Listen to What Next:

Tweet Share Share Comment

Over the past few months, in a courtroom in Michigan, a local prosecutor has been attempting to do something I consider basically impossible: explain a school shooting. The school shooting in question happened in November 2021, at Oxford High School. A student named Ethan Crumbley came to class with a 9 mm handgun. He killed four people, injured seven.

Afterward, the district attorney got access to reams of information in an attempt to figure out how this shooting went down. That included security footage, cellphone video, text message after text message. It’s all piled up in court each day. “The defense attorney had a stack of papers that was literally several feet high,” said Quinn Klinefelter, who is covering the story for WDET in Detroit.

Advertisement

One of the pieces of evidence here is a confession of a sort. It’s video the shooter took of himself, the day before the massacre, where he explains exactly what he’s about to do. This video was played in its entirety in open court, back in July. “It was a bit rambling. It even mentions how he realized that he was going to get a life sentence because of his actions,” Klinefelter said. “The phrase he used was, ‘I’m going to rot in jail like a tomato.’ ”

He seemed to know what would happen to him. And he did plead guilty back in the fall. But that wasn’t the end of the story, because the district attorney has put Ethan’s parents on trial, too—Jennifer and James Crumbley. They are accused of missing signs that Ethan’s mental health was in crisis, even buying the gun Ethan used to hurt so many of his schoolmates.

In that video he made before the shooting, Ethan apologized to his parents, saying, “I’m ruing my life and not yours.” It turns out he was pretty wrong about that. “When he was sentenced, he specifically said, ‘My parents didn’t know about this. It’s not their fault,’ ” Klinefelter said.

Advertisement

But Ethan Crumbley didn’t have the final say here. A jury did. And that jury just found his mother guilty of four counts of involuntary manslaughter. She now faces years in prison. On a recent episode of What Next, we discussed how this Michigan case may change the way courts—and the rest of us—think about who is responsible for gun violence. Our conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Mary Harris: This shooting at Oxford High School took place in November of 2021. But according to the prosecution, Ethan Crumbley started to show signs of mental illness months before that. And he wasn’t suffering from simple depression. Eight months before the massacre, Ethan started texting his mom, saying he was seeing things around the house.

Advertisement

Quinn Klinefelter: He was afraid that he was having hallucinations, that he was lonely in the house, that there was a demon throwing bowls around everywhere, that somebody slammed the door in the bathroom and it’s haunted. There was a psychiatrist later that showed this was a sign of psychosis. The mother claims that Ethan had got a Ouija board at that time, him and his friend, and that they liked to pretend that it was a haunted house and that they would actually fake things like slam a door and say, “Oh, did you hear the ghost do that?” And so she thought that he was just messing around with her, that he wasn’t seriously having any kind of a breakdown.

Advertisement

Later on, Ethan wrote to a friend and said that he wanted to call for a doctor himself, call 911, but that he was afraid that “his parents would be really pissed about that.” He worried that he was going to have a mental breakdown. He wrote later that when he had said something to his parents about it, they just laughed at him, his mother did. And his father told him just to take a pill and suck it up.

Advertisement

Now, the defense argues the exact opposite. Much of those came from messages that Ethan Crumbley sent back and forth with a friend of his about what the parents did or didn’t do. Some of it he wrote in his own journal, which was found in his backpack after the shooting. And they say that the parents never saw any of that, and had they known any of this, they would have done something, but he never actually formally came out and asked them for a doctor.

Advertisement

Advertisement

And the stuff that his parents allegedly might not have known about is legitimately disturbing stuff. Ethan was reportedly torturing and decapitating baby birds and then keeping the heads. He wrote to his friend at some point, “Oh, my mom almost found the bird head.” It’s really, really gruesome stuff.

Yeah. And again, what the prosecution argued during Ethan’s case is not only that and how gruesome it was, but the pleasure that he seemed to be taking from it, that he would kind of coo as he was torturing a small animal. “Oh, that’s OK, baby,” as he’s inserting things into their stomach or trying to see how far he can go before they blow up in a bloody way. It’s horrible to say such things, but it’s the way it was.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

He also had a journal where he wrote things to himself and would talk about things like, “They’re ignoring me. I’m getting zero help for my mental issues, and it’s going to cause me to shoot up the F-ing school.” That is written in his journal. Whether or not any authority figure—parents, school officials, anybody—actually ever saw that is something that is in question. Apparently the parents may never have known that that was even in existence.

What a mess. Because as a parent of a teenager, I feel like there’s so much I don’t know about what’s going on with my kid. So in some ways I’m empathetic. But then at the same time, the things that Ethan Crumbley is accused of doing are horrible.

Advertisement

That’s one of the central things of this. What should a parent know? What does a parent know? How much does a parent ever know, especially in teenage years, right? Ethan was 15 at the time. So, you’re in puberty—all the different things that are just inherent in that, for any person, let alone one that would have some of these issues. How much do you know about what your child is doing, and how much should you know, and how much should you be held accountable for what you do or don’t know?

Advertisement

Advertisement

It’s not just that Ethan Crumbley was mentally unwell, although that seems to certainly be true. The other thing that the prosecutor wants to talk about is the presence of firearms in the Crumbley home and just how present they were. Can you explain that a little bit? How important were guns to this family?

Advertisement

They had got him BB guns, they said, and set up targets in the backyard. And shooting together was a family activity.

It’s worth noting that giving kids guns is not a rare thing in this community.

No, not at all. There’s a strong gun culture in Oxford. The prosecution says that the parents bought Ethan the handgun used in the crime as an early Christmas present, to the point where Jennifer Crumbley was posting on social media, Look at this. Check it out. Ethan’s new Christmas toy, or something along those lines.

Can we talk about that day when Ethan did this horrific shooting? In some ways, it’s the most perplexing and upsetting part of the story, because the day of the school shooting so many people tried to intervene with Ethan Crumbley. They sensed something was wrong. Can you tell me the story of that day?

Yeah. They had seen that he had been looking up ammunition.

His teachers?

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Yes, teachers had noticed that and then had reprimanded him for that. The day of the shooting, they had come across a math paper that had pictures drawn on it—a stick figure that was being shot by a gun that looked identical to the one that Ethan had just been gifted as a present. And he’d written things on it like, “Blood everywhere,” and “The thoughts won’t stop,” and “Help me.” They took that, and they sent him to the office, to the counselor, and said, “He needs some help.”

Advertisement

While they were waiting for his parents to arrive—they called them and told them to come down because they needed to talk to them—he told the counselor that he was interested in video games, and he was just practicing for video games. And he also asked them, while he’s waiting for his parents, if he could do his homework. He’d left his backpack in the classroom when they had taken him down to the counselor’s office. So they went and grabbed the backpack and brought it back to him and said, “Boy, this seems awfully heavy.” It would seem almost certain that the gun was in there then, but nobody checked. Nobody looked.

Advertisement

Advertisement

And so, they sit down. The parents finally arrive and the counselor tells them that he was concerned that Ethan might have suicidal tendencies. He wasn’t worried about a mass shooting but him hurting himself, and told them, “You need to take him home, and he needs counseling.”

Now. Right? Like, he needs to see someone immediately.

Well, no. That’s another point in the trial. They said he should be seen, and Jennifer and James Crumbley said, “Well, we’re working.” He was a DoorDash driver between jobs, and she had another job that she said she had to go back to for a meeting, so they weren’t able to take him home right then, they claimed. So, the counselor said, “Well, you need to make sure to get him counseling within the next 48 hours or else we’ll send child protective services.” But Jennifer Crumbley has argued that she relied on these professionals who made it seem very clearly that they didn’t consider Ethan posing a danger to anybody, or she claims she would have taken him home then.

Advertisement

Advertisement

And yet it seemed like the Crumbley parents did suspect something, because within hours of this meeting at the school, there were reports of something happening at the high school. They see emergency responders at the high school. They’re texting their son, saying, “Don’t do it.” And the dad is going home to search for the gun. Like, Oh gosh, where’s the gun? Right?

Advertisement

Advertisement

The father rushes back to the house the first time that he hears of this and finds that the gun is gone and that the ammunition is gone. And then he makes a hurried and nervous 911 call that he thinks maybe his child could be the shooter.

Eventually, both Jennifer and James Crumbley were charged with involuntary manslaughter. But Jennifer was the first to go to trial. Her lawyers hoped they could play on jurors’ sympathies.

Advertisement

The defense, as one of their arguments, said, “Find Jennifer not guilty, for every parent who hasn’t known exactly what their child is doing or every parent who made a mistake but shouldn’t be held criminally accountable.” It’s the crux of the entire case really on that side: How far can you criminalize a parent for maybe not being the best parent in the world?

By winning this case, prosecutors have done something novel, legally. In the past, parents have been charged with negligence or reckless conduct after a child commits gun violence, or there’s an accident with the parent’s gun, but that is fundamentally different from what Jennifer Crumbley was found guilty of in Michigan.

Advertisement

Some of the other cases are, like, you kept a gun in a shoe box and a 5-year-old could find it and shoot themselves or others, or take it to first grade and play with it and shoot somebody. It was carelessness and negligence. In this case, they’re charging involuntary manslaughter and gross negligence, saying basically that they’re an accessory to the murder because of their actions that they took or didn’t take.

Advertisement

Advertisement

What the prosecution has argued over and over is if they had taken certain simple steps, then it would never have gotten to the point where these children would have been killed. If they had even mentioned to the counselors when they were meeting with them, “Oh yeah, by the way, we just bought him a gun. You might want to check if he’s got it,” or something like that even. But they didn’t. And because they did not take those steps, did not take him from class, and avoided getting him any help when he claims that he wanted some, that’s why the prosecution says these parents are as complicit as the getaway driver in a robbery.

Advertisement

Subscribe to What Next on Apple Podcasts

Get more news from Mary Harris every weekday.

View Transcript

A big part of the prosecution’s case involved interrogating Jennifer Crumbley’s “vigilance as a parent.” The prosecutors brought up her expensive horse-riding hobby and her extramarital affairs as a way of implying she was inattentive. They even tracked down footage of the family reuniting after Ethan was arrested.

There was one video that I hadn’t seen before where Ethan had been taken in custody and was sitting in the police station, and his parents actually got in to see him. This was just a couple of hours after the shooting. And during that little bit of time, they don’t really say anything. They don’t say, Oh, are you OK?, or Oh, my poor child, or hug him or anything like that. But as they’re leaving and walking out of the room, Jennifer starts yelling at him, like, “Why? Why?” And the prosecution will paint that initial reaction especially as a lack of empathy for their own child and that they’re more preoccupied with their own affairs than they were with their child. And if they hadn’t watched while their son was potentially spiraling down the drain, they could have saved the lives of four other teenagers.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

As the mother of a teenager, I have really mixed feelings about the focus that’s been happening on Jennifer, the mom, here. There’s just been so much talking about how she’s a bad mom, a cold mom. All of those things may be true, but I’m unclear if they amount to a crime. What does that say about what we’re really saying with this prosecution?

Popular in News & Politics

  1. A Grand Bargain Is Emerging in the Supreme Court’s Trump Cases, but Chaos May Be Ahead
  2. The Supreme Court Sure Picked a Curious Moment to Embrace Humility
  3. Trump’s Supreme Court Ballot Argument Posits That Jefferson Davis Wasn’t an Insurrectionist Either
  4. The Supreme Court Left No Doubt About How It’ll Rule in the Trump Ballot Case

That was something that the defense argued again there in the closing arguments: You may not like Jennifer Crumbley particularly for whatever reason. But this is not a case about her morality. It’s a question about what would a reasonable person have done, and did they allow access to a weapon that they should not have? The defense summed it up: What parent is going to buy a gun for a child that they think has mental illness? And that’s mainly their argument, along with saying that demonizing her is not tantamount to saying that she’s guilty.

Advertisement

But now that Jennifer Crumbley has been found guilty, the question becomes just how far a parent’s responsibility for their child will go.

What a lot of legal experts will say is that it’s a warning sign to other cases across the country. Where will the line be drawn? If your child goes on a robbery spree and there are some signs that they were a robber, are you going to be penalized and charged with accessory to robbery or something? I’m making these up, but it’s along those lines. As we all know, legal people want to go off precedents. When something’s been set, they’re either having to argue completely against it, and they will have to set a precedent of their own, or they’ll use that as the example. Well, in this Michigan case such and such happens, so therefore for our variation of it, based on what was found in that case, we’re going to do this. And they really say that could be a crux for a whole lot of cases coming up.

Tweet Share Share Comment

QOSHE - Is Bad Parenting Criminal? - Mary Harris
menu_open
Columnists Actual . Favourites . Archive
We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close
Aa Aa Aa
- A +

Is Bad Parenting Criminal?

13 1
09.02.2024

Listen to What Next:

  • Apple Podcasts
  • Spotify
  • Stitcher

Tweet Share Share Comment

Over the past few months, in a courtroom in Michigan, a local prosecutor has been attempting to do something I consider basically impossible: explain a school shooting. The school shooting in question happened in November 2021, at Oxford High School. A student named Ethan Crumbley came to class with a 9 mm handgun. He killed four people, injured seven.

Afterward, the district attorney got access to reams of information in an attempt to figure out how this shooting went down. That included security footage, cellphone video, text message after text message. It’s all piled up in court each day. “The defense attorney had a stack of papers that was literally several feet high,” said Quinn Klinefelter, who is covering the story for WDET in Detroit.

Advertisement

One of the pieces of evidence here is a confession of a sort. It’s video the shooter took of himself, the day before the massacre, where he explains exactly what he’s about to do. This video was played in its entirety in open court, back in July. “It was a bit rambling. It even mentions how he realized that he was going to get a life sentence because of his actions,” Klinefelter said. “The phrase he used was, ‘I’m going to rot in jail like a tomato.’ ”

He seemed to know what would happen to him. And he did plead guilty back in the fall. But that wasn’t the end of the story, because the district attorney has put Ethan’s parents on trial, too—Jennifer and James Crumbley. They are accused of missing signs that Ethan’s mental health was in crisis, even buying the gun Ethan used to hurt so many of his schoolmates.

In that video he made before the shooting, Ethan apologized to his parents, saying, “I’m ruing my life and not yours.” It turns out he was pretty wrong about that. “When he was sentenced, he specifically said, ‘My parents didn’t know about this. It’s not their fault,’ ” Klinefelter said.

Advertisement

But Ethan Crumbley didn’t have the final say here. A jury did. And that jury just found his mother guilty of four counts of involuntary manslaughter. She now faces years in prison. On a recent episode of What Next, we discussed how this Michigan case may change the way courts—and the rest of us—think about who is responsible for gun violence. Our conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Mary Harris: This shooting at Oxford High School took place in November of 2021. But according to the prosecution, Ethan Crumbley started to show signs of