This is a consequence of the significantly different treatment defendants receive if they are classified as "juveniles" (that is, not adults). Yes, drunken driving that results in the deaths of pedestrians is usually a criminal offense, all over the world. However, in many places, and for sure in every state of the United States, a minor who commits a criminal act will not be put on trial in the adult court system, but rather in a special juvenile court with different rules and different outcomes for a case. The usual outcome of a juvenile court case is court supervision to try to help the juvenile grow up to be an adult who won't commit crimes. That is the disposition that was ordered in this case.

Because of the severity of the charged offense, the prosecutors in this case asked for, and apparently were within the scope of juvenile court rules to ask for, hard prison time if the juvenile defendant was found delinquent. But, yes, in this case the defense lawyers, who were no doubt expensive specialist defense lawyers, came up with a defense that convinced the judge to order a less harsh disposition for the case. A news report I saw[1] included this report about what a defense lawyer said after the case decision:

"'There is nothing the judge could have done to lessen the suffering for any of those families,' said defense attorney Scott Brown, CNN affiliate KTVT reported.

'(The judge) fashioned a sentence that is going to keep Ethan under the thumb of the justice system for the next 10 years,' he said. 'And if Ethan doesn't do what he's supposed to do, if he has one misstep at all, then this judge, or an adult judge when he's transferred, can then incarcerate him.'"

So it could be that the boy will still do prison time (which I personally think would be more just than the treatment disposition he has received so far). Some of the facts in another report about the case[2] are really stark. This boy was a disaster waiting to happen in his earlier behavior, and his parents appeared not to do much about that. That's just wrong. But the prosecutors had their one chance at trial to ask for a tougher sentence on the boy, and the trial court decision now cannot be undone to allow them to ask for a second trial to get tougher punishment. Nor can the parents be tried for anything under usual principles of United States law in this case.

[1] http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/11/us/texas-teen-dwi-wreck/

[2] http://www.wfaa.com/news/crime/Defense-pushes-for-intensive-...

His therapy is already off to a great start - the judge letting him suffer virtually no consequences for quadruple manslaughter will surely convince him that the belief that he can get away with anything is misguided.

It will be interesting to see the civil suits. The parents apparently argued that their son had no sense of personal accountability because they'd always given him anything he wanted and never told him no. When damages start being calculated for the victims and their families, there's a pretty good argument that it's not safe to leave the parents with any money.

More Detail: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/blogs/gone-viral/os-...

There's basically a separate system of justice in most countries for anyone with a net worth of 8 figures or more. He literally got away with murder.

  http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/laura.asp

Is there any doubt the judge was paid off? No sane person could make an argument that a serial criminal, a serial killer, should not face consequences for his actions because he didn't face any in the past.

If he was black he would spent 2 years in juvi then shipped off to life in prison.

How can a community go on after this.

Alright proletarians, back to work. Nothing to see here. And file your taxes on time this year!!