by 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.
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
Mike S.,
I agree with you…. But the judge is not supposed to play prosecutor…… Nor is the defense suppose to do anything to harm its client….. So where does the ball being dropped start…..
I know of a prosecutor that worked for Henry wade….. Shot a family member in the back….and his office ruled justifiable homicide….. It’s not just Texas ….. It’s all over the world….
@Anonymously Yours
I’ll hazard my reply to your question,
the way you propose and frame the question : “So where does the ball being dropped start?” exactly illustrates the systemic nature of the problem.
Some of the responses in this post attempt to address this with such things as mandatory sentencing – which is fraught with its own errors and abuses – and citizen review boards… all incidentally applicable but systemically they simply perpetuate the problem.
I’d offer that your framing of the question exemplifies the need for a deeper inquiry into just what is going on. (I attempted to speak to this by appealing to some future ‘enlightenment’ era)
The problem is complex, but here is one notion I have: Our justice system is not organized around the central objective of finding out the truth and dispensing justice.
If this is true, and I suggest this story is simply one particularly loud example of its truth…then that means we are organized around something else.
Until we are willing to actually ask that question and follow the evidence where it leads we will be stuck at the level of the conundrum that you have articulated.
You are correct also in this: It is not just Texas, though they and the South in general has refined this sort of injustice to an art. And because it is a ubiquitous problem I suggest it demands a inquiry towards a solution worthy of the question.
Until then, we are condemned to asking unanswerable and puzzling questions, like yours, where is the beginning of the circle… A modern Sisyphean struggle.
MIchael B. – Our judicial system appears to be fatally flawed. How long has the system of using political means, such as democracy and/or democratic republics been used to provide justice; several hundred years in modern culture, unless you are willing to include the Romans and Greeks? Using the principle of legalized force and coercion has failed time and time again yet most still believe that tweaking the system enough will eventually cure the systemic problem. We’re up to eighty comments and not one individual has yet to provide a realistic proposal to solve this simple miscarriage of justice that can be realistically initiated.
The Citizens must have the opportunity to be involved in their own mitigations of dispute and if they are not properly educated to do so, it is not their fault.
Is our system of punishment and restitution the best potential method, perhaps even needs questioning but allowing such power in the hands of such a few is obviously not providing the quality of justice that we all desire or we wouldn’t be on this thread.
@Mike Spindell re your last comments about the toxic nature of this case as an example of the institutional disease in our country :
My comments are a harmony to your point.
I disagree with you only in this particular : you say “We are seeing this in our country today as our institutions crumble under the power of the buck and young Mr. Couch is only a symptom of what is a possibly fatal disease to the American body politic.”
I say it is not possibly fatal, but already the disease has metastasized. The body politic is already fatally inflicted, it just needs time to actually die.
A fatalistic POV for sure. But hopefully ameliorated a little by the corollary idea, or hope, that out of the death we might not only return to basic principles but advance the precepts of justice and citizen and human enlightenment in a new way.
It is possible, and even likely, given the arc of history.
That the pathway to that next enlightenment era leads thru some v.dark times is also certain. I wonder how it will work out. Maybe there is enough consciousness here and there to endure the storm and shorten how long the storm will last…
> hskiprob enjoyed your comments….I wish you success…
> On reading this post my first reaction was (and remains) I hope that this family is drained of their money and stripped of their ability to continue to careen thru society inflicting their special (but not unique) harm and death on innocents.
And… I also know this is not likely.
I have an old acquaintance, v.rich, who as a kid killed people in an accident, and later got women pregnant – and forced abortions upon them so as to protect the family name. (you might even know the name/business if you lived in LA) … and all of it was paved over by money, and that smelly form of injustice that pervades this story.
In life that person went on to become a special sort of a prick and continued inflicting his arrogance upon those unfortunate enough to have to live or work for him.
I see the same sort of path for this kid. He will get released, he will think that he is something special because he got away with it, and will continue to get away with inflicting damage on people in less illegal, but just as destructive ways..
It is a special privilege of the arrogant class (someone cited Romney above … an iconic example) to hold others accountable in the most harsh ways for crimes they perpetrate on others with hardly any consequence. (Thinking of Limbaugh and his Oxycontin adventures as another example.)
I join those who hope that this case turns out different. But I don’t expect it. Though there are times when someone gets too much attention and the ranks of privilege close rank and expel the offender from the protection of the class so as to not endanger their own privileges… So it is possible.
. I wonder about the judge.
I don’t think it too much as stretch to wonder what sort of relationships, promises, and even money/wealth have been given to this judge for “services” over the years. From some of the comments above it seems this is not a first time offense with this “judge”.
If one had the time and resources I’d bet on there being something hiding in the shadows of this judge.
. And on the other hand.
