Category Archives: legal news

Throw book at ‘Affluenza Teen’ mom

affluenza

Ethan Couch is in custody … again.

So is his mother.

The so-called “Affluenza Teen” has been found in Mexico, where authorities are preparing to send him back to Texas.

Why the big deal? This is the nimrod who piled into a pickup in 2013 — when he was 16 years of age — and while roaring drunk plowed his vehicle into another vehicle, killing four people.

The kid got 10 years probation largely on the testimony of a shrink who blamed his ghastly behavior on the upbringing he received from his wealthy Fort Worth parents.

Thus, the term “affluenza” was born.

Then the kid — who’s now 18 — was seen taking part in a drinking game in violation of his probation; and after that, the kid failed to report to his probation officer. Can’t do that, young man.

So, Mom and Ethan went on the lam, ending up on the Mexican Riviera before the cops found them.

Texas law limits the amount of time Ethan can serve in jail; he faces a maximum of 120 days in the slammer.

Mom, though, ought to spend some serious time in The Joint.

What’s so ironic about all of this is that the “affluenza defense” has taken an odd turn toward validity.

Ethan Couch never should have been too drunk to drive. Did his parents enable his terrible behavior?

It seems that Mommy Couch’s accompanying her little pride and joy to another nation suggests that she truly has enabled Ethan’s criminal activity.

She deserves some hard time if a Texas court convicts her of aiding in her son’s flight from the law.

 

 

 

‘Affluenza’ teen may be in trouble again

beer pong

The case of Ethan Couch introduced America to a new term: affluenza.

It was coined by a psychologist who testified in Couch’s defense after the then-16-year-old Fort Worth teenager got roaring drunk, climbed into a motor vehicle and then killed four people and injured several others, at least two of them critically.

Couch dodged some serious prison time and received a probated sentence and was ordered to participate in a drug rehab program.

The psychologist had argued that Couch’s wealthy parents had enabled the boy’s behavior and, therefore, the youngster wasn’t totally responsible for what he did that night.

The state had sought to put the boy behind bars for a long time.

Now it turns out that the cops are looking for Couch, who’s now 18, after a video surfaced that seems to reveal he is participating in a game of “beer pong,” which is a game involving participants hitting a ball into a cup and then drinking the contents of whatever cup the ball lands.

Sound like fun? Uhh, not really.

The issue, though, is whether Couch has violated the terms of his probation, which was for 10 years and which prohibits him from drinking alcohol.

Did I mention that Couch’s blood-alcohol content was three times the legal limit for an adult at the time of his horrific accident?

The nation was shocked by the stunningly lax sentence handed down in that Tarrant County courtroom in 2013.

Something tells me that when the police catch up with Evan Couch that the young man will get the justice he deserved when he killed those people in the first place.

 

Scalia recuse himself from race cases? Not a chance

pelosi

U.S. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is angry at Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

She’s mad at remarks that Scalia made during oral arguments involving an affirmative case involving the University of Texas. Scalia contended that African-American students might not do as well academically at UT as they would in “slower-track schools.” The statement has drawn much criticism against the outspoken justice.

Pelosi thinks Scalia now must recuse himself from future discrimination cases because of his bias.

Let’s hold on, Mme. Minority Leader.

Don’t misunderstand me. I dislike Scalia’s world view as much as the next progressive. But calling for him to recuse himself from these cases goes way too far. According to Politico: “It’s so disappointing to hear that statement coming from a justice of the Supreme Court. It clearly shows a bias,” Pelosi said. “I think that the justice should recuse himself from any case that relates to discrimination in education, in voting, and I’m sorry that he made that comment.”

Consider something from our recent past.

The highest court in the land once included two justices who were philosophically opposed to capital punishment. The late Justices Thurgood Marshall and William Brennan voted automatically in favor of capital defendants’ death sentence appeals. If a death row inmate’s case made it to the Supreme Court, he or she could depend on at least two votes in favor of the appeal.

In fact, Justice Marshall was particularly blunt about it. He said repeatedly that he opposed capital punishment, yet he took part in those appeals.

Did he ever recuse himself? Did pro-death penalty forces make the case that he should? No to the first; and unlikely to the second.

Federal judges — and includes the nine individuals who sit on the highest court — all have lifetime jobs. That’s how the Constitution set it up. Presidents appoint then; the Senate confirms them and then they are free to vote their conscience.

Scalia need not recuse himself. He is free — as he has been since President Reagan appointed him to the court in 1986 — to speak his mind. He has done so with remarkable candor — and even occasionally with some callousness — ever since.

 

Always a political back story

refugees

I am a strong believer in what the Founding Fathers intended by creating an independent federal judiciary.

