Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(KOCO Oklahoma City)   Drive while intoxicated and get your 16 year old passenger killed? Ten years....of going to church?   (koco.com ) divider line
    More: Stupid, Tyler Allred, passengers  
•       •       •

9705 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Nov 2012 at 1:22 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



245 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-11-17 02:07:17 AM  

jimmyego: Lsherm: What if I want to change religions?

You restart from zero days completed.


And since Atheism is a religion...WIN!

Or Pastafarianism...
 
2012-11-17 02:10:17 AM  

InitialCommentGuy: velvet_fog: I could not agree less. I think it's so unfair to the victim that this kid won't spend a day behind bars for killing another human being. You talk about this like he just got an MIP or a speeding ticket, like it's some mistake he can just hit the undo button on. He farking killed someone. It's permanent. He made the decision to drink and drive - he deserves to live with the consequences, not get some slap on the wrist punishment from an idiot Bible-thumping judge. If tossing him in jail had ruined his life and followed him for the rest of his life, so be it - he should have considered that before he got behind the wheel. Personally, I think its a travesty of justice that he's still walking the streets and that he won't have to answer for it down the road. No idea how this judge can hand down this type of sentence and look the victim's family in the eye. As it is, the judge let the guy get off basically scot-free.

And I get so farking tired of all the Fark DUI apologists. How hard is it to not farking drink and drive? I understand the apologists even less in a case like this, where the guy farkING KILLED SOMEONE. But, oh, DUI laws are just so harsh!!!!! The poor drunk driver!!!! How will he ever get his life together, especially if he kills someone! Gosh, it sure couldn't be the drunk driver's fault!!!!

This seems to be a case of (to use the judge's religious bend) loving the sinner but hating the sin.

The judge is forcing the kid to contemplate what he has done, and walk a tightrope. It used to be the prison system was for reformation and penance, to provide a way to correct the behavior. The judge is saving two lives from being ruined while forcing responsibility, understanding, and self realization seemingly in hopes of correcting the flaws in the criminal and make them a productive member of society.


Going to church does not make one a better person, and it doesn't require responsibility. The major figures behind the world economic collapse were all religious, as were the guys who flew planes into the Twin Towers.
 
2012-11-17 02:11:12 AM  
People get sentenced to attending religious services everyday in every state in the US. AA is religious based as is %99 of all 12 step programs. Just try telling a judge you won't attend AA because it's a Christian program. Scientology runs several of the 12 step programs people get sentenced to.
 
2012-11-17 02:11:51 AM  

InitialCommentGuy: velvet_fog: I could not agree less. I think it's so unfair to the victim that this kid won't spend a day behind bars for killing another human being. You talk about this like he just got an MIP or a speeding ticket, like it's some mistake he can just hit the undo button on. He farking killed someone. It's permanent. He made the decision to drink and drive - he deserves to live with the consequences, not get some slap on the wrist punishment from an idiot Bible-thumping judge. If tossing him in jail had ruined his life and followed him for the rest of his life, so be it - he should have considered that before he got behind the wheel. Personally, I think its a travesty of justice that he's still walking the streets and that he won't have to answer for it down the road. No idea how this judge can hand down this type of sentence and look the victim's family in the eye. As it is, the judge let the guy get off basically scot-free.

And I get so farking tired of all the Fark DUI apologists. How hard is it to not farking drink and drive? I understand the apologists even less in a case like this, where the guy farkING KILLED SOMEONE. But, oh, DUI laws are just so harsh!!!!! The poor drunk driver!!!! How will he ever get his life together, especially if he kills someone! Gosh, it sure couldn't be the drunk driver's fault!!!!

This seems to be a case of (to use the judge's religious bend) loving the sinner but hating the sin.

The judge is forcing the kid to contemplate what he has done, and walk a tightrope. It used to be the prison system was for reformation and penance, to provide a way to correct the behavior. The judge is saving two lives from being ruined while forcing responsibility, understanding, and self realization seemingly in hopes of correcting the flaws in the criminal and make them a productive member of society.