It is all part of the way we are. It has been going on for thousands of years.
The Bible is full of invective about unjust judges.
It is most sad to consider that , while this incident is reprehensible, it is not even close to the most horrific injustice inflicted even this year.
. there is a hopeful different outcome for this young man : that he actually comprehends the damage that he is and what he inflicts and makes the profound character changes necessary to be a true human being….
This blog and its commentators have often decried sentencing guidelines and mandatory-minimum sentences. This case points out the advisability of both. If Judge Boyd’s discretion been limited by a mandatory-minimum sentence and/or sentencing guidelines, we would not be having this discussion. Young Master Crouch would have received a sentence commensurate with his misdeeds and “affluenza” would never have come into play. Justice may or may not be blind, but mandatory-minimum sentences and sentencing guidelines are.
Spoiled, drunk, punks, need to go to jail and get punked. Those who get punked will get out wiser. No wise guys need apply.
** Any recommendations for these drug crimes ?**
buckaroo,
I thing that comes to my mind today on this subject is an ole friend of mine & what I consider common sense for people to ponder.
That friend wasn’t super wealthy, but just a regular church going respected local building contractor.
He had 3 boys. Two of them were basically normal, drank beer with their friends, stayed out of trouble, etc.
But the one boy had repeated trouble mainly involving drinking.
One day that boy hit & killed a young local gal, 17-19, I don’t recall.
If I remember correctly it would be that boy’s 3rd offense & that meant life in prison.
Regardless of what you think the punishment should have been the dad did what most dads would do & tried to help his son out of trouble.
He told me he had to pay the family of the young gal $30,000.
I’m sure it hurt my friend’s finances yet the price, 20 years later, still seems far to cheap to pay for a human life.
Taking a serious look at these young men, they don’t have life’s experiences to draw from, their young, full of energy, boiling over with testosterone making them overly aggressive/half crazy chasing young gals and then many throw in the Alcohol/doping on top of all that. Walking train wrecks looking for a place to happen.
(Many of us have that tee shirt from back then)
Anyway my friend said something that has stuck with me & seems to make some sort of common sense to me yet today.
“A man, (person), has to find out what his mix is & stick with it.”
In other words, whether young or old, guys/gals, need to figure what it takes them as an individual to be able to function & get along in society.
Other then that or turning all those young men into steers I’m not sure of other workable solutions.
I take it as a certainty that alcohol is a major ingredient in this sad case. Alcohol can be a beverage or drug. When used as a drug it can account for untold lethal consequences similar to another social issue debated often by opinionators. Visit a hospital ER on any late night or early morning to observe the carnage. Any recommendations for these drug crimes ?
Many commenters on this post while making perfectly valid arguments appear to me to be ignoring the essence of what Gene writes about. He is taking the distressing incident of the deaths of four innocents, the privilege that wealth has bestowed upon the teen driver to get off lightly and translated it into the larger issue of the effect such unjust privilege has on society. This case has had an egregious outcome thus far, but it is merely one of many such egregious instances. The fact that those who destroyed our economy with their greed is another instance illustrating that wealth (the oligarchy) has its privileges over the rest of us. Our interest as citizens should focus on the fact the the multiplication of such instances destroys the social fabric of the country. We are seeing this in our country today as our institutions crumble under the power of the buck and young Mr. Couch is only a symptom of what is a possibly fatal disease to the American body politic.
Blouise,
Thanks for the sincere response.
I don’t wish to condone the behavior of many in this society, but realize that this type case is far to common in that others are injured or killed by someone else’s gross negligence and criminal negligence.
Exploring possible ways to stop these type events before they happen is of interest to me.
So far all/most of all the would call professionals ideas may have helped some yet has not stopped all of these tragic events from happen.
I do believe the number of cases have fallen drastically since I was a teenage, 60s/70s.
With the money/trouble it’s placed the parents in, everyone involved likely would have been far better off if the parents would have hired a ret Marine Corp Sargent as a 24/7 chaperon for that “young man”.
But because of money that isn’t an option for most.
I recall telling my son when he was 14 that he was a “Man” & needed to be responsible for his actions & act like one.
Knock on wood or an act of god both my kids stayed out of in such trouble.
You sure have some smart people in your comment section Mr Turley. Some comments are as good as original articles. This is becoming one of my favorite sites. Thanx for the enlightenment y`all.
This case is horrible in so many ways that have been described previously, yet I would like to add another topic is how many states lightly punish those who commit Vehicular Homicide; that is homicide in relation to Reckless Driving or DUI.
I have hooked up two individuals, on different cases, who committed Criminal Attempt of First Degree Murder and they each received 40+ years in prison. (There is no parole here) But those who actually killed one or more persons in a Vehicular Homicide case get 4 to 8 years typically. In my view these two got what they deserved given their offender score and the crime committed, but why is it that with Vehicular Homicide it is different.