They gave the president the authority to nominate federal judges for lifetime jobs, pending approval by the U.S. Senate. The intent, as I’ve always understood it, was to de-politicize the judicial branch of government.

It works.

Judge blocks order

Then again, politics always seems to be part of the subplot of every federal judicial decision.

U.S. District Judge David Godbey, for example, today struck down Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s ban on Syrian refugees coming to Texas. Paxton cited security concerns in asking for the temporary restraining order. Godbey ruled within hours of the request that Paxton had failed to demonstrate that the refugees posed any kind of threat.

Godbey wrote, according to the Texas Tribune: “The Court finds that the evidence before it is largely speculative hearsay,” the judge wrote. “The [state] has failed to show by competent evidence that any terrorists actually have infiltrated the refugee program, much less that these particular refugees are terrorists intent on causing harm.”

So, it’s fair to ask: Is this judge sitting on the federal bench because a liberal Democratic president, Barack Obama, appointed him? No. He was selected in 2003 by Republican President George W. Bush to serve the Northern District of Texas. Paxton, let’s point out, is a Republican as well.

Does it really matter, then, whether a judge gets picked by a Democrat or a Republican? It shouldn’t. Judges take an oath to uphold the Constitution without regard to political favor. They do, remember, have a lifetime job.

But the politics of this particular issue — the refugee crisis and the political debate swirling all over it — causes one to look carefully at who’s making these decisions.

Judge Godbey appears to have put the law above his political leanings.

What took so long to charge this cop?

Chicago-PD-LaQuan--1000x600

Laquan McDonald was walking down the middle of a Chicago street in 2014. He was carrying a knife with a 3-inch blade.

Some police officers pulled up. One of them got out of his cruiser and then shot McDonald to death. That’s not all he did. He emptied his service pistol into McDonald.

Sixteen rounds, man!

That was more than a year ago.

This week, Chicago authorities have charged former Officer Jason Van Dyke with murder in McDonald’s death.

I’ve seen the dash-cam video of the incident. It’s about 6 minutes long. Having seen it, I am compelled to join many others in asking: What on Earth took ’em so long to charge the officer with a crime?

The video is graphic. It shows McDonald, who was 17 years of age, simply walking past Van Dyke’s SUV cruiser. Remember, he wasn’t packing any firepower; he was holding a small knife.

The officer opened fire.

I must point out here — as if you need reminding — that McDonald was black and Van Slyke is white.

McDonald’s family didn’t want the video released. To its credit, the network on which I saw the video, NBC, had the decency to blur the image of McDonald lying on the ground as he was being hit by the bullets.

According to the Chicago Tribune: “Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez said she had decided weeks ago to charge Van Dyke weeks ago but was holding off until federal authorities completed their part of the joint investigation. She said she ‘moved up’ her decision to charge Van Dyke after a Cook County judge ruled last week that the video should be released to the public.”

Van Dyke had been taken off of patrol duty and was working behind a desk for the past year — while drawing his salary. He’s no longer drawing it now that he’s been charged with murder.

Well, OK. But based on what millions of Americans have now witnessed on that hideous video, it seems — to me, at least — that the “joint investigation” could have been wrapped up months ago.

What took ’em  so long?

 

These charges seem so very appropriate

crash

A woman plowed her car into a Stillwater, Okla., crowd over the weekend.

Four people are dead, including a 2-year-old toddler.

The woman reportedly was drunk at the wheel, although the suspect’s lawyer contends there “absolutely” was no alcohol involved. We’ll have to wait for the tests to come back on that one, counselor.

She is now facing at least four counts of second-degree murder over the carnage she created at an Oklahoma State University homecoming parade.

My initial reaction to the charges being filed? Good!

The rage is palpable in Stillwater toward Adacia Chambers, a 25-year-old resident of the city.

These kinds of tragedies hit us all quite hard. The very idea that a crowd of people enjoying a day of celebration for a college football team could be victimized in this manner by someone who might have been impaired by drugs and/or alcohol simply boggles the mind.

It’s not a “mere” drunk- or reckless-driving case here. If Chambers gets convicted of the murder charges, she’s going away for a very long time. What’s more, several of the people who were injured are in critical condition; if any of them loses the fight for survival, the counts against Chambers could add up to even more prison time in the event of a conviction.

One of the witnesses to the mayhem said, “I’ve lived here my whole life and this blows my mind. This is something that doesn’t happen in Stillwater.”

Tragically, yes it does.

 

The law is the law, Mme. Clerk

kim-davis

Kim Davis keeps running into that silly little thing called the law.

The Rowan County (Ky.) clerk who’s made a spectacle of herself because she refuses to issue marriage licenses to gay couples has been hit with yet another legal setback.

