Crumbley's parents charged with involuntary manslaughter
-
I’m of mixed emotions about this…
-
In a Monday court filing, prosecutors said that Jennifer Crumbley may attempt to blame her husband during their trial, which is set to begin in January, nearly two years after a judge had to ask the couple to stop mouthing "I love you" to each other in court.
"Defendant James Crumbley should be aware of the fact that defendant Jennifer Crumbley has placed blame on him in jail communications," prosecutors wrote. The prosecution did not elaborate on the referenced jail communications, which could include monitored phone calls or conversations with other inmates, among other interactions.
James and Jennifer Crumbley each have their own attorney, but they will go to trial together with a joint defense. Prosecutors have noted in previous hearings this could cause a conflict of interest.
-
The Michigan teen whose murderous rampage took the lives of four classmates at Oxford High School in November, 2021, will spend the rest of his life behind bars.
That's the sentence handed-down by a Michigan judge after hours of often heart-wrenching statements by survivors and families of the victims, among others.
-
A school shooting that killed four students in Michigan could have been prevented if the mother of the armed teen had removed him after seeing his violent drawings that same day, a prosecutor told jurors Thursday in an uncommon trial about parental responsibility.
Jennifer Crumbley is charged with involuntary manslaughter in the Nov. 30, 2021, attack at Oxford High School. Prosecutors say she and husband James Crumbley were grossly negligent and that their son’s actions were foreseeable.
Jennifer Crumbley was aware of Ethan Crumbley’s deteriorating mental health and social isolation and knew that a gun drawn on a math assignment resembled the one that he had used with her at a shooting range, assistant prosecutor Marc Keast said.
-
The mother of the Oxford High School shooter on Tuesday was convicted on four counts of involuntary manslaughter, capping an emotional 11-day trial that some legal experts viewed as a possible precedent setter for holding parents criminally responsible for their children's actions.
As the 12-member jury read their verdict Tuesday afternoon in Oakland County Circuit Court, Jennifer Crumbley, with her hands clasped on a table in front of her, showed little reaction but closed her eyes and looked down. Jurors deliberated for 11 hours before arriving at a decision tied to the killing of four Oxford High students by Crumbley's son. Crumbley is scheduled to be sentenced April 9 and faces up to 15 years in prison.
-
Gotta be careful. We don't want to go down a rabbit hole with widespread judicial blame.
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
15 years
ANDY MCCARTHY: It's completely unprecedented ...your heart breaks for the parents of the children who were killed here. But you have to remember that the person who actually did the shooting got treated as an adult and was sentenced to life in prison. So it's not like the system didn't carry out law enforcement against the person who actually did this. It's unprecedented to hold the parents accountable to something that they obviously didn't plan, agree to participate in. I frankly just don't think that this is what the criminal justice system is for. I think the criminal justice system mainly should be reserved for intentional wrongs. And I think it's more troubling here because Michigan actually attempted to or proposed passing child access prevention laws, which would prevent – which would make it a crime for parents to negligently allow their children to have access to firearms. And the legislature wouldn't pass that. So what happened here is the prosecutor made up a crime on the fly that the legislature had not opted to pass.
It's a Pandora's box. You're extending the criminal law to people who didn't actually commit the crimes.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
Saw one comment in the X thread about the Chicago shooting saying the parents of the youths that shoot people should face charges. Of course in that case it would only be the one parent, which should lighten the load on the justice system.
-
Saw one comment in the X thread about the Chicago shooting saying the parents of the youths that shoot people should face charges. Of course in that case it would only be the one parent, which should lighten the load on the justice system.
@Horace said in Crumbley's parents charged with involuntary manslaughter:
Of course in that case it would only be the one parent, which should lighten the load on the justice system.
That's what I love about you. You're a half-full kind of guy. Looking for the graduation pictures, and now this.
Bless you, and the work you do.
-
@Horace said in Crumbley's parents charged with involuntary manslaughter:
Of course in that case it would only be the one parent, which should lighten the load on the justice system.
