“Affluenza” Teen Avoids Jail Time

“Affluenza.” Most people had never heard this term, but it was recently used as a legal defense for Texas teen Ethan Couch. Couch, a 16 year old who had been driving with a blood alcohol content of .24 (three times the legal limit for an adult), lost control of his Ford F-350 and killed four people while doing 70 mph in a 40 mph zone. Earlier that night, Couch had been caught on camera stealing beer with his friends from a local liquor store and was later found to have had traces of Valium (a sleeping drug) in his system. Two of Couch’s friends, who were riding in the bed of the truck, were severely injured, and one is currently paralyzed; unable to speak or move.

The deadly crash, which killed four and severely injured two, occurred on June 15^th this year, and the judge reached a decision last week, sentencing Couch to 10 years probation and 1-2 years in a treatment facility in California away from his parents. The rationale for this conviction, which flew in the face of the prosecution who had sought 20 years in prison, was that Couch had been spoiled by his parents and was unable to tell right from wrong. The defense used the term “Affluenza” to describe Couch’s alleged ailment and claimed that he was as much a victim as those who had been killed and injured as a result of his actions. According to the judge, Couch will spend 1-2 years away from his family in a private treatment program in California and will receive no jail time, though he will be on probation for 10 years. The cost of the treatment program, to be paid by his parents, is estimated to be around $500,000

Personally, I think that this case was an abomination and should go down with the OJ Simpson trial as one of the worst sentencings in the history of our country. The fact that this brat essentially got off scot-free for killing four people serves as a giant middle finger to the entire American legal system, and I shudder to think of the precedent this has set for future cases. The irony of the situation is that Couch’s parents are buying his way out of jail; if Couch was supposedly crippled by his parent’s wealth, how could the judge allow them to spend $500,000 to get him a spot in a posh treatment facility? What if Couch’s parents had been unable or unwilling to pay? Would he have gone to prison? Horrifically, the answer is yes. We may never see this type of case again, but what happens when the defendant is not a spoiled, white, Texas teenager, whose parents can’t afford the cost of “treatment?” It seems very trendy to criticize the rich nowadays, claiming that they buy admission to colleges and enjoy privileges that the rest of us do not, but I had never really bought into this school of thought. Thusly, I am horrified to think that this type of thing can actually happen in this day and age; a teen can callously take the lives of four people and fall back on his parent’s wealth in order to shirk the consequences. It is even worse to think about the judge that actually bought this cock and bull defense and the defense lawyers and psychologists who had the gall to present this as fact in a trial concerning the death of four human beings. I really am concerned for the future of this country when such an open and shut case can be successfully defended by a fabricated illness; one in which the “victim” is adversely affected by his parents wealth. “Affluenza” isn’t even recognized by Microsoft Word, how can it be the defense in such a high profile case? How can the judge even allow the defense to present this nonsense, and worse; how can she agree with them? We will likely never know the answers to these questions and the families of those whose lives were so casually snuffed out will never receive closure as long as Couch is living comfortably while receiving ACTUAL MEDICAL TREATMENT for being spoiled by his parents.