I have to laugh, albeit bitterly, when I see someone condemning a 17-year old kid to prison for even so heinous a crime as this. Yes, vehicular manslaughter is an awful crime. Yes, somebody died. But the "killer" in this case is a kid. He has a chance at this point to turn his life around and remedy the terrible error he made. Is the preferred remedy to destroy his life too? Because, in this day and age, that's what prison will do to him. Even if he were to manage to escape a ten-year prison sentence with his mind and ass intact, a felony conviction condemns him to a life of low-paying unskilled jobs. He can't have a professional license of any type--which includes not only a bar card or a gun license, but even a barber's license. In some states, he'll never be able to vote. He couldn't qualify for student loans, and he'd be barred from a lot of colleges, even if he got his GED in prison. He would be refused bank loans and credit even if he was employed, merely because of the felony, and in a lot of states, he'd have to register as a violent felon, so the cops could keep an eye on him.

So, is that "preferable" to what the judge did? And before anyone asks "Oh, but would you be saying the same thing if he was black?" you bet your daddy's dick I would. I'd rather see this for all juvenile offenders, for any crime less than first-degree murder. I wouldn't necessarily make it church; but I'd definitely make it ten years of community service or until they got full-time employment or acceptance into college or voluntary entry into the military. I would much prefer a young offender was sentenced to ten years of establishing ties to the community, education, and enforced drug testing; instead of learning criminal behavior and establishing a record that ensures nothing but a future of low-paying unskilled jobs and more petty crime.

I think this judge actually showed some common sense for a change. I know it's shocking to see. But I think he was right.
 
2012-11-17 02:11:52 AM  
Does he have an alternative to church such as psychology counseling?

The reason why I ask, since that some churches see themselves as alternatives to counseling, especially ones that espouses Biblical Counseling Movement (BCM)

/ BCM seems to be pretty harmful. The common concept in the movement is that there is no mental illnesses, only guilt, sin, possessment, etc...
 
2012-11-17 02:14:14 AM  

Gyrfalcon: InitialCommentGuy: velvet_fog: I could not agree less. I think it's so unfair to the victim that this kid won't spend a day behind bars for killing another human being. You talk about this like he just got an MIP or a speeding ticket, like it's some mistake he can just hit the undo button on. He farking killed someone. It's permanent. He made the decision to drink and drive - he deserves to live with the consequences, not get some slap on the wrist punishment from an idiot Bible-thumping judge. If tossing him in jail had ruined his life and followed him for the rest of his life, so be it - he should have considered that before he got behind the wheel. Personally, I think its a travesty of justice that he's still walking the streets and that he won't have to answer for it down the road. No idea how this judge can hand down this type of sentence and look the victim's family in the eye. As it is, the judge let the guy get off basically scot-free.

And I get so farking tired of all the Fark DUI apologists. How hard is it to not farking drink and drive? I understand the apologists even less in a case like this, where the guy farkING KILLED SOMEONE. But, oh, DUI laws are just so harsh!!!!! The poor drunk driver!!!! How will he ever get his life together, especially if he kills someone! Gosh, it sure couldn't be the drunk driver's fault!!!!

This seems to be a case of (to use the judge's religious bend) loving the sinner but hating the sin.

The judge is forcing the kid to contemplate what he has done, and walk a tightrope. It used to be the prison system was for reformation and penance, to provide a way to correct the behavior. The judge is saving two lives from being ruined while forcing responsibility, understanding, and self realization seemingly in hopes of correcting the flaws in the criminal and make them a productive member of society.

I have to laugh, albeit bitterly, when I see someone condemning a 17-year old kid to prison for even so heinous a crime as this. ...


I agree except I think 10 years of community service would have been a better way to go about it. 10 years of benefiting others seems a better way to go and doesn't violate the Constitution.
 
2012-11-17 02:15:36 AM  
Want to be outraged but the judge pretty much gave the kid a chance to have a life. It's either this or send him to jail for ten years where he gets to be a repeat offender as he would have no education and a man slaughter charge on his record.
 
