Teenage Drunk Driver Spared Jail
ALINA MACHADO, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Behavior has real consequences. The 16-year-old admitted to drinking alcohol the night he caused the chain reaction crash that killed four people and severely hurt two others in Tarrant County, Texas. His sentence, 10 years of probation, not the 20 years of prison prosecutors asked for. The teen's defense and the judge's lenient sentence have sparked outrage. His victim's loved ones are stunned.</s>MARLA MITCHELL, DAUGHTER WAS KILLED: He'll be feeling the hand of God definitely. He may think he's gotten away with something, but he hasn't gotten away with anything.</s>ERIC BOYLES, WIFE AND DAUGHTER KILLED: The wounds that it opened only makes the healing process that much greater and much more difficult.</s>MACHADO: Eric Boyles lost his wife and daughter that night in June.</s>BOYLES: We had over 180 years of life taken, future life, not 180 years lived, but 180 years of future life taken. And two of those were my wife and daughter.</s>MACHADO: Hollie and Shelby Boyles were helping Breanna Mitchell, a 24- year-old, whose car had a flat tire. Brian Jennings, a youth pastor, also stopped to help when Couch's vehicle slammed into them. All four were killed.</s>OPERATOR: Sir, how many people are injured? Do you know?</s>CALLER: One, two, three. Multiple.</s>OPERATOR: Multiple?</s>CALLER: I don't even know how many.</s>OPERATOR: Oh, God.</s>CALLER: Yes.</s>MACHADO: Three hours after the crash, Couch's blood alcohol level was .24, three times the legal limit in Texas. The term "affluenza" came from a psychologist put on the stand by the defense who reportedly said Couch was brought up to spend money instead of saying sorry if he hurt someone and that he never learned that sometimes you don't get your way. The judge opted for probation and therapy over prison time.</s>SCOTT BROWN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Taking him away from his family and teaching him to be a reasonable citizen, that's a consequence.</s>MACHADO: But for the families of the victims, that's simply not enough.</s>BOYLES: Money always seems to keep Ethan out of trouble. This was one time I did ask the court that -- for justice and that for money not to prevail. And ultimately, today, I felt like money did prevail.</s>MACHADO: Now, the families of Couch's victims have filed civil lawsuits against the teen and his family. One of those victims includes a teen who was riding with Couch and who is now paralyzed because of the crash. Chris. Kate.</s>CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: All right, Alina, thank you. Sunny Hostin, CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor, joins us now. You do not agree. You do not like this.</s>SUNNY HOSTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: No.</s>CUOMO: Let's discuss why in terms of the law and the policy. What do you see here?</s>HOSTIN: You know, I think in terms of the policy, this really flies in the face of our criminal justice system. There has to be consequences to actions. And that's what our system is about, even for juveniles. I think a lot of people feel, well, you know, the system is about rehabilitation. And that's a part of it, no question about it, but it's also about punishment and sending a message to not only this defendant, but other people, that this type of behavior won't be tolerated. You can't kill four people, Chris, and paralyze another one and then get sent to a rehab facility, a Tony (ph) rehab facility. I think the cost is about $450,000 a year that his parents are going to pay for, rather than being sent to prison where you learn real adult lessons.</s>CUOMO: Or you can be, right, because that's exactly what the judge just did.</s>HOSTIN: Well, that's what the judge just did, exactly, sent him to this rehab facility. And I've got to tell you, you know, we're hearing for the first time this "affluenza,." How many kids have suffered from poorenza, like I suffered from in the south Bronx, get, you know, have terrible upbringings and dysfunctional families, yet get put in jail for a lot less. And so I think that really is the problem here.</s>KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Have you heard of this defense before?</s>HOSTIN: I've never heard of it before. And, in fact, this psychologist says he's been using it for about 30 years, but this is something I've never heard of. In fact, again, this sort of flies in the face of what we do hear of every single day in our justice system, which is, there are consequences to actions and for poor kids and rich kids, those consequences should be the same.</s>MICHAELA PEREIRA, CNN ANCHOR: Yes, I was watching that poor mother saying he thinks he may have gotten away with something, and that's, I think, the concern of a lot of people is that, you know, we're doing a great disservice to this young man. If we think he can - if he thinks he can coast through life like this.