CNN
—
In a landmark verdict Thursday, a Michigan jury found James Crumbley guilty of manslaughter in the 2021 killings of four students at his son's high school. Experts say the findings could set an important precedent for how guilty parents of school shooters can be. You will be held responsible.
Just last month, the shooter's mother, Jennifer Crumbley, was found guilty on the same four charges, becoming the first parent to be held directly responsible for a child mass shooting.
“We're living in a new world now, and that new world is for prosecutors to say, 'If there's no law, if there's no significant protection, we're going to accept it.'” CNN legal analyst Joey Jackson told CNN's Erin Burnett on Thursday night.
Prosecutors argued during the week-long trial that James Crumbley was “grossly negligent.” Prosecutors say he bought a SIG Sauer 9mm gun for his son four days before the attack, but did not secure it properly and ignored his son's deteriorating mental state. , allegedly failed to take “reasonable care” to prevent foreseeable danger.
The shooting could also have been prevented if James or Jennifer Crumbley had listened to school counselors' advice and removed their son from school on the day of the shooting, or told school officials that they had just bought a gun. He also claimed that there was no.
On November 30, 2021, 15-year-old Ethan Crumbley used a SIG Sauer rifle to kill four students and wound six students and a teacher at Oxford High School. He was sentenced last year to life in prison without parole.
The case against the Crumbleys had attracted national attention even before the verdict was handed down. It examines whether and how parents can be held directly responsible for mass shootings in a country that continues to experience on-campus shootings and mass shootings that result in multiple victims. Because it was. Such a ruling is rare for parents who are held responsible for their children's actions, including child neglect and firearms charges.
Now, the ruling in the Crumbley parents' case, based on claims of negligence and foreseeability, will likely be used by prosecutors in other cases, Jackson said.
“If you are a parent and you were careless in allowing your child to have a weapon, and not only did you allow your child to have a weapon, but you failed to secure that weapon, you are concerned about your child’s mental health. You have, or you should have, some sense of how a disease is spreading and what you are doing to actually oversee it or act in an appropriate manner to protect the public. If you don’t, you will be held accountable,” he said.
Still, the case against the Crumbleys reflects the parents' extraordinary negligence, prosecuting attorney Karen McDonald told jurors at the latter trial.
She said it's not true that “finding James Crumbley guilty of gross negligence would open up criminal charges to every parent who doesn't know what their child is doing at all times.” pointed out that they were “not facing the same normal challenges” that we all experience as parents. ”
To be sure, the Crumbleys' case is so unusual that its impact will likely be limited, said Frank Vandervoort, a clinical law professor at the University of Michigan Law School.
“I don't expect a large number of these types of lawsuits to be filed. I think this is a pretty unique case,” he said. “It's hard to talk about shootings by teenagers as something that happens every day. Unless there are really special circumstances, I don't think many parents will be charged.”
Still, while the guilty verdicts for James and Jennifer Crumbley could set an important precedent for who is to blame besides the mass shooter, such cases remain rare. experts said.
James Crumbley and Jennifer Crumbley were each found guilty of four counts of manslaughter, which carried a combined charge of up to 15 years in prison. Both men are scheduled to be sentenced on April 9th.
There have been several other cases in the United States where parents have been charged with shootings committed by their children. In Illinois, the father of the July 4th parade shooter was charged with tort for signing an application for a state firearms owner's ID after his son's questionable behavior. was charged with. And in Virginia, the mother of a 6-year-old who shot a teacher was charged.
Vandervoort said parents can be held responsible for their children's behavior up to the point of not attending school, but the Crumbley parents' cases have a different level of severity.
“We impose certain duties on parents regarding their children, which means that parents are expected to take a higher degree of responsibility for what happens when their children do something. “It's legally mandated,” he said. “I think the gravity of the charges is what sets this apart.”
In a written opinion last March, a panel of Michigan Court of Appeals judges acknowledged that Crumbley's parents' case could set precedent, but said the situation was unique and unusual and that Ethan Crumbley's He said the actions had “significantly alleviated” concerns. “Reasonably foreseeable is the ultimate test that must be applied.”
Ultimately, Jackson said, prosecutors could use the sentence to deter other parents.
“This judgment will be used by prosecutors and very effectively as a tool to deter this type of conduct in the future,” Jackson said.
02:54 – Source: CNN
Hear opening statements in trial of father of Michigan school shooter
Lawsuits focused on mental health and gun safety
The foreman of the jury in her mother's trial said on NBC's “Today” show that Jennifer Crumbley's testimony that she would have done nothing to lead up to the massacre was brought up repeatedly as jurors considered the verdict. He said it happened.
“It was repeated over and over again in the deliberation room. I think it was very upsetting to hear that. I think there were a lot of little things that could have been done to prevent this,” she added.
One of the prosecution's main arguments was that the shooting was foreseeable. Ethan Crumbley's parents “could have prevented this foreseeable tragedy with a little effort,” said MacDonald, the prosecutor.
Prosecutors pointed to disturbing text messages and diary entries written by Ethan, saying his parents gave him a gun, didn't secure it and ignored signs of his declining mental health, leading to the deaths of four children. He claimed to be personally responsible for the student's death.
Detectives said a cable lock sold with the SIG Sauer was found still in its plastic packaging, and no other firearm locking mechanisms were found in the home. The defense questioned whether another locking mechanism was used to secure the firearm.
Also key to the trial was a meeting between Ethan's parents and school officials on the morning of the shooting. Sean Hopkins, a counselor at Oxford High School, said Ethan's parents removed him from school and recommended he receive mental health treatment after the school discovered he was making disturbing notes on his math worksheets. I testified. But Jennifer Crumbley said she can't do that because she has work to do. James Crumbley did not protest, the counselor testified.
The Crumbleys' eldest son and his son's guilty plea marks a milestone in the deadly school shootings of 2021, perhaps setting a new standard for parental liability in such cases. However, McDonald said the results do not end the scourge of gun violence in this country. Said.
“The three indictments and convictions are extremely important,” she said. “But these three indictments will not solve gun violence.”
