cases and do so with general public satisfaction and the approbation of most lawyers (see magistrates’ court). Professional judges handle only the relatively small number of very serious crimes; most of their time is devoted to civil cases. England places unusually heavy reliance on lay judges, but they are far from unknown in the courts of many other countries, particularly at the lowest trial level. This was also true in the former Soviet Union and remains so in the United States. In some countries of the Middle East (e.g., Israel and Iran), lay judges constitute religious courts and are selected for service on the basis of their knowledge of and fidelity to nonsecular rules and laws. In Finland, panels of lay judges sit with credentialed judges in district court criminal cases (and also may be used in some civil cases pertaining to domestic issues).

    1. Dredd, I would guess that justice or the lack there of, is pretty much the same world wide. As long as decisions of who are on the bench, are being made through politically derived methods, instead of by open voluntary means to all, I believe we will continue to see the Judiciary used as a protection racket for the ruling oligarchy in addition to its intended duties. This is nothing new. The Judiciary has throughout history been a rubber stamp for the government, which has always been controlled by the oligarchs.

      You know the favored aristocrats where protected by the Kings Court. When the Kings Court and the Religion colluded, is when we have had the most tyranny in history. The Aristocracy has just been replaced in modern times by the professional attorney who also dominate the legislatures in addition to the Judiciary. Tweaking the current system is not going to have any major long term affect.

      Thinking that people would not properly select members to a Case Review Board, is no different than having to trust people to properly select good politicians.

  13. Just wondering, so what’s up with the tire that blew out?

    Was it some wealthy creeps set up a slave labor tire plant in Asia, shipped back to the USA a defective tire.

    The tire blows on a Texas road one night, people gather around & here comes a spoiled drunk punk.

    Without the Slave Labor piece o crap tire there is no butterfly effect & no case.

    “It isn’t what we don’t know that gives us trouble, it’s what we know that ain’t so.” – Will Rogers

  14. Did this happen in Texas? Tank God it was not in Florida. Here we have some Governor who shaves his head because he has lice, a Senator from Cuba who wants us out of Gitmo, a golf course in nearby Palm Springs that does not allow dogs to poop on the greens. Jeso. I have been off this blog for more than a week with no where to itchBay. And no where to practice my pig latin so as to get around Word Press. Or ordWay ressPray. Pray for rain and pray that this kid does not get another vehicle any time soon.

  16. Ethan Couch had already received a chance when earlier in the year, Feb. to be exact, he was given 2 citations “Just before 1 a.m. February 19, a Lakeside officer gave Couch two citations — one for being a minor in possession of alcohol, the other for consuming alcohol as a minor.

    In March, Couch plead no contest in both cases. His mother paid $423 in court costs. As terms of his probation, her son agreed to take an alcohol awareness class and participate in 12 hours of community service, to be completed by June 19.

    But in the final moments of June 15, police say Couch was on Burleson Retta Road with seven other teenagers in his truck. Police believe he hit a group of people standing near a stalled car on the side of the road.”

    http://www.wfaa.com/news/crime/Teenage-driver-involved-in-deadly-crash-had-prior-alcohol-citations-212577071.html

    In other words, the kid was on probation for two prior alcohol related convictions when he killed all those people. He made all the conscious decisions that led up to their deaths violating laws of theft, speed zones, and his driver’s permit, after taking the rehabilitation classes the State had ordered for his prior alcohol related convictions.

    So, what do I think? Hang the sensibilities of the Judge Boyd and the expense to the State of Texas. Ethan had his shot at rehabilitation and it didn’t work. His self destructive behavior turned deadly and destroyed others. Rehabilitation failed with Ethan. Incarceration is the only avenue left to protect society from the Couch’s off-spring. Call it a community service.

  17. FBI was tossed out of Iceland for seeking evidence against Wikipedia.

    Iceland said ;

    “In America your federal agents & agencies protect larceny by banks and seek to punish the whistleblowers for pointing out the crimes.

    Here in Iceland – we do the opposite”

  20. The Citizens, in my opinion, must have a way in which to overrule bad decisions by Judges at all levels, including appellate. The parties of a case or their families, impacted by a bad decision must be able to create a specific petition in affidavit form, signed by a large number of people, perhaps 500, that forces a review and hopefully a better decision. In this case even those people who know and who are friends of the Couch’s would, I believe, conclude that the sentence was much to weak. I am sure there are a number of cases to draw on that would give those interested, guidelines for such a punishment. This particular Judge knows she has nothing to loose because she is retiring soon. I’ll bet if you review many of her decisions over her tenure, you will probably find a number of similar indiscretions by her as such injustices are much more widespread then most understand.

    Just having a mechanism in place which trumps Judicial decisions will start the curing process of the lack of justice. Many members of our system of Jurisprudence will in my opinion be apposed to such a system, as it would most likely strip them of some privilege over the long term.

    Additionally, our society should begin introducing legal concepts and rules of procedure in our education systems at relatively young ages. Finance, insurance and other important subjects should also be taught as our young are often left unguided and lacking the necessary knowledge as they enter the adult world and workforce. As an example I think it would be better to teach general finance and accounting rather than some advanced mathematics in high school.

    I have proposed a Supreme Court Review Board derived from appointments by Citizens at the local level that are randomly selected to review cases at our highest level. Each Board member would be required to get 50 or perhaps even 100 people in their community to appoint them which is done both to get greater representation but also increases the quality of the membership of the Board.

    Participation is voluntary, but it should be a part of ones resume for those wishing to enter the Judiciary. The idea is to have enough members so that know one has to review more than one or two cases a year.

    My rational for such a system is twofold. One is that it would correct some of the ongoing injustices but secondly, it would slowly reverse some of the abrogations of the Constitution committed by the Judiciary. By slowly reversing some of the bad decisions, this would also impact some legislation imposed that was meant to cure injustices, that would reduce some of the regulatory constraints placed on business. As an example, If we can effectively sue a company for polluting a river, there is little need to hire regulators, thus reducing tax burdens for such government costs. It is amazing how much regulation we have in our law specifically for this purpose and sadly the laws still only keep the honest people honest while the oligarchy gets their hands slapped by the regulatory entities. Very much in the same way, this young man, only got probation. As an example, it is not widely known that government and it’s contractors are some of the greatest polluters.

    We could also impose a similar system of case review at the local levels.

    No change is easy to implement, but we must try to do something. We cannot as a society continue to allow both the constant injustices and the usurpations of individual rights continue. The Judiciary has in a sense, blocked the ability of the Citizens to sue those individuals in government that are creating the injustices thus alleviating any significant punishment.

Comments are closed.