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

[LinasK]

I keep trying to figure out why these parents would act the way that they have. I think I have come to the conclusion it could be one of a few different things, or combinations of some or all.
1. They were so wrapped up in themselves they really didn’t bother with Ethan unless it was to defend him against other people like his teachers or the police when they tried to step in.
2. They are too screwed up to care about anyone or anything but themselves.
3. They feel like they are better than everyone else and so is their son
4. They are all too important to have any consequences for their action
5. Like typical school yard bullies, they just don’t care about anyone but themselves
6. They were/are too stupid to know that they were actually doing more harm than good to their son

Please feel free to add other possibilities

Permissive/free-range parenting. It's actually a style. My BIL and SIL practiced it and their kids had problems. I think it borders on neglect.

 

[LinasK]

It's becoming clearer. Should hear why he's asking for $15K in court...

[video=twitter;685260738307342337]https://twitter.com/clairezcardona/status/685260738307342337[/video]

eta, ha ha

Someone who has already fled the country once is a known flight risk. The judge would be stupid to reduce her bail, she should be held on a no-bail status and her passport taken. Next time she might go further than Mexico, like Europe or some other continent.

 

[JanetElaine]

Someone who has already fled the country once is a known flight risk. The judge would be stupid to reduce her bail, she should be held on a no-bail status and her passport taken. Next time she might go further than Mexico, like Europe or some other continent.

I hate to sound like I'm sticking up for TC, but technically she did not flee. She's not the one who was on probation and she was free to go wherever she wanted. She was however not free to hide a fugitive, which is what she did, and that is what she's now charged with. Her son is a known flight risk, but technically TC is not.

 

[JeannaT]

She has other children? MSM articles often refer to Ethan as their only child, so I assumed he is her only child as well (which at least would help a little to understand why she spoiled him rotten). I frankly think this family is way beyond Dr. Phil's expertise.

She has two older children. Her first child was born when she was 15, and she had the second before she was 18. Those who characterize her as having lived a cush life are uninformed - she had a very difficult beginning. According to news sources, neither of the first two fathers of her children were involved at all, only Ethan's dad is involved.

 

[JeannaT]

Knowing Aurora Vega and the INM, I can bet my paycheck that it's a hell hole with beans and rice. Nutritionist my rear. We don't even have them in schools for crying out loud.

If he were being terribly mistreated, it's unlikely he'd be fighting to stay there. I do know people who have had horrific experiences in Mexican jails, namely a couple of lawyers who were on a dove hunting expedition and crossed the border with dove hunting guns in their brand new SUV. They willingly left their SUV in Mexico as payoff to the jailers so they could get the hell out of that jail and take a taxi back home to central Texas.

Ethan seems to be in no such hurry, meaning, IMHO, he's being treated humanely.

 

[JeannaT]

Permissive/free-range parenting. It's actually a style. My BIL and SIL practiced it and their kids had problems. I think it borders on neglect.

I do agree with you, that it borders on neglect. But free-range parenting is what parents did before the 1980's. Kids were allowed free range to develop their skills and experience adventure. Before the 1980's, and thousands of years prior to that, kids were allowed a great deal of freedom, to develop and mature.

What the Couches did wasn't free-range. No free range parent would give their kids a house of their own, and look the other way when they were charged with crimes. Free range parents allow their kids to roam around during the day - as kids born in the 50's and thousands of years before that, until the 1980s did. It's only just now that we keep our eyes on our kids 24/7. So thousands of years of human parenting, where kids about 8 years and up were allowed to venture around all day, and then the last 40 years we keep our kids under constant surveillance. That was free-range.

What the Couches did was not that. They set him up with unlimited funds and a house of his own. Whole 'nother story. Kids in the earlier era would have been physically punished for the misdeeds he did.

 

[bluesneakers]

Permissive/free-range parenting. It's actually a style. My BIL and SIL practiced it and their kids had problems. I think it borders on neglect.

