I believe that this to be neglectful of even being consistent in our criminal justice system as there is no reason he should have gotten probation for committing four counts of reckless homicide. All four will never get their life back see their families I don’ t understands the backlash he faced for playing beer pong after what he went through because he may have tried to have an interactioning with friends if he does reflect on the mistake he made. But I do believe that he should be locked behind bars until the day he dies. He took four lives’ with so much as showing any bit of remorse to his victims’ families and what he personal made them suffer. I also believe him fleeing to Mexico, could also be backlash from the public, which is much desived for him and his family after the evil act and then excusing the act that was made, so the media did not set this in stone on the terms of fleeing but I also believe the judge should have made a determination not to jail him for 760 where he can earn good time to get less but given him additional years with the original years its sickening to see someone be able to function in society with so much of a care while others are in agony due to the actions of anther punishment and as for the agony suffered and punishment should consider that is just as equal and fair of the harm that was caused. But, as the justice system has shown time and time again if an offender messes up once they will be sure or mostly sure a similar offense or the offense will occur again hopefully not but if any injustice comes from this individual lock him and away toss the key and don’t look back this person deserves this punishment. eagle789
In response to the observation that increasing numbers of offenders are having parole revoked during community supervision, many jurisdictions are reexamining their revocation procedures. A major development is the structuring of discretionary decision making consistent with the general trend in criminal justice. The goal of structure is to give officers concrete guidance so that their choice become more certain and uniform without removing all discretion. Decision making by written policy giving goals of revocation and specifying which violation are serious enough to result in revocation procedures. Behaviors that warrant alternative sanctions are also identified. Thus, agencies make it clear to officers that violation is a routine part of supervision that can be responded to in a variety of ways.Most states limit parole to inmates convicted of certain crimes and who have a certain percentage of their sentence. According to me I think its good idea because some offenders committed a very serious crime that they are not even needed to the community but in the other hand some offenders see that to be unfair. For instance, offenders who have been convicted of first degree murder, kidnapping, rape, arson, or drug trafficking are generally not eligible for parole. For other offender the parole board will consider each inmates personal characteristics such as age mental stability, marital status prior criminal record. As we know that parole boards do not grant parole to offenders simply because of good behaviors exhibited during incarceration, the parole board will also consider the nature and severity of the offence committed and the length of sentence served. Finally the parole board will examine the inmate’s ability to establish a permanent residence and obtain gainful employment upon release. Parole will be granted if there is no apparent treats to public safety and inmate is willing and able to re-enter the community. GUSII 789
We know just from living our everyday lives that there are many people on this Earth who come from different walks of life and who have vastly different sets of values than our own. These people are not lesser people than us but sometimes their views of life and values may be flawed in a sense. This story is a truly heartbreaking one, as we can see that simply because someone who is wealthy is going to not have to face as severe of a punishment for a crime that is very serious, I mean this kid killed 4 people while drunk driving. He should have easily been charged with reckless homicide and should have been spending many years behind bars for this crime. However because his family is wealthy they were able to afford some of the best lawyers and were able to get just probation. Then after that, his mother helped him escape to Mexico to avoid further justice. My main issue with this is not only should he have received jail time, but just because of his status he escaped proper justice. This would have been a very different story and case had his family not been wealthy. We know that a huge percentage of people in jail are poor people who cannot afford to pay for a lawyer or to pay their bail/bond. The disparity between those who are wealthy and those who are poor plays a huge role in our criminal justice system unfortunately, and it continue to be a problem until we change how the system works. People’s innocence and guilt should not be subject to the amount of money they possess. Pack789
While I believe that person's circumstances should be taken into account as far as their treatment by the criminal justice system goes, I do not think that circumstances should ever justify someone's actions to the point of law enforcement releasing them entirely. This person's defense was cogent, He was never made to meet basic expectations, and as a result of that, he cannot be expected to make good, well-thought-out, responsible decisions. I also think it is important to realize that it is most likely that the vast majority of people who are incarcerated were also never equipped with skills to make responsible well-thought-out decisions. It seems most likely that the only reason this defense was held up was because the family was able to afford a competent lawyer.