2012-11-17 02:17:18 AM  
Who wants to bet his parents have been dragging him to church his whole life and therefore he doesn't see this as a big deal anyway?
 
2012-11-17 02:19:25 AM  

ExcaliburPrime111: Being "sentenced" to what many people do out of maturity is not justice.


Lolwut?
 
2012-11-17 02:20:56 AM  
Can we at least send his parents to prison for a little while?
 
2012-11-17 02:22:09 AM  

CuttySupreme: So you morons think sending this kid to prison for years would be better than making him attend church...


I'd much rather he do community service in some way, something useful with his time that is also beneficial to his community, anything rather than church.

/who wants to bet he and the judge belong to the same one?
 
2012-11-17 02:22:39 AM  

Gyrfalcon: InitialCommentGuy: velvet_fog: I could not agree less. I think it's so unfair to the victim that this kid won't spend a day behind bars for killing another human being. You talk about this like he just got an MIP or a speeding ticket, like it's some mistake he can just hit the undo button on. He farking killed someone. It's permanent. He made the decision to drink and drive - he deserves to live with the consequences, not get some slap on the wrist punishment from an idiot Bible-thumping judge. If tossing him in jail had ruined his life and followed him for the rest of his life, so be it - he should have considered that before he got behind the wheel. Personally, I think its a travesty of justice that he's still walking the streets and that he won't have to answer for it down the road. No idea how this judge can hand down this type of sentence and look the victim's family in the eye. As it is, the judge let the guy get off basically scot-free.

And I get so farking tired of all the Fark DUI apologists. How hard is it to not farking drink and drive? I understand the apologists even less in a case like this, where the guy farkING KILLED SOMEONE. But, oh, DUI laws are just so harsh!!!!! The poor drunk driver!!!! How will he ever get his life together, especially if he kills someone! Gosh, it sure couldn't be the drunk driver's fault!!!!

This seems to be a case of (to use the judge's religious bend) loving the sinner but hating the sin.

The judge is forcing the kid to contemplate what he has done, and walk a tightrope. It used to be the prison system was for reformation and penance, to provide a way to correct the behavior. The judge is saving two lives from being ruined while forcing responsibility, understanding, and self realization seemingly in hopes of correcting the flaws in the criminal and make them a productive member of society.

I have to laugh, albeit bitterly, when I see someone condemning a 17-year old kid to prison for even so heinous a crime as this. ...


I have a problem with it because what would the judge do if the kid was an atheist, sure the kid s a good upstanding citizen who happened to get drunk and drive but sure he's a christen so let's double down with that. Sorry, I don't think laws should ruins kids lives for stupid stuff but this just seems wrong.
 
2012-11-17 02:24:00 AM  

EggSniper: Can we at least send his parents to prison for a little while?


I'm okay with this outcome as well.
 
2012-11-17 02:26:43 AM  

Lsherm: A judge presiding over Allred's case sentenced him to attend church every Sunday for the next 10 years. In addition to church attendance Allred must graduate from high school and take drug and alcohol test for the next year.

I can't stand the Fark atheists as much as the next guy, but how is this legal? I understand that the kid was 17, stupid, drunk, and deserves another chance, but doesn't requiring church attendance violate something?

And I'm speaking as a practicing Catholic. I'd be pretty irritated if I had a criminal sentence handed down that made me go to church for 10 years. What if I want to change religions?


It's likely to make sure he's staying involved in a "good" group and such. I see this along the lines of a judge ordering someone to hold the "I'm an idiot" signs. You can take the unusual sentence or appeal it as cruel and unusual then get the prison time instead. This kid got off easy and is getting a second chance. They could have easily thrown the book at him, tried him as an adult, and ruined the rest of his life while bankrupting his family trying to defend him.

That's the difference between a nicer judge vs one with a stick up their ass.
 