A federal court has denied Davis an exemption from a gubernatorial directive that requires all public officials to comply with federal law. The law in question, interestingly, originated in a Kentucky case when a gay couple sued to have their marriage declared legal under U.S. law. The Supreme Court ruled in the couple’s favor earlier this year.

Davis, though, has resisted, saying she follows God’s law.

Davis defeated by court

God’s law is not the law to which she swore an oath to uphold. That oath involved secular law established by the U.S. Constitution.

I’ve noted already that Davis — who spent some time in the slammer on a contempt of court violation when she refused to issue marriage licenses to anyone — has gone back to work. She still isn’t granting marriage licenses to same-sex couples, but she’s allowing her deputies to do so.

But she’s running out of legal options to keep fighting the law she vowed to follow.

This sideshow became a media spectacle the moment Davis started this illegal protest.

It’s time for it to end. Do you job, Mme. Clerk, or else walk away. You’ll be allowed to pray real hard for what you believe and you can become an advocate for whatever cause you wish to pursue.

You just can’t do it while you’re being required to serve the public interest.

This ref’s story becomes bigger than the game

referee-powerpoint-slide-template-for-microsoft-powerpoint-21668881

Robert Watts no doubt doesn’t want to be remembered this way.

It’s out of his hands now.

He’s the high school football referee who was pummeled late in a game the other evening by two San Antonio Jay High School players. They blindsided him with a hit in the backfield late in a game against Marble Falls.

Watts says he’s going to press charges against the players, who’ve been suspended from school. What’s more, an assistant Jay HS coach, Mack Breed, also has been suspended.

Coach’s conduct in question

Indeed, the focus now is turning to the coach.

Did he encourage the young men to hit the official? Did he actually give them permission to do this deed?

If the answer is yes to either, then the coach needs to face charge of conspiring to commit assault and battery.

It’s been reported that Watts reportedly made some bad calls on the field that went against Jay … and that he allegedly uttered a racial slur in the direction of one, or maybe both, of the players who hit him from behind.

Suppose he did make some bad calls. And let’s suppose further that he said something offensive to the players. Is that how they should respond? By hitting a ref — while wearing body armor — so hard as to potentially inflict permanent injury?

The University Interscholastic League, which governs high school extracurricular activities in Texas, needs to spare no effort in finding out what happened on that field.

That the young men would do such a thing by itself is inexcusable. They must not play football again in Texas.

The coach’s actions also require a thorough investigation.

To say this kind of conduct is inexcusable doesn’t do justice to what these young men did.

 

Now the clerk is free … to quit her job

kim-davis

Believe this or not, but I am glad that Kim Davis is no longer in jail.

A federal judge ordered the Rowan County (Ky.) clerk to jail because she had stopped issuing marriage licenses to protest the U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage all across the United States of America; the ruling includes Kentucky.

I didn’t want her jailed over this.

Davis is free, therefore, to make a critical decision.

She needs to quit her job as county clerk. Heck, she won’t perform all the duties required of her. She cites religious objections to the legalization of gay marriage, even though she has a rather checkered heterosexual marital history herself.

The germane issue is whether Davis will do the job to which she swore an oath.

She insists she cannot. Her husband says she’s become a victim of a government that is persecuting her because of her Christian beliefs — which, by many people’s thinking, is a serious crock of mule fritters. Republican presidential candidates Mike Huckabee and Ted Cruz say Davis is a victim of “judicial tyranny,” which also is so much malarkey.

Just quit your job, Mme. Clerk, and take up the cudgel against gay marriage as a private citizen. You are free to do so. No one’s going to arrest you.

 

HS football players face serious trouble

football-sideline-with-ref

I marvel occasionally at the ability of football referees and umpires to stay out of the way of the action as it unfolds before them on the field.

One usually doesn’t worry, though, about players deliberately targeting officials for seriously vicious hits.

Perhaps we ought to worry now.

Two San Antonio-area high school football players have been suspended from school after they pile-drived an official during a game this past week.

See video here

John Jay High School was playing Marble Falls High School. The game was nearing the end. The ref was blindsided by the players. The video, which has gone viral, looks — to me at least — as if it was deliberate and malicious.

The John Jay head coach has apologized for his team. The Marble Falls coach said he’s never seen anything like what happened in his 14 years coaching high school sports.

The question now being floated is: Should the players be prosecuted for committing a crime?

The ref is so upset at what happened he’s considering pressing charges. If it were me and I was threatened with potential permanent injury as a result of two football players wearing body armor, well, I believe I’d file charges.

Poor sportsmanship happens. You see kids taunting other kids on occasion. They get reprimanded for losing their cool.

The video, though, suggests to me something considerably worse.

I agree with the school officials: Let’s let “due process” play out.

I believe the process is going to produce a criminal prosecution.

Take a look at the video. Your thoughts?