GUILTY TX - Ethan Couch 'Affluenza Teen' DUI driver who killed four gets probation, 2013 #2

[JeannaT]

According to reports, she had at least $30,000 in her bank account. So the $7,500 bond was a drop in the bucket to her. Her daily withdrawal limit is $30,000. That should tell you how much money she has has. How many people have a $30,000 withdrawal limit on their bank account?

Maybe most people? She's not really responsible for banking policy.

 

[KaaBoom]

Maybe most people? She's not really responsible for banking policy.

The average withdrawal limit is $500. Her’s is 60 x higher then an average person.

 

[JeannaT]

The average withdrawal limit is $500. Her’s is 60 x higher then an average person.

I think you might be talking about through an ATM. Did she get her money from an ATM, or did she walk in to the bank and make a withdrawal? I can't imagine an ATM allowing that kind of money to be withdrawn - that's just foolish on the part of the bank.

 

[KaaBoom]

When you enter the jail, you are relieved of any possessions at all that you had. In the US (don't know if it's shakier in Mexico) her car with possessions inside would be towed. If she had an asthma inhaler or some other kind of emergency medication, that would be taken and be made available to her. Otherwise, her car would be towed (at great expense to her) to an impound lot where she would be charged money each day it wasn't picked up, and her possessions would be locked inside it. Maybe her purse and wallet would be taken to the jail, but not in her possession.

This is incorrect. If she had been arrested in the US, her car would not normally have been towed, unless she requested police to do that, or if it was parked in a no parking zone or something. But that would be a separate issue.

All of which is of course irrelevant, since she was arrested in Mexico, not the US.

 

[nrdsb4]

At 33 pages, I sure could have missed it, but what legitimate source says TC has a $30,000 daily withdrawal limit? That can't be referring to an ATM.

If I have hundreds of thousands of dollars in a bank account, I'm entitled to withdraw however much I want of it. What reason could my bank have for denying me my own funds?

Which is not to say the bank might not report this to the IRS. Frequent withdrawals of large sums of cash are reported AFAIK.

 

[JeannaT]

This is incorrect. If she had been arrested in the US, her car would not normally have been towed, unless she requested police to do that, or if it was parked in a no parking zone or something. But that would be a separate issue.

All of which is of course irrelevant, since she was arrested in Mexico, not the US.

If her car were in her own driveway, it wouldn't be towed. If it were on private property where she had permission to leave it (for example, a friend's home or a private business where she had permission to store her car) it wouldn't be towed.

If she were arrested on a traffic stop, or in a business like a mall, her car would be towed at her expense and the fee would compound daily.

I'm not sure why we're arguing such petty things.

 

[JeannaT]

At 33 pages, I sure could have missed it, but what legitimate source says TC has a $30,000 daily withdrawal limit? That can't be referring to an ATM.

If I have hundreds of thousands of dollars in a bank account, I'm entitled to withdraw however much I want of it. What reason could my bank have for denying me my own funds?

Which is not to say the bank might not report this to the IRS. Frequent withdrawals of large sums of cash are reported AFAIK.

I'm guessing (just guessing) what happened is this is a joint account, and she can't withdraw more than 30K at once without both signatures on the account.

If this were an account with only her name on it, she's entitled to close out the entire thing and get cash - but I think some places (like Fidelity) have a waiting period for huge amounts. Huge like, millions of dollars. Not huge like 60K.

 

[faw720]

At 33 pages, I sure could have missed it, but what legitimate source says TC has a $30,000 daily withdrawal limit? That can't be referring to an ATM.

If I have hundreds of thousands of dollars in a bank account, I'm entitled to withdraw however much I want of it. What reason could my bank have for denying me my own funds?

Which is not to say the bank might not report this to the IRS. Frequent withdrawals of large sums of cash are reported AFAIK.

Somewhere (happy hunting) in the 80 pages on the first thread or somewhere on this thread one of the linked MSM articles made the statement that she could only withdraw $30,000.00 per day. At the time I thought that sounded strange. Could it be that hubby placed a withdrawal limit?