2012-11-17 02:28:27 AM  
This manages to simultaneously be a horrible ruling for two separate reasons; first, it's giving someone guilty of homicide a trivial punishment AND it's giving him a punishment that violates the 1st and 8th amendment. Damn, that judge sucks.

thatboyoverthere: Want to be outraged but the judge pretty much gave the kid a chance to have a life. It's either this or send him to jail for ten years where he gets to be a repeat offender as he would have no education and a man slaughter charge on his record.


He farking killed someone while driving drunk. Ten years might be a little much, but no jail time is pretty far from justice as well.Two years seems fair - he sees a serious consequence to his actions while not permanently ruining his life.
 
2012-11-17 02:29:59 AM  
once a county psych (the guy who sees people who can't afford to see anyone else) told me that i have to start going to church and if i don't then i'll no longer be able to receive treatment (from the public county mental health services). the letter i wrote to the Superiors in the system became legendary, and even a few years later in a totally different corner of the county mental health establishment i heard "you're the guy who wrote that letter!" from a few people.

texas - still slightly less bad than oklahoma. go texas!

The teen's attorney does not plan to challenge the sentence.

dude, this guy has a license to practice law? bad oklahoma, bad.
 
2012-11-17 02:36:03 AM  
the801:
dude, this guy has a license to practice law? bad oklahoma, bad./i>

He's not gonna challenge it because it's a much lighter sentence than the offense calls for. The judge was counting on that - you can only pull this kind of unconstitutional bullshiat if you know it isn't gonna get challenged.
 
2012-11-17 02:36:51 AM  
Not that I'm condoning the bad behavior, but I'd love to see the kid go to a Buddhist temple or some other non-christian religious service instead, and watch the judge stew.

I understand that it's a probationary condition, and as such isn't technically a 'punishment'. The judge could have sentenced him to 10 years of watching back episodes of 60 Minutes if he wanted.
 
2012-11-17 02:36:52 AM  
I'm sure the parents of the victim can rest easy knowing this guy is going to be slightly inconvenienced for a few hours a week for killing their son.
 
2012-11-17 02:36:55 AM  
I wonder if he can be compelled to tithe. Because presumably some churches wouldn't want a free-loading member. Sure, 10 years and he's a captive audience, they stand a good chance of converting him--well at least, they couldn't ask for a better chance. But he might draw the wrong kind of attention (not all churches are into welcoming the down-trodden and have a reputation to uphold), and if he's not contributing financially, would the church necessarily want to invest 10 years for just one saved person?

Also, it says he can go to the church of his choosing. I am assuming he could go to a synagogue, as well, and I know some that make you pay up front for the year. Then there's the Church of Scientology. That can get up to into the millions of dollars--especially if you last 10 years in it. If I were the kid, I'd join Scientology to screw with the judge. I'm guessing he could send the judge the bill? Plus, he could learn all the skills needed to utterly ruin the judge.
 
2012-11-17 02:40:35 AM  
Gyrfalcon:The article doesn't say, but it could be more like probation or a suspended sentence. I'd rather see a kid this age not have a criminal record, finish school, have a chance to go to college and, hopefully, not repeat the mistake. The judge did make finishing high school and ten years of clean drug and alcohol testing a requirement, as well as ten years of church attendance--all of which would be probationary requirements (clean drug testing, school, maintain ties to the community). Since the attorneys are not complaining, I suspect that if the kid violates any of these requirements, he gets to go to jail.

I'm as pro-1st Amendment as anybody here; but really, I've got no problem with this. Assuming there's a provision for the kid changing religions or doing community service later if he prefers...why the hell not? Better than making a felon out of a 17-year old.


It's not your job to make him a felon, he did that himself when he killed someone by his own conscious action. And your "I'm as pro-1st Amendment as anyone, but..." sounds exactly like someone saying "I have no problem with black people, but..." and, just as with the latter opening, you go on to contradict your opening statement. Have you taken responsibility for anything you've ever done? I think there's something wrong with your brain.
 
2012-11-17 02:43:37 AM  
Is he allowed to sleep through the sermons?
 
