Current Events > Michigan school shooter's mother found guilty of involuntary manslaughter

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/06/us/jennifer-crumbley-oxford-shooting-trial/index.html

Jennifer Crumbley, the mother of the teenager who killed four students at an Oxford, Michigan, high school in 2021, was found guilty Tuesday of all four counts of involuntary manslaughter in a novel legal case that stood as a test of the limits of whos responsible for a school shooting. The jury of 12 deliberated for more than 10 hours. Jennifer Crumbley looked down at her clasped hands as the verdict was read. She was taken from the courtroom in shackles. Crumbley, 45, had pleaded not guilty to the charges in the November 30, 2021, mass shooting at Oxford High School, in which her son killed four students and wounded six students and a teacher. She faces up to 15 years in prison, and her sentencing hearing was set for April 9. She has been behind bars since her arrest in a Detroit warehouse days after the shooting. The prosecutions case relied on an unusual and novel legal strategy and represented an attempt to expand the scope of blame in mass shootings. While parents have previously faced liability for their childs actions such as with neglect or firearms charges this was the first time a parent of a school shooter was held directly responsible for the killings.

It was a long time coming, but its definitely a step towards accountability that weve been talking about, Craig Shilling, the father of 17-year-old shooting victim Justin Shilling, told CNN affiliate WXYZ. Its kind of been our goal the whole time. Crumbleys husband, James, is scheduled to go on trial on the same charges in early March. Jennifer Crumbleys defense and the prosecution were barred from speaking publicly about her case until the end of James Crumbleys trial. Their son Ethan pleaded guilty to one count of terrorism causing death, four counts of murder and 19 other charges related to the deadly rampage. He was sentenced last year to life in prison without parole. He did not testify in this trial, as his attorneys said he would invoke his Fifth Amendment right to silence. The prosecution argued Jennifer Crumbley is responsible for the deaths because she was grossly negligent in giving a gun to her son Ethan, who was 15 at the time, and failing to get him proper mental health treatment despite warning signs. Over a week of testimony, law enforcement officials, school employees, shooting victims and those who knew Jennifer Crumbley testified for the prosecution. Its a rare case that takes some really egregious facts, Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald said in closing arguments Friday. It takes the unthinkable, and she has done the unthinkable, and because of that, four kids have died. However, the defense argued the blame lay elsewhere: on her husband for improperly securing the firearm; on the school for failing to notify her about her sons behavioral issues; and on Ethan himself, who planned and carried out the attack on his own. Defense attorney Shannon Smith said the case was dangerous for parents everywhere. Can every parent really be responsible for everything their children do, especially when its not foreseeable? Smith said in closing arguments.

This can be a pretty important precedent moving forward in other cases. Will be interesting to see how impactful this will be in the future.

Defense attorney Shannon Smith said the case was dangerous for parents everywhere. Can every parent really be responsible for everything their children do, especially when its not foreseeable? Smith said in closing arguments.

Maybe don't give your piece of shit son guns? Bam, not liable if you didn't do that.

I only vaguely remember the details, but pretty sure it's a pretty heavy fair, next from how fucked up the kid was and how little they did to try to curb it. It's not like this was a case of a normal-acting child going off the deep end without any warning.

Nemu posted...

I only vaguely remember the details, but pretty sure it's a pretty heavy fair, next from how fucked up the kid was and how little they did to try to curb it. It's not like this was a case of a normal-acting child going off the deep end without any warning.

She found a diary and drawings that basically said "I'm gonna kill people " and ignored it. I think that is the main reason she is guilty, to me

Zikten posted...

She found a diary and drawings that basically said "I'm gonna kill people " and ignored it. I think that is the main reason she is guilty, to me

Beyond ignoring it, didn't she find that stuff and THEN bought the gun?

chris1001_the_sequel posted...

Beyond ignoring it, didn't she find that stuff and THEN bought the gun?

I dont know the order of how it happened but yea. She gave him a gun as a present

15 years is too light

Should be 20 for every victim that died and additional charges for those who were wounded

Yes if she provided the shooter with a gun this seems to be the right decision.

K181 posted...

Maybe don't give your piece of shit son guns? Bam, not liable if you didn't do that.

Also, don't tell your kid to be better at hiding his homicidal tendencies.

I was actually relieved when I found out she gave him a gun - that certainly is a pretty clear fuck up

I originally thought it was going to be more vague things like she didn't notice the warning signs or something like that which would have been unsettling/unfair

Fair, next.

GS4Life posted...

15 years is too light

Should be 20 for every victim that died and additional charges for those who were wounded

I can get on board with this too.

She is 45. I do wonder if she will serve concurrent, or one after the other. I am assuming all at the same time.

Is there another trial about her attempts to evade capture?

haloiscoolisbak posted...

I was actually relieved when I found out she gave him a gun - that certainly is a pretty clear fuck up

I originally thought it was going to be more vague things like she didn't notice the warning signs or something like that which would have been unsettling/unfair

Wasn't there also something about how the school contacted the parents prior to the shooting and they refused to do anything? Or am I remembering that incorrectly?

CableZL posted...

Wasn't there also something about how the school contacted the parents prior to the shooting and they refused to do anything? Or am I remembering that incorrectly?

Yeah, the school asked the parents to come pick up their kid, and they couldn't be bothered to take time off of work.

Friends,

Great, no go back and get ALL the other parents of these underage school shooters.

She should have heeded this nugget of wisdom:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlDq04YDJ6Q

Zikten posted...

I dont know the order of how it happened but yea. She gave him a gun as a present

And when he got in trouble looking up images of bullets at school, she told him "Lol Im not mad, you have to learn not to get caught,"

Like the signs were all there and she ignored all of that shit

Nice, as another poster said:

archizzy posted...

This can be a pretty important precedent moving forward in other cases. Will be interesting to see how impactful this will be in the future.

If parents started to take more responsibility for the irresponsibility of their children in regards to firearms it might make some irresponsible parents finally be responsible on the issue.

Kradek posted...

Nice, as another poster said:

If parents started to take more responsibility for the irresponsibility of their children in regards to firearms it might make some irresponsible parents finally be responsible on the issue.

Hardly. The parent was damn near aiding and abetting the child with his murders. It wasn't a typical negligence case. I don't see this expanding the scope of negligence very much

Idk what this solves or fixes.

LSGW_Zephyra posted...

Idk what this solves or fixes.

Maybe it will cause parents to rethink giving firearms, weapons specifically designed to kill people, to kids in general, but especially kids who are mentally unstable and have exhibited tons of warnings signs, which even the school was privy to?

Parent's not being held accountable for the actions of their children definitely facilitates an environment of irresponsibility when it comes to firearm ownership.

DragonClaw01 posted...

Hardly. The parent was damn near aiding and abetting the child with his murders. It wasn't a typical negligence case. I don't see this expanding the scope of negligence very much

This isn't the first case it's happened, it's the 2nd as far as I'm aware. I don't remember the other shooting as I heard a caller talk about it and we've had so many, but a father was charged with 7 misdemeanors over crimes their child committed in a shooting. He only served like 30 days of a 60 day sentence, but still, the more cases there are the more normalized it becomes.

LSGW_Zephyra posted...

Idk what this solves or fixes.

Establishes precedent to get parents off their asses.

Turns "oh little jimmy is talking about killing his school" from being an amusing anecdote or whatever the fuck this lady was doing into something that can bite them in the ass.

And it has to bite them in the ass, these people aren't smart enough to do things out of empathy.