That's what I love about you. You're a half-full kind of guy. Looking for the graduation pictures, and now this.
Bless you, and the work you do.
@George-K said in Crumbley's parents charged with involuntary manslaughter:
@Horace said in Crumbley's parents charged with involuntary manslaughter:
Of course in that case it would only be the one parent, which should lighten the load on the justice system.
That's what I love about you. You're a half-full kind of guy. Looking for the graduation pictures, and now this.
Bless you, and the work you do.
Thanks George. Helping is my passion.
-
15 years
ANDY MCCARTHY: It's completely unprecedented ...your heart breaks for the parents of the children who were killed here. But you have to remember that the person who actually did the shooting got treated as an adult and was sentenced to life in prison. So it's not like the system didn't carry out law enforcement against the person who actually did this. It's unprecedented to hold the parents accountable to something that they obviously didn't plan, agree to participate in. I frankly just don't think that this is what the criminal justice system is for. I think the criminal justice system mainly should be reserved for intentional wrongs. And I think it's more troubling here because Michigan actually attempted to or proposed passing child access prevention laws, which would prevent – which would make it a crime for parents to negligently allow their children to have access to firearms. And the legislature wouldn't pass that. So what happened here is the prosecutor made up a crime on the fly that the legislature had not opted to pass.
It's a Pandora's box. You're extending the criminal law to people who didn't actually commit the crimes.
@George-K said in Crumbley's parents charged with involuntary manslaughter:
You're extending the criminal law to people who didn't actually commit the crimes.
They do it a lot with drugs. Someone who was the original drug seller can be charged with murder if they drug taker overdoses.
-
@George-K said in Crumbley's parents charged with involuntary manslaughter:
You're extending the criminal law to people who didn't actually commit the crimes.
They do it a lot with drugs. Someone who was the original drug seller can be charged with murder if they drug taker overdoses.
@taiwan_girl said in Crumbley's parents charged with involuntary manslaughter:
They do it a lot with drugs. Someone who was the original drug seller can be charged with murder if they drug taker overdoses.
I believe a bartender has some legal exposure if a customer leaves the bar and involved in a DUI which kills someone.
-
15 years
ANDY MCCARTHY: It's completely unprecedented ...your heart breaks for the parents of the children who were killed here. But you have to remember that the person who actually did the shooting got treated as an adult and was sentenced to life in prison. So it's not like the system didn't carry out law enforcement against the person who actually did this. It's unprecedented to hold the parents accountable to something that they obviously didn't plan, agree to participate in. I frankly just don't think that this is what the criminal justice system is for. I think the criminal justice system mainly should be reserved for intentional wrongs. And I think it's more troubling here because Michigan actually attempted to or proposed passing child access prevention laws, which would prevent – which would make it a crime for parents to negligently allow their children to have access to firearms. And the legislature wouldn't pass that. So what happened here is the prosecutor made up a crime on the fly that the legislature had not opted to pass.
It's a Pandora's box. You're extending the criminal law to people who didn't actually commit the crimes.
@George-K said in Crumbley's parents charged with involuntary manslaughter:
15 years
ANDY MCCARTHY: It's completely unprecedented ...your heart breaks for the parents of the children who were killed here. But you have to remember that the person who actually did the shooting got treated as an adult and was sentenced to life in prison. So it's not like the system didn't carry out law enforcement against the person who actually did this. It's unprecedented to hold the parents accountable to something that they obviously didn't plan, agree to participate in. I frankly just don't think that this is what the criminal justice system is for. I think the criminal justice system mainly should be reserved for intentional wrongs. And I think it's more troubling here because Michigan actually attempted to or proposed passing child access prevention laws, which would prevent – which would make it a crime for parents to negligently allow their children to have access to firearms. And the legislature wouldn't pass that. So what happened here is the prosecutor made up a crime on the fly that the legislature had not opted to pass.
It's a Pandora's box. You're extending the criminal law to people who didn't actually commit the crimes.