2012-11-17 02:47:44 AM  

akede: That's the difference between a nicer judge


It's not the judge's job to be nice though.
 
2012-11-17 02:47:53 AM  

9Speed: Is he allowed to sleep through the sermons?


The My Little Pony Killer: CuttySupreme: So you morons think sending this kid to prison for years would be better than making him attend church...

I'd much rather he do community service in some way, something useful with his time that is also beneficial to his community, anything rather than church.

/who wants to bet he and the judge belong to the same one?


There's a very good chance that the judge is also the pastor/reverend of said church.
 
2012-11-17 02:53:58 AM  

Phoenix_M: People get sentenced to attending religious services everyday in every state in the US. AA is religious based as is %99 of all 12 step programs. Just try telling a judge you won't attend AA because it's a Christian program. Scientology runs several of the 12 step programs people get sentenced to.


Many people do challenge the AA requirement due to religious grounds. The problem is that unless you live in a major city - there are no viable secular alternatives.

/AA is a cult as far as I'm concerned
 
2012-11-17 02:56:05 AM  

IlGreven: The teen's attorney does not plan to challenge the sentence.

Then the teen's attorney is a dumb fark.

/Meanwhile, the ACLU will be all over this one.


If I got 10 years of church instead of 10 years in prison and my attorney tried to fight it, I would tell him to STFU and fire him. If the ACLU tried to get involved, I would tell them to GTFO as well. Look at the alternative,yeesh.
 
2012-11-17 02:57:41 AM  
Hate speech and bigotry thread, yeah fark.
 
2012-11-17 02:59:59 AM  
Send that f*cker to the Metal Church
 
2012-11-17 03:02:53 AM  

IlGreven: The teen's attorney does not plan to challenge the sentence.

Then the teen's attorney is a dumb fark.

/Meanwhile, the ACLU will be all over this one.


Sure. The kid can easily sue, and win. But if he wins, that means he goes to jail for several years, instead.

Think he will sue?
 
2012-11-17 03:03:14 AM  
Not sure how it works in the USA, but here in Australia parties can make submissions as to appropriate punishments at the sentencing hearing. Before everyone gets their panties in a knot about separation of church and state, it was probably the boy's own counsel who suggested the church punishment. I might be wrong though if you guys do things differently over there.
 
2012-11-17 03:04:53 AM  
Love how harsh sentencing causes outrage. And mercy causes outrage.

But then, FARK's meme-infused denizens are CONVINCED they're above all think-of-the-children hysteria.
 
2012-11-17 03:07:35 AM  
Ya wanna know why he ain't goin to jail? The jail is full. The judge knows that cuz he filled it. Ya wanna guess what it's full of? Poor white kid can't go there.
3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-11-17 03:08:04 AM  

CuttySupreme: So you morons think sending this kid to prison for years would be better than making him attend church...


No, more just. He killed someone because of his actions. This is not justice. This is a slap on the wrist.
 
2012-11-17 03:08:27 AM  

Nofun: The judge didn't specify which church, did he (article doesn't say)?


The fact that it specifies going on Sunday should give you a hint.
 
2012-11-17 03:08:44 AM  
At least he didn't end up like that one Kennedy guy and end up being stuck with several terms in a Senate seat.
 
2012-11-17 03:09:58 AM  

fusillade762: Nofun: The judge didn't specify which church, did he (article doesn't say)?

The fact that it specifies going on Sunday should give you a hint.


Haha. I just realized... if he chooses 7th day adventists for his church, he can go every sunday, see that the doors are locked, and go home.
 
2012-11-17 03:12:09 AM  
So.... from murderer to child molester, is this what they're going for?
 
2012-11-17 03:13:50 AM  

RatMaster999: jimmyego: Lsherm: What if I want to change religions?

You restart from zero days completed.

And since Atheism is a religion...WIN!


Monsieur Trole, is that you?
 
2012-11-17 03:14:43 AM  

david_gaithersburg: Hate speech and bigotry thread, yeah fark.


Sayeth the biggest racist on Fark.
 