My parents practiced it but we lived on a farm so it was literally free-range. I had a horse and we had dogs, but you're right - it can border on neglect at times. It's certainly not the way I raised my own kid.

 

[JeannaT]

My parents practiced it but we lived on a farm so it was literally free-range. I had a horse and we had dogs, but you're right - it can border on neglect at times. It's certainly not the way I raised my own kid.

I agree. I was free-range too. But I would ABSOLUTELY be punished for breaking the law or doing something that would have embarrassed my parents in any way. I honestly can't believe the neglectful way I was raised, but there is NO WAY my parents wouldn't have punished me for any minor infraction.

 

[asac]

I agree. I was free-range too. But I would ABSOLUTELY be punished for breaking the law or doing something that would have embarrassed my parents in any way. I honestly can't believe the neglectful way I was raised, but there is NO WAY my parents wouldn't have punished me for any minor infraction.

You think your roaming free-range lifestyle was neglectful? I grew up in a similar way in the 80s, we'd walk out the door to go play on a farm/in the woods with neighbours. We'd do whatever we wanted, tried catching crayfish/got bitten by crayfish, had motorbikes, had air rifles, climbed up trees, invented games, figured out how to behave safely around various farm animals (most importantly, the deer). I would never call it neglectful, I think we learnt a lot and think we all grew up to have a lot of common sense and practical skills. This also happened in an environment with parents who took us camping, fishing etc, and we went to schools which took us on camps to the forests (where we also had guns, archery, boats, were sent off to find our way from point a to point b in small groups) - so we also had those periods of adult teaching which we used in our free-range life. I think it's a great way to grow up.

Though, from what I've read, I might also call the Couch's permissive rather than free-range.

 

[faw720]

Another little piece of info, please pardon it it's a repeat.

Almost like a country club, Ethan. Hope you're enjoying it!!

A Look At Ethan Couch’s Living Conditions While Being Held In Mexico

January 7, 2016 7:12 PM


Follow CBSDFW.COM: Facebook |Twitter
MEXICO CITY, MEXICO (CBSDFW.COM) – Aurora Vega, the Director of Communication of National Institute of Migration of Mexico describes Ethan Couch’s holding center where foreigners stay when they have problematic (illegal) migratory status.
This center is an installation of national security.
Media is not allowed to receive any videos nor can they visit the residents.
The organizations that have full access are the Red Cross, ACNUR, Human Rights – direct relatives migrants may visit as can lawyers who have been certified and hired by migrant in process.
The center has surveillance 24×7 under very strict supervision by INM.
There are 3 areas which are independent from each other- no interaction among groups.
-One for males
-One for females
-One for families.
Sick patients are placed in isolated areas and supervised by medical teams.
All migrants are the same there are no privileges given to anyone.


Food:
3 meals are served per day – all the meals are supervised by a nutritionist, everyone is served the same menu except people with dietary restrictions related to health needs or religious traditions
Food is served in a common and large dining room, they serve the food by groups.
The quality of the food is good and they are offered a balance diet. The center receives random visits from human rights organizations to make sure the conditions are humane.


Sleeping areas:
The sleeping areas are share by 5 people the room size is 16 square meters.
Each person has a thin foam mattress with 2 sheets.
The most popular nationalities of foreigners in the holding center are Guatemala, Honduras Salvadorians, Africans, Chinese, Indus, most of them migrating for economic reasons.
The hygiene habits are not as the standards of US middle class, usually the smell of sweat is very strong. Many of the residents opt not to bathe or keep their clothes clean. They have places where they can hand wash their clothes.
As the foreigners are admitted to the holding center they are given a:
Hygiene kit: Towel, tooth brush, tooth paste, soap, hand sanitizer ( alcohol)
Each area has common showers
Electronics not allowed: none of the migrant have access to cell phones, Internet and or computers.


Entertainment:
The center has basketball and soccer areas. The migrants are free to move within their areas, they are never locked or handcuffed.