 

[KaaBoom]

At 33 pages, I sure could have missed it, but what legitimate source says TC has a $30,000 daily withdrawal limit? That can't be referring to an ATM.

If I have hundreds of thousands of dollars in a bank account, I'm entitled to withdraw however much I want of it. What reason could my bank have for denying me my own funds?

Well, for one thing, you do understand that banks don’t keep that amount of cash on hand, right? The nature of the banking business is that they take your money and loan it to other people. Thats the way they make money. Keeping hundreds of thousands of dollars of cash on hand incase you want to withdraw it, would not be profitable for them.

 

[KaaBoom]

If her car were in her own driveway, it wouldn't be towed. If it were on private property where she had permission to leave it (for example, a friend's home or a private business where she had permission to store her car) it wouldn't be towed.

If she were arrested on a traffic stop, or in a business like a mall, her car would be towed at her expense and the fee would compound daily.

I'm not sure why we're arguing such petty things.

I was just pointing out that towing a car is not part of the arrest process in the US, and probably not in Mexico either. For example I once got paid $50 to go and recover the car of someone who had been arrested for DUI. I found his car sitting in a public parking lot, right where he said he had been arrested, with the windshield filled with parking tickets. So I don’t get the part that her car would have been towed in the US.

 

[nrdsb4]

Tonya Couch's older son, Steven McWilliams, testified his mom had no property of her own, and no access to $100,000 in a bank account that's been frozen by the government.

So they are not saying she has no money, simply no access to her money.

Tarrant County District Attorney Sharen Wilson previously said Couch is a proven flight risk. But Judge Salvant said bond is not meant to keep people in jail... it's to get them to court.

"It's not a murder," he said. "I've got to follow the law."

It will be interesting to see if she complies with the bond restrictions.

http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/loca...nya-couch-requesting-bond-reduction/78637208/

 

[sbecker60]

When on probation you are usually not allowed to leave the county much less the country. She knew what she was doing. IMO

 

[JeannaT]

I was just pointing out that towing a car is not part of the arrest process in the US, and probably not in Mexico either. For example I once got paid $50 to go and recover the car of someone who had been arrested for DUI. I found his car sitting in a public parking lot, right where he said he had been arrested, with the windshield filled with parking tickets. So I don’t get the part that her car would have been towed in the US.

Maybe Texas is different. If you're arrested, and can't verify that someone will be coming by shortly to pick up your car, it gets towed. Sounds like your friend said he had someone to come get it.

Tonya would have had no such person showing up to get her truck.

 

[Everyday Grace]

http://www.madd.org/get-involved/sign-the-petition-to-fight-affluenza.html

30,165

 

[JeannaT]

When on probation you are usually not allowed to leave the county much less the country. She knew what she was doing. IMO

She wasn't on probation, he was, and he's another adult. I just think this is stickier than others think it is.

What she did, I believe we'll all agree, is travel out of the country with her adult son when she became aware that he was engaging in at risk behaviors that were in violation of his probation for intoxication manslaughter, for which he was given 10 years probation. There was no warrant issued, and no cop came to her door asking where he was.

This isn't the same kind of thing as someone who knows there is an arrest warrant for murder or rape or aggravated assault, and a friend/parent lies to cops who come to the door looking, and then provides them with a car. His infraction isn't a felony. It's a probation violation, and there was no arrest warrant at the time. That he chose to violate probation and leave the country is not her crime. It's his.

 

[Everyday Grace]

Texas Transportation Code 545.305(a)(8)

(a)A peace officer listed under Article 2.12, Code of Criminal Procedure, or a license and weight inspector of the department may remove or require the operator or a person in charge of a vehicle to move a vehicle from a highway if the vehicle:

<snipped>

(8) is operated by a person an officer arrests for an alleged offense and the officer is required by law to take the person into custody;

<snipped>

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/txstatutes/TN/7/C/545/G/545.305#sthash.jHO8bFGK.dpuf

May, not shall.

They usually do.