I'm not an expert, but this type of "law extension" isn't new. There is liability (albeit, maybe civil?) if parents, for example, have a bunch of kids over, watch them get drunk, then a kid kills someone on the way home with their car.
In the case above, from what I recall the facts were pretty damning. The kid had mental issues (journal entries, voices, etc) that the parents very much knew about. They bought him a gun. They were brought in to school a few days after giving him the gun and were shown drawings of him shooting his classmates. The parents for some reason didn't tell anyone THEY JUST GAVE HIM A GUN. A few hours later, the kid takes out the gun and shoots students.
I have no problem with the involuntary culpability of these parents. It's a good way to help reduce gun violence... make the parents responsible for proper secure storage of firearms.
-
@George-K said in Crumbley's parents charged with involuntary manslaughter:
15 years
ANDY MCCARTHY: It's completely unprecedented ...your heart breaks for the parents of the children who were killed here. But you have to remember that the person who actually did the shooting got treated as an adult and was sentenced to life in prison. So it's not like the system didn't carry out law enforcement against the person who actually did this. It's unprecedented to hold the parents accountable to something that they obviously didn't plan, agree to participate in. I frankly just don't think that this is what the criminal justice system is for. I think the criminal justice system mainly should be reserved for intentional wrongs. And I think it's more troubling here because Michigan actually attempted to or proposed passing child access prevention laws, which would prevent – which would make it a crime for parents to negligently allow their children to have access to firearms. And the legislature wouldn't pass that. So what happened here is the prosecutor made up a crime on the fly that the legislature had not opted to pass.
It's a Pandora's box. You're extending the criminal law to people who didn't actually commit the crimes.
I'm not an expert, but this type of "law extension" isn't new. There is liability (albeit, maybe civil?) if parents, for example, have a bunch of kids over, watch them get drunk, then a kid kills someone on the way home with their car.
In the case above, from what I recall the facts were pretty damning. The kid had mental issues (journal entries, voices, etc) that the parents very much knew about. They bought him a gun. They were brought in to school a few days after giving him the gun and were shown drawings of him shooting his classmates. The parents for some reason didn't tell anyone THEY JUST GAVE HIM A GUN. A few hours later, the kid takes out the gun and shoots students.
I have no problem with the involuntary culpability of these parents. It's a good way to help reduce gun violence... make the parents responsible for proper secure storage of firearms.
@89th said in Crumbley's parents charged with involuntary manslaughter:
It's a Pandora's box. You're extending the criminal law to people who didn't actually commit the crimes.
People have been prosecuted in the past for murder even though they didn't actually pull the trigger, but took part in a robbery where a murder took place, for example. The way these parents acted with their clearly highly troubled child is incomprehensible. I don't see how they couldn't be held responsible.
-
@George-K said in Crumbley's parents charged with involuntary manslaughter:
You're extending the criminal law to people who didn't actually commit the crimes.
They do it a lot with drugs. Someone who was the original drug seller can be charged with murder if they drug taker overdoses.
@taiwan_girl said in Crumbley's parents charged with involuntary manslaughter:
@George-K said in Crumbley's parents charged with involuntary manslaughter:
You're extending the criminal law to people who didn't actually commit the crimes.
They do it a lot with drugs. Someone who was the original drug seller can be charged with murder if they drug taker overdoses.
My understanding is that those cases occur when the drug was laced or more potent than advertised. And even so, I fail to find equivalence.
It is very possible/probable that these parents were criminally negligent and deserving of prosecution. The question is what charges are appropriate.
-
Definition of involuntary manslaughter
Involuntary manslaughter is the unintended killing of a person while committing a crime, or acting in a reckless or negligent manner. This type of homicide is committed without malice or intent, even accidentally, and is considered a less serious crime than murder.
I can see where this fits the parents. And I can see how this definition would fit someone selling drugs. In both cases, they did not intentionally try to kill someone, and did not plan for someone to die, but their actions had the result of someone dying.