As much as I would like for him to be living in these conditions, it's just my personal opinion that his accommodations are much more luxurious. If they weren't, he would be fighting to come back to the U.S.

 

[faw720]

I agree. I was free-range too. But I would ABSOLUTELY be punished for breaking the law or doing something that would have embarrassed my parents in any way. I honestly can't believe the neglectful way I was raised, but there is NO WAY my parents wouldn't have punished me for any minor infraction.

I was raised that way too far out in the country on a ranch. I sometimes look back & wonder how I managed to survive out roaming around the countryside on my own. I distinctly remember one time when I was about 6 or 7 years old & I came home bragging about getting one of our horses untangled from a fence he had been caught in. I was so proud of myself but my parents chewed me out good for putting myself in danger. And then there was the time I almost drowned in a stock tank. My cousin a couple of years younger pulled me out. I had a tremendous amount of freedom but if I had ever broken the law I would have also had a tremendous amount of punishment.

 

[KaaBoom]

When looking at our DFW local websites I suggest that you also look in the comments section to see what other people are saying about this case. Some are even claiming that Sheriff Anderson is using this case as publicity since he is running for re-election this year. I have no opinion on that, but it looks to me like this story is going to have lots of publicity regardless. After all, it's not every day that a spoiled brat gets away with killing 4 people & then running from the law with his maw.

I think both the Sheriff and the U.S. Marshals have been milking this case for every thing it is worth. Look at the difference in the way the Mexican and the US authorities handled the case. The Mexicans released a statement. We arrested two Americans who were wanted by US authorities at location *advertiser censored* at time *advertiser censored*, and thats all they said about it. Meanwhile the Sheriff who wasn’t even involved in their apprehension has been having daily press conferences about it.:facepalm:

American politics is weird. This is probably the most unimportant thing happening in America today. This kid killed four innocent people, and got away with it. US cops kill hundreds of innocent people every year, and get away with it. LE can’t ever comment on those cases, but they sure like to talk about the Affluenza kid. This is nothing but a smokescreen to divert people’s attention from the real problems in this country, but it is pretty entertaining.

 

[faw720]

I agree. I was free-range too. But I would ABSOLUTELY be punished for breaking the law or doing something that would have embarrassed my parents in any way. I honestly can't believe the neglectful way I was raised, but there is NO WAY my parents wouldn't have punished me for any minor infraction.

Speaking of embarrassing parents............that was not tolerated at our house. I still can hear my parents saying, "What would the neighbors think?". I heard those words so often it totally soured me. I think that's the main reason I chose to live in a large city. Not that I'm trying to do or ever did anything really bad, but dang, so long as I'm not hurting my neighbors it's none of their business what I do.

Rant over.

 

[JeannaT]

What exactly does it mean then? He plead no contest and was given probation.

"Priors" means "prior convictions". As odd as it may seem, if he pled no contest and was given probation, it's very likely he did NOT receive a conviction, but rather, a "deferred adjudication" and then at the end of a successful probationary period, the charges were dropped. No conviction.

And so, it could be correctly stated that he has no "priors". All charges against him were dropped by the court, which is very typical of misdemeanor charges.

 

[Everyday Grace]

Pre-2007 and post-2007 approaches to juvenile justice in Texas.

As a result of state reforms enacted between 2007 and 2011, Texas has made good on its promise to reduce the number of youth incarcerated in its state-run juvenile correctional facilities without compromising public safety.

After it came to light in 2007 that youth in state-run juvenile facilities had suffered a number of abuses, Texas state leaders made a concerted effort to reduce the number of youth in state-run secure correctional institutions and, over the course of seven years, invested hundreds of millions of dollars in local juvenile probation departments.

http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/kc/content/study-reveals-impact-texas-juvenile-justice-reforms

Not an endorsement by me of the policy changes or this report.

Just an observation that Texas juvenile judicial case dispositions before and after 2007 are better viewed within the spectrum of the major policy reversal. IMO.