 

[pukasonqo2]

Well, for one thing, you do understand that banks don’t keep that amount of cash on hand, right? The nature of the banking business is that they take your money and loan it to other people. Thats the way they make money. Keeping hundreds of thousands of dollars of cash on hand incase you want to withdraw it, would not be profitable for them.

i used to work in a bank and for cash withdrawals of 10000 or more we needed, at least, 24 hour notice as the branch did not have that much available for withdrawals
in oz the ATM withdrawal limit is 1000 a day or security reasons



Lupus est *advertiser censored* homini, non *advertiser censored*, quom qualis sit non novit

 

[Everyday Grace]

She wasn't on probation, he was, and he's another adult. I just think this is stickier than others think it is.

What she did, I believe we'll all agree, is travel out of the country with her adult son when she became aware that he was engaging in at risk behaviors that were in violation of his probation for intoxication manslaughter, for which he was given 10 years probation. There was no warrant issued, and no cop came to her door asking where he was.

This isn't the same kind of thing as someone who knows there is an arrest warrant for murder or rape or aggravated assault, and a friend/parent lies to cops who come to the door looking, and then provides them with a car. His infraction isn't a felony. It's a probation violation, and there was no arrest warrant at the time. That he chose to violate probation and leave the country is not her crime. It's his.

Um, yes, his infraction is a felony. Specifically, Intoxication Manslaughter.

Attempting to avoid a probation violation is attempting to avoid punishment for the underlying felony.

Directly from her arrest warrant affidavit:

On or about December 11, 2015, in Tarrant County, Texas, Tonya Pope Couch, a white female, Date of Birth [REDACTED], did then and there, commit the offense of HINDERING APPREHENSION, in that she, with intent to hinder the arrest or detention of [REDACTED] under the authority of a directive to apprehend issued by the 323rd District Court in Tarrant County, harbored, concealed and provided means for [REDACTED] to avoid arrest or detention and punishment for the felony grade offense of PROBATION VIOLATION - INTOXICATION MANSLAUGHTER.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/294943483/Tonya-Couch-Arrest-Affidavit

One more time for reference, a link to Texas Penal Code, Sec. 38.05 -- http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.38.htm

 

[JeannaT]

Very interesting, Ordinary Grace. This is the arrest affidavit - their salvo over the bow - and I'll be very interested in how this shakes out in court.

These are accusations, and not convictions.

Here's what I understand about probation violations, and I think you can probably google it and verify it. If the violation isn't a crime itself - that is, if an ordinary citizen did the deed, it wouldn't be a crime, it is also not a crime as a probationer. It's an administrative
problem, and allows the courts to act on their bargain that you swore you wouldn't do those things which otherwise you could legally do.

For example, if you are on probation and told not to drink and you have to remain in college OR be full time employed. And then you flunk out of college. That's not a crime for another person. Or you are told you can't leave the county, and you do. That's not a crime for an average person, so again, it's not an additional "crime" for a probationer. It does allow the court to come down harder on the offender for the original offense, but the probationer won't be charged with the "crime" of leaving the county. This seems like a very fine line, but it's still a line.

This isn't as if he committed a crime while on probation - I don't think you can prove the drinking, no one breathalized him. And leaving the country isn't of itself a crime. It's a violation of probation. Had he been arrested for drunk driving, or assault, or dealing drugs, etc., that would be a crime and not just an administrative violation of his compact with the court.

Again, I'll be very interested in how this all wends its way through the courts. We've all seen arresting affidavits that are horse hockey.

Thanks again for doing the legwork.

So the takeaway in all this is, his infraction is in fact, not a felony IMHO. That's why the talking heads are talking about a max of 120 days in jail for this violation. In the future, if you google his convictions, there will be no where that says "leaving the country" or "failure to show up for parole officer visits". Because they're not crimes.

 

[JeannaT]

Here's another way to look at it. He is not entitled to a jury trial for this behavior, as I understand it. He's not being charged with a crime. He's already had his crime adjudicated. He agreed to certain terms, and he violated them. Now, his case will go back to the original court that adjudicated his crime initially (intoxication manslaughter) and decide what to do with him due to this violation of his terms. But there won't be a legal finding of a new crime, and so, no right to a jury.

His mother, on the other hand, IS entitled to a jury trial because she's accused of a crime - the crime of hindering apprehension.