2012-11-17 03:16:13 AM  

The My Little Pony Killer: Who wants to bet his parents have been dragging him to church his whole life and therefore he doesn't see this as a big deal anyway?


Oh I do. And I'm also willing to bet that he was "saved" and "forgiven" just like the violent felons Mike Huckabee pardoned as governor.
 
2012-11-17 03:17:54 AM  

harm dealer: Not sure how it works in the USA, but here in Australia parties can make submissions as to appropriate punishments at the sentencing hearing. Before everyone gets their panties in a knot about separation of church and state, it was probably the boy's own counsel who suggested the church punishment. I might be wrong though if you guys do things differently over there.


Here's the difficulty: it's Oklahoma, the same state that we were just talking about, mere hours ago, that took three years to place a misspelled tenn commandments monument in front of one of it's county court houses.

In the states, most of our crimes have minimum sentences, which, in some cases, is total horseshiat. The opposing counsels usually come to an agreement as to the sentence should the defendant plead out. If it goes to jury, the jury is asked to make a reasonable offer, and the judge alters it as he sees fit.

Still no excuse for this travesty of justice, though.
 
2012-11-17 03:23:42 AM  

SpikeStrip: gonna get raped either way.


Yep, either way he'll be on his knees praying for Jesus to come already.


/yes, I stole that joke
//and I'm not going to church for it
 
2012-11-17 03:34:50 AM  

Nofun: I think that's the most important point, this sentence acts in the best interests of society.


Bullsh*t.

No, seriously, bullsh*t. What would have benefitted society? 10 years of forcing this kid to work clean-up in a f*cking trauma ward at a hospital. You REALLY WANT to have this kid turn his life around? Make him realize what he did, instead of giving him a pass to say "this was God's will!"
 
2012-11-17 03:36:13 AM  

velvet_fog: No idea how this judge can hand down this type of sentence and look the victim's family in the eye. As it is, the judge let the guy get off basically scot-free.


Yeah, something stinks about this. Actually, a lot stinks about this.

I'm no pitchfork/torches type on crime and punishment, but I'd like to see any precedent they have in Oklahoma for similar crimes/sentences. Where is the judge getting this from?

Is the kid connected? The story gives no details at all, there's no story on the web about the accident, unnamed victim....

My bullshiat meter says something is awry.
 
2012-11-17 03:36:25 AM  
Imagine the outrage if he'd ordered the kid to pray towards Mecca five times a day.
 
2012-11-17 03:36:46 AM  
The judge is letting his prejudice show. As far as the "maintaining ties with the community" shtick I've seen bandied about here, there are likely better ways to maintain ties and help the community. Not to mention a vast majority of the community isn't likely to attend the chosen, or any, church. I think the judge should have gone truly biblical, eye for an eye and all that.
 
2012-11-17 03:37:14 AM  

velvet_fog:
And I get so farking tired of all the Fark DUI apologists. How hard is it to not farking drink and drive? I understand the apologists even less in a case like this, where the guy farkIN ...


I don't know, he was under the legal limit - you know that limit where they decide you are actually impaired. He got manslaughter because if you have a mouthwash quantity of alcohol on your breath it still counts of manslaughter. So I would like to see some numbers before crucifying a farking kid.
 
2012-11-17 03:38:42 AM  
Every iteration of this story is nearly identical, providing no details.

Oklahoma city is not a small town.

Something ain't right.
 
2012-11-17 03:39:16 AM  

Gyrfalcon: I have to laugh, albeit bitterly, when I see someone condemning a 17-year old kid


And I have to laugh when someone refers to a 17-year-old as a "kid," as if a 17-year-old is just learning how to change his or her own pants.
 
2012-11-17 03:40:18 AM  
I don't know where people are getting this idea that he will be subjected to ten years of drug and booze tests. According to TFA, it says ONE year.

I would pass that year, and then the first Sunday after that I'd find a nice quiet seat in the back and sit there, completely wrecked.
 
Displayed 50 of 245 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report