More:

In 2007, before Texas lawmakers began these reforms, 4,305 youths were locked up in state-run facilities. Today, less than 1,000 kids are locked up in state facilities.

Researchers also found that local probation departments hadn’t gotten much more effective than they were in 2007. The departments are chronically underfunded, and supported mostly with county funding. Researchers studied hundreds of treatment programs employed at the county level, and suggested that counties weren’t always connecting the right child with the right treatment—a mismatch, they said, that “can also increase the likelihood a youth will come into contact with the justice system.”

http://www.texasobserver.org/texas-juvenile-justice-reformers-take-victory-lap/

IT BEGAN WITH A WORD ONLY A CHILD would use—“icky”—uttered in a place where innocence was commonly assumed to be dead. A conversation between a tormented teenager and a volunteer math tutor about sexual abuse at a high- security lockup in Pyote, about fifty miles west of Odessa, set in motion a chain of events that has led to the downfall of the executive director of the Texas Youth Commission (the state agency responsible for juvenile corrections), the ousting of its board, the dispatching of police to every juvenile facility in the state, and an opening for the kind of corrections reform not seen since federal judge William Wayne Justice assumed control of the state prison system in the eighties. In the wake of the scandal, conventional wisdom about our obligation to delinquent youth has moved a long way in a very short period of time. “They are criminals,” one agency supervisor told a reporter shortly after the story broke in February. “They are not children, as you keep calling them. They have survived in this world by learning how to manipulate and using it to their advantage.” Two weeks later, after the real story of what had happened at Pyote had become impossible to deny, a rural East Texas legislator named Jim McReynolds was almost in tears. “They’re God’s children,” he told a packed hearing room at the Capitol. “I read last night till I wanted to vomit.”

- See more at: http://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/sins-of-commission/#sthash.UL4kaQWm.dpuf

 

[Dr. Know?]

TC is in court right now.

(link frozen atm)

http://www.courtchatter.com/#!tonya-couch-hearing-live-stream-1/c1s06

 

[Dr. Know?]

She was arraigned and on Monday they will have a bond hearing to lower it. Her lawyer was caught in traffic and was not present today. No plea entered. Attorney on Monday will ask for lower bond amount & go over her finances.

Judge said if she makes bail, she would wear a gps monitor & must have a permanent residence to live at. Said she'd have to give up her passport (guess it was a temp passport per the Judge) TC said she does not have her possessions and that they were given to CA authorities.

 

[jjenny]

"Priors" means "prior convictions". As odd as it may seem, if he pled no contest and was given probation, it's very likely he did NOT receive a conviction, but rather, a "deferred adjudication" and then at the end of a successful probationary period, the charges were dropped. No conviction.

And so, it could be correctly stated that he has no "priors". All charges against him were dropped by the court, which is very typical of misdemeanor charges.

As far as I can tell he didn't successfully complete his probation period. His probation period was supposed to have ended on June 19th. He killed four people in a drunk driving incident on June 15th.

 

[LillyP]

Here's the full length 9 minute video of her for anyone who wants to see the entire appearance.

I like her outfit today :behindbar

[video=youtube;SAhY9qqBzw4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAhY9qqBzw4&feature=youtu.be&a[/video]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAhY9qqBzw4&feature=youtu.be&a

 

[faw720]

She was arraigned and on Monday they will have a bond hearing to lower it. Her lawyer was caught in traffic and was not present today. No plea entered. Attorney on Monday will ask for lower bond amount & go over her finances.

Judge said if she makes bail, she would wear a gps monitor & must have a permanent residence to live at. Said she'd have to give up her passport (guess it was a temp passport per the Judge) TC said she does not have her possessions and that they were given to CA authorities.

Thanks for letting us know what happened!! I was trying to watch it live, but my sound was not working properly & I couldn't hear a word they said. At least we know she's going to have to stay in jail a few more days.