If the kid is as incapable of making decisions as he claims to be, which I do believe, he should be rehabilitated by the justice system just like the people who are simply being detained should.
If the persons supposedly suffering "affluenza" is so irresponsible that he consistently makes bad decisions including ending the lives of four people who went out of their way to help someone in need and keeping an illegal firearm in a mexican hotel, it is certainly unsafe for him to be allowed to walk with members of common society.
While this individual's actions are very reprehensible and I would like to simply attack his character, I also think it is important that this is recognized as another example of how much America needs a rehabilitation based justice system. In the current system, responsibility is the primary thing that is considered when determining what to do with someone responsible for a crime. When someone is neither considered to be criminally insane or culpable for his actions, he or she is released back into society without further consideration. -Rudedog789
This video does show how the system is set up so the wealthy can prosper and the poor can suffer. If the circumstance were different and this child came from a poor family I believe it goes without saying that individual would be spending life without the possibility of parole. This course of events did not take place for this kid. Instead they released him and gave him 10 years’ of probation which he then violated, decided it was ok to play beer pong and party some more. There are people right now serving time in prison for drug charges involving marijuana. There is a system, but this just goes to show some things need to be fixed. His lawyers used his wealth as an excuse, can the poor do the same as a defense and say they had no father figure to say that this or that was wrong. I feel sorry for the victim’s family involved. It was interesting to hear that pastor say that he believes in him but I do feel that is what he is supposed to say in a sense. It will not benefit society if this kid is let out nor will he have learned anything given the short amount of time he has served even with the strict conditions he will be under. It is interesting to think that perhaps this kid didn’t know right from wrong given his social status, but the fault falls on the parents in that case. Whichever way this is turned this is just wrong and unfair to say the least. ~pj012
I believe that this to be neglectful of even being consistent in our criminal justice system as there is no reason he should have gotten probation for committing four counts of reckless homicide. All four will never get their life back see their families I don’ t understands the backlash he faced for playing beer pong after what he went through because he may have tried to have an interactioning with friends if he does reflect on the mistake he made. But I do believe that he should be locked behind bars until the day he dies. He took four lives’ with so much as showing any bit of remorse to his victims’ families and what he personal made them suffer. I also believe him fleeing to Mexico, could also be backlash from the public, which is much desived for him and his family after the evil act and then excusing the act that was made, so the media did not set this in stone on the terms of fleeing but I also believe the judge should have made a determination not to jail him for 760 where he can earn good time to get less but given him additional years with the original years its sickening to see someone be able to function in society with so much of a care while others are in agony due to the actions of anther punishment and as for the agony suffered and punishment should consider that is just as equal and fair of the harm that was caused. But, as the justice system has shown time and time again if an offender messes up once they will be sure or mostly sure a similar offense or the offense will occur again hopefully not but if any injustice comes from this individual lock him and away toss the key and don’t look back this person deserves this punishment. eagle789
ReplyDeleteIn response to the observation that increasing numbers of offenders are having parole revoked during community supervision, many jurisdictions are reexamining their revocation procedures. A major development is the structuring of discretionary decision making consistent with the general trend in criminal justice. The goal of structure is to give officers concrete guidance so that their choice become more certain and uniform without removing all discretion. Decision making by written policy giving goals of revocation and specifying which violation are serious enough to result in revocation procedures. Behaviors that warrant alternative sanctions are also identified. Thus, agencies make it clear to officers that violation is a routine part of supervision that can be responded to in a variety of ways.Most states limit parole to inmates convicted of certain crimes and who have a certain percentage of their sentence. According to me I think its good idea because some offenders committed a very serious crime that they are not even needed to the community but in the other hand some offenders see that to be unfair. For instance, offenders who have been convicted of first degree murder, kidnapping, rape, arson, or drug trafficking are generally not eligible for parole. For other offender the parole board will consider each inmates personal characteristics such as age mental stability, marital status prior criminal record. As we know that parole boards do not grant parole to offenders simply because of good behaviors exhibited during incarceration, the parole board will also consider the nature and severity of the offence committed and the length of sentence served. Finally the parole board will examine the inmate’s ability to establish a permanent residence and obtain gainful employment upon release. Parole will be granted if there is no apparent treats to public safety and inmate is willing and able to re-enter the community. GUSII 789
ReplyDeleteWe know just from living our everyday lives that there are many people on this Earth who come from different walks of life and who have vastly different sets of values than our own. These people are not lesser people than us but sometimes their views of life and values may be flawed in a sense. This story is a truly heartbreaking one, as we can see that simply because someone who is wealthy is going to not have to face as severe of a punishment for a crime that is very serious, I mean this kid killed 4 people while drunk driving. He should have easily been charged with reckless homicide and should have been spending many years behind bars for this crime. However because his family is wealthy they were able to afford some of the best lawyers and were able to get just probation. Then after that, his mother helped him escape to Mexico to avoid further justice. My main issue with this is not only should he have received jail time, but just because of his status he escaped proper justice. This would have been a very different story and case had his family not been wealthy. We know that a huge percentage of people in jail are poor people who cannot afford to pay for a lawyer or to pay their bail/bond. The disparity between those who are wealthy and those who are poor plays a huge role in our criminal justice system unfortunately, and it continue to be a problem until we change how the system works. People’s innocence and guilt should not be subject to the amount of money they possess. Pack789
ReplyDeleteWhile I believe that person's circumstances should be taken into account as far as their treatment by the criminal justice system goes, I do not think that circumstances should ever justify someone's actions to the point of law enforcement releasing them entirely. This person's defense was cogent, He was never made to meet basic expectations, and as a result of that, he cannot be expected to make good, well-thought-out, responsible decisions. I also think it is important to realize that it is most likely that the vast majority of people who are incarcerated were also never equipped with skills to make responsible well-thought-out decisions. It seems most likely that the only reason this defense was held up was because the family was able to afford a competent lawyer.
ReplyDeleteIf the kid is as incapable of making decisions as he claims to be, which I do believe, he should be rehabilitated by the justice system just like the people who are simply being detained should.
If the persons supposedly suffering "affluenza" is so irresponsible that he consistently makes bad decisions including ending the lives of four people who went out of their way to help someone in need and keeping an illegal firearm in a mexican hotel, it is certainly unsafe for him to be allowed to walk with members of common society.
While this individual's actions are very reprehensible and I would like to simply attack his character, I also think it is important that this is recognized as another example of how much America needs a rehabilitation based justice system. In the current system, responsibility is the primary thing that is considered when determining what to do with someone responsible for a crime.
When someone is neither considered to be criminally insane or culpable for his actions, he or she is released back into society without further consideration.
-Rudedog789
This video does show how the system is set up so the wealthy can prosper and the poor can suffer. If the circumstance were different and this child came from a poor family I believe it goes without saying that individual would be spending life without the possibility of parole. This course of events did not take place for this kid. Instead they released him and gave him 10 years’ of probation which he then violated, decided it was ok to play beer pong and party some more. There are people right now serving time in prison for drug charges involving marijuana. There is a system, but this just goes to show some things need to be fixed. His lawyers used his wealth as an excuse, can the poor do the same as a defense and say they had no father figure to say that this or that was wrong. I feel sorry for the victim’s family involved. It was interesting to hear that pastor say that he believes in him but I do feel that is what he is supposed to say in a sense. It will not benefit society if this kid is let out nor will he have learned anything given the short amount of time he has served even with the strict conditions he will be under. It is interesting to think that perhaps this kid didn’t know right from wrong given his social status, but the fault falls on the parents in that case. Whichever way this is turned this is just wrong and unfair to say the least. ~pj012
ReplyDelete^pj789
Delete