It occurs to me, that we wouldn't even know this young man's name if the psychologist who testified at his trial had not created the word "affluenza" in his defense. There are so many cases like this - of juveniles or first offenders given great mercy by the justice system - and we don't know their names.
The psychologist greatly regrets coining this term. We would not know of this case, or really focus on it, had that characterization not been used in court about him.
Very much in agreement with you.
Even without the use of that term, his adjudication would have been noted on a local basis due to the scale of the tragic loss of lives.
"Affluenza" set the course for the viral outrage. Actions and apparent attitudes since that utterance have kept it going.
I'm not without some compassion for this man-child. I don't disagree with his mother's attorney in that he is likely to be prey in the Texas prison system. Worse, even, than most of us care to imagine.
The predators within the system include those who might offer him "protection" inside TDC. Such "protection" comes with high prices to pay and those prices are too often more than just $. They'll take that, too, though.
Tragically, there are other young folks who enter that system every day. Some may already be "lost causes" but it pains me just about every day to see the number of young lives we give up on so easily. If we think about them at all.
My personal fount of outrage with this case flows from his parents' failures to do everything within their power to guide him to a better path, especially after he received the grace of a probated sentence but had a potential path to TDC in front of him.
I've seen/read/heard little to suggest his parents did anything post-grace than to continue on their own path of denial and enabling.
I think it's from the deposition in one of the civil suits where his father said he didn't think the family was "profoundly dysfunctional."
SMH