</s>HOSTIN: Exactly. Exactly. And that's the message I think that's being sent. And it sets this really dangerous precedent.</s>PEREIRA: A terrible precedent, right? That's the other thing.</s>HOSTIN: Because are we going to now hear about "affluenza" from other defense attorneys?</s>PEREIRA: Sure.</s>HOSTIN: Of course we are.</s>PEREIRA: Oh, not my fault. Not my fault.</s>HOSTIN: Of course we are. And it does a disservice, I think, to this young man especially. I suspect, though, that the government may -- and I don't know if Chris will agree with me -</s>PEREIRA: You think</s>HOSTIN: May try to challenge this sentence. And it's not often done. It's rarely done. I know in federal court at the U.S. attorney's office it was rarely done and you had to get permission from your supervisors. But if there is a too lenient sentence or even perhaps a sentence that's too harsh or perhaps a sentence that's illegal, you can challenge the sentence. And it's something that we saw in that Montana case with the -</s>CUOMO: Yes.</s>PEREIRA: Yes.</s>HOSTIN: With the rape -- the teacher that was given 30 days for rape.</s>PEREIRA: Yes. Yes.</s>HOSTIN: We saw that sentence challenged by the government and I suspect, and I hope, that these prosecutors will do that in this case.</s>CUOMO: And, you know, it's - the only - I don't disagree with you, it's just that it's very rare.</s>HOSTIN: It is rare.</s>CUOMO: That's the point that you need to highlight, too harsh, illegal, yes, yes,</s>HOSTIN: Yes.</s>CUOMO: But too lenient.</s>HOSTIN: Sometimes too lenient. Sometimes.</s>CUOMO: Very - very rare.</s>HOSTIN: Exactly.</s>CUOMO: And here the judge laid out what she did. Here's my thing that I'm trying to get my hands around. I can't -- you listen to the family members, you listen to the relatives of the victims, it's just too much to hear. It's like the best people in the world, everything that we want to implicate (ph) into society wound up being punished by this kid who was doing everything wrong.</s>HOSTIN: Sure. Good Samaritans.</s>PEREIRA: Yes, helping someone else out.</s>CUOMO: And it's almost impossible to get past that in the analysis. But I think we have to. And here's why. I don't like when poor kids get sent to jail when they shouldn't. If they were better lawyered up, it wouldn't have happened. I don't like when people are punished as some type of proxy for change because as we both know it doesn't happen unless you're an exceptional individual. Why isn't the concern in a situation like this that more kids should get this kind of benefit of doubt and the idea of forgiveness and redemption? We throw away so many lives into the system. I'm not sure what bothers me here more, that this kid used money, influence, whatever you want to put, "affluenza," I've never heard of that, but is that it? Or is it the frustration that, why does he get it when the kid who did the thing wrong one time for whatever reason doesn't get that second chance? That so many don't get a chance. Is that the frustration?</s>HOSTIN: You know, I think you make a great point because certainly there is always the argument that we just warehouse our kids, warehouse our youth into prisons, right, and they really do need rehab instead. I think this case is very different though. I think it is in stark contrast -</s>PEREIRA: How is it different?</s>HOSTIN: Because you're talking about someone who killed four people. This is not --</s>PEREIRA: Right, and paralyzed another.</s>HOSTIN: And paralyzed another. This was not his first rodeo.</s>BOLDUAN: Right.</s>HOSTIN: He had another drunk driving situation before. And so to now give him a pass this time, given the egregious nature of his conduct, four deaths, it's just incomprehensible to me. It's something that sort of stands alone.</s>CUOMO: So why do you think she did it?</s>HOSTIN: You know,</s>I - CUOMO: Judge long record, never censured (ph) before for this kind of thing. Yes, she's not running again, but what do you think?</s>HOSTIN: Yes, she's not running again. I think that she bought this sort of "affluenza" argument. I think she's probably seen the juvenile justice system not rehabilitate young people. And I think she thought, well, I'm going to try to make change within the system and not send him to prison.</s>PEREIRA: So it's a way to make those changes.</s>HOSTIN: And this was the wrong thing to do. This was the wrong message. And I think she should be censured, quite frankly, and I think this sentence should be challenged.</s>BOLDUAN: We'll see. Sunny, thank you so much.</s>HOSTIN: Thanks.</s>BOLDUAN: All right. Coming up next on NEW DAY, as you're getting ready, probably making some breakfast, ponder this one, steak with a side order of antibiotics. Does that sound very tasty? Probably not. Well, the federal government apparently doesn't think it's healthy either. Dr. Sanjay Gupta is going to be joining us to talk about new rules to try and make meat safer.</s>CUOMO: Hey, Golden Globe nominations are coming up. You're looking at them live right now. Big surprises. Big snubs. We'll have them for you.