Pontiac, Michigan – Opening statements in the manslaughter trial of James Crumbley, the father of the teenager who fatally shot four students at a Michigan high school in 2021, began on Thursday. His wife, Jennifer, was recently convicted of the same charges. James Crumbley has pleaded not guilty to four counts of involuntary manslaughter in the tragic incident at Oxford High School, where his son Ethan carried out the attack, killing four students and injuring six others and a teacher. If convicted, James Crumbley could face up to 15 years in prison.
Prosecutors are taking an unconventional legal approach by attempting to broaden the scope of blame in mass shootings. They argue that the shooter’s parents share responsibility for the deaths because they purchased a gun for their son and ignored signs of his mental health struggles. According to Oakland County Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Marc Keast, James Crumbley was “grossly negligent” for buying the murder weapon for his son and failing to secure it, despite being aware of his son’s deteriorating mental state.
The defense attorney, Mariell Lehman, argued that James Crumbley was unaware that his son had access to the weapon and did not perceive an imminent danger. She emphasized that there is no evidence to suggest that James Crumbley was aware of his son’s intentions or considered him a threat. Jury selection took place over two days, with attorneys questioning potential jurors on their ability to be impartial and exploring their views on guns, parenting, and mental health.
The case against James Crumbley mirrors that of his wife, with testimony expected from shooting survivors, police investigators, and school staff. While both parents gifted their son a firearm and went to the gun range with him, there are differences in their individual firearm knowledge and awareness of Ethan’s mental health issues. Ethan, who pleaded guilty to multiple charges in connection with the shooting, was sentenced to life in prison without parole. Jennifer Crumbley’s defense and the prosecution were prohibited from discussing her case publicly until the conclusion of James Crumbley’s trial.
The comparison between the cases of the Crumbley parents reveals similarities in their actions leading up to the shooting and their responses afterward. Both parents were dismissive of their son’s mental health struggles, were aware of disturbing drawings he made, and chose not to intervene despite warning signs. However, there are distinctions in their roles regarding the firearm purchase, firearm expertise, and knowledge of Ethan’s mental health issues.
As the trial progresses, the focus will likely shift to what James Crumbley knew about his son’s actions and mental state. The prosecution in Jennifer’s trial painted her as neglectful and introduced evidence of her personal life, while James’ legal strategy and potential testimony remain uncertain. The outcome of this trial will undoubtedly have far-reaching implications in holding parents accountable for their children’s actions in cases of mass violence.