Surely one could say the difference is intent verses recklessness. But it is it such a grave differnce where a mental state is all that differenciates the two? The person who dies is just as dead.
Darren, I have long argued that stiffer sentences should occur when people cause harm to others in cases such as an automobile accident. When driving we must all be cognizant that we are operating a lethal weapon.
Adding alcohol to the equation, to me, does not render the crime any more or less offensive, as long as carelessness is a prime component. It is one thing to have a tire blowout, it another to both speed and drive recklessly, I don’t care if you are impaired or not. He killed people because of his carelessness and he should go to jail for that. Punishment is meant to both punish and deter people from harming others and we should try to be fairly consistent in it’s application to all persons in society, despite their social status.
A case of notoriety here in Florida where a wealthy man killed a person while driving under the influence garnered him a 15 year sentence for DUI manslaughter. http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/pub_info/summaries/briefs/out/96010ini.pdf
The “good ole boys” (and now – more often than not – “gals”) networks have a way of expertly shinning U.S. all on.
DA and judge could have lunch at golf club and say – Judge you hand out the severest sentence possible to the weakest possible charge I bring.
We both point our fingers at each other and hide behind our office’s immunity
Blouise: I would add that, given his probationary status and that he was a minor, I would bet his father would be found negligent in letting him take the truck, and that would put his father’s multi-million dollar fortune (or at least his business) on the line as well, in the civil suits.
The truck was owned by his father’s company. How it was insured is anyone’s guess. That’s the beauty of discovery in law suits.
Having taken an Alcohol Awareness class as part of his initial probation requirements, he was thoroughly exposed to the pitfalls of drinking and driving. Having obtained a drivers license he was perfectly aware of the requirements that a 21 year old had to be in the vehicle with him. Having already been cited for alcohol, he knew it was against the law for him to possess or drink it. Having, at least, watched television, he was perfectly aware that stealing was against the law. As to purposely setting out to harm others … don’t forget he was drunk and speeding and had passengers inside his vehicle and in the bed of his truck. There may have been no malice but there was certainly the killing of other persons through gross negligence and criminal negligence.
Is there a provision for the prosecutor to appeal the sentence here?
In light of the existing probation from the two previous offenses I would think much of the attention will shift from the boy to the Judge & parents of the boy.
How did that boy come to be able to drive his dad’s company truck?
If I recall correctly from personal experience at least some commercial business insurance policies will not cover underage drivers.
And then as a separate issue of drinking, other drugging in society & DUI/Dope schools. The problem hasn’t been stopped & more rotten cases like the above everyday.
You think just maybe DUI/Dope schools might step out into the other box & tell these fools, Hey Stupid, you don’t mix Alcohol & Downers Period! And if you’re going to drink/dope go somewhere, stay there until you’re done & don’t drive….etc…
I mean, “Just Say No” policy is a miserable failure & if society doesn’t yet have a solution to the issue, which it doesn’t, at the very least society could point out ways for those out getting smashed to avoid trouble for themselves & others.
I seriously doubt that boy & others start out thinking hey I think I’ll go out & harm a bunch of people tonight.
Also, given the rather public outrage at this injustice, the Pyrrhic politics may be less of a factor now. One time were media exposure may work to aid correcting an injustice. He still faces the hurdle that the sentence is not prime facie illegal, but given the totality of the circumstances? I think the argument for vacating and ordering a new trial might actually be able to get some traction.
We’ll see.
I retract my earlier comment. I didn’t realize there had been other alcohol offenses. He should serve some time.
AY,
I agree that if he dropped the ball? That was where he dropped it proper. He does, however, still have time to rectify that mistake but the clock is rapidly ticking.
AY,
I don’t think ADA Alpert is blameless here, but by the same token, I can see him being fairly blindsided by a probation sentence as well. Especially in light of the existing probation from the two previous offenses. It is possible he simply didn’t smell the fix was in.
Gene,
Not from what I understand did the prosecutors office object on the record to the sentence imposed…. That’s where the appeal issue starts…. Unfortunately juvenile cases are treated as civil….. The same protections are not afforded civil litigants…..
Everyone is blasting the judge and the juvenile….. Who’s job is it to enhance the charges against the juvenile….. A lawyer may not do anything that would harm its client….. The judge was stuck with the ultimate result….. Because the prosecutor did not enhance or seek to enhance the charges…l
I don’t sense the wealthy & criminally corrupt have woken up to the fact the old day’s of the “Boss Hog” type cover ups will no longer work, or work as well in these days of information technology, cameras & audio recordings.
ie: 2 wrongs/crimes don’t make either right or legal.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/video-captures-georgia-cop-slamming-70-year-old-womans-face-into-pavement.html