'Afflueza' Strikes Again

this is not even the case of affluenza.
it is as blatant as saying "his money mean more for us than justice".
how long before a rich murderer walks?
 
This thread reeks of class warfare.
 
"S.C. Johnson:A family company."

I guess that's kinda true.
 
What a shitty mother, you would think she would do more for her daughters.
Dat money doe.
 
Affluenza - The new precedent for legally being allowed to get paid off.
 
Seems like a distortion of the facts. He took a plea bargain from the prosecutors because the daughter wouldn't testify. Not exactly sure how affluenza played a role in this.
 
Seems like a distortion of the facts. He took a plea bargain from the prosecutors because the daughter wouldn't testify. Not exactly sure how affluenza played a role in this.

Maybe this guy was so rich that he had people "persuade" her to keep her mouth shut?
 
Maybe this guy was so rich that he had people "persuade" her to keep her mouth shut?

Being rich is not prerequisite for "persuading" a step daughter into keeping her mouth shut. Intimidating a family member into silence is not an occurrence that is exclusive to rich people. Not saying it ain't shitty, but given what was written in the OP, I don't see how affluenza played a role in this.
 
Being rich is not prerequisite for "persuading" a step daughter into keeping her mouth shut. Intimidating a family member into silence is not an occurrence that is exclusive to rich people. Not saying it ain't shitty, but given what was written in the OP, I don't see how affluenza played a role in this.

Fair enough.

I guess we all would have to agree on a definition of affluenza. I take it to mean that one is so rich and is so used to getting everything they want that one can't be held accountable for their actions because of it.
 
Seems like a distortion of the facts. He took a plea bargain from the prosecutors because the daughter wouldn't testify. Not exactly sure how affluenza played a role in this.

Pretty much. They should be pretty happy they got any time for him.
 
I would like to look at the headlines one day and read that one of these judges or crooked cops got bumped off.
 
So, his confession gets him 4 months. Do you think if one of the "99%" confessed to the same crime they would get 4 months?

I think the prosecution anywhere would have a hard time proving this type of case without testimony from the victim.

He confessed to the mother, not to the police or DA. And it was both the mother and the victim who refused to testify. He's a first time offender and presumably doesn't have a criminal record for anything else.

So, yeah, I think the 99% would have gotten off just as likely, assuming competent counsel. Now, if you're pointing to the quality of his lawyers as "Affluenza" because the average person couldn't afford to fight the case as long or as hard without a serious dent in their resources...I'll give you that...maybe.

First time offender, no testimony from anyone related to the case, no criminal record or history of malfeasance, etc.
 
I think the prosecution anywhere would have a hard time proving this type of case without testimony from the victim.

He confessed to the mother, not to the police or DA. And it was both the mother and the victim who refused to testify. He's a first time offender and presumably doesn't have a criminal record for anything else.

So just based on hearsay he got 4 months? I will admit the article is lacking, but how did he get 4 months?



He confessed to the police or to the girl's mother (allegedly)?

The article does mention SC3 confessing to the mother, but since the mother or daughter didn't testify I am assuming he confessed to police. How could he get convicted otherwise?
 
Back
Top