Affluenza Redux: Rich Guy Gets Slap On The Wrist For Drunken High Speed Chase
Seattle’s TV stations are reporting that a wealthy businessman who led police on a high speed chase through the city of Olympia in his Ferrari F360 has been sentenced to just one year of work release. According to the reports, Shaun Goodman pleaded guilty to felony police evasion and DUI for the December 29 incident that saw his terrified passenger leap from the moving car when he slowed at an intersection and ended only after he crashed into a parked car and then careened into the side of a house.
Blood alcohol tests showed Mr. Goodman had a BAC of 0.16, twice the legal limit in Washington State, and sentencing guidelines dictate that anyone with a BAC greater than 0.15 and two or three prior offenses receive 120 days jail time unless the judge determines that the sentence would impose a substantial risk to the offender’s physical or mental well-being. This conviction is Mr. Goodman’s seventh.
The light sentence has sparked some outcry in the local community and protesters gathered before the Thurston County Courthouse on Friday to voice their dissatisfaction. They allege that this sentence is just the latest example of the favorable treatment that Mr. Goodman has received all along from the court and point to the modest $75.000 bail, a sum the wealthy Mr. Goodman easily posted, and the fact that Mr. Goodman received the court’s permission to leave the state in order to attend the Super Bowl less than a month after his arrest as proof of their claim.
Mr. Goodman is obviously a serial offender and a menace on the roads and this judgment, just another in which wealthy defendants have used their position to obtain lighter sentences than would have been imposed upon the rest of us, is a disgrace. Protesters are right to demand answers.
More by Thomas Kreutzer
Comments
Join the conversation
Dan brings up a related issue which is serious: dilution of a driver's license suspension. It used to be your license got suspended for bad driving. Now you get it suspended for not paying child support or dropping out of school. it contributes to the way that driving on a DWI suspended license is handled. The rule in all jurisdictions (its a federal requirement) is that the license must be suspended for at least six months on a first offense, or at least replaced with an interlock requirement. Many, if not most states differentiate between driving on a DWI revoked license and a license suspended for other reasons. This, however, is often ignored. I completely disagree with the idea that jail time is ineffective. Its the thing that works for multiple offenders and within reason, an excellent return on our penological dollar. Its like a vacation for the guy's liverif nothing else. There's no substitute for physically drying out. I don't have a problem with substituting residential rehab for jail. Driving drunk on a revoked, or three offenses or more, should pull you a felony and six month's incarceration.
Dan brings up a related issue which is serious: dilution of a driver's license suspension. It used to be your license got suspended for bad driving. Now you get it suspended for not paying child support or dropping out of school. it contributes to the way that driving on a DWI suspended license is handled. The rule in all jurisdictions (its a federal requirement) is that the license must be suspended for at least six months on a first offense, or at least replaced with an interlock requirement. Many, if not most states differentiate between driving on a DWI revoked license and a license suspended for other reasons. This, however, is often ignored. I completely disagree with the idea that jail time is ineffective. Its the thing that works for multiple offenders and within reason, an excellent return on our penological dollar. Its like a vacation for the guy's liverif nothing else. There's no substitute for physically drying out. I don't have a problem with substituting residential rehab for jail. Driving drunk on a revoked, or three offenses or more, should pull you a felony and six month's incarceration. I don't think forcing people to go to AA is a good idea. For one thing, its a private organization and its supposed to be, you know, anonymous. Who told the local Adult Probation office they could hijack this organization, force people to go and turn in sign in sheets? I don't mean to be harsh, but really, a long, enforced drying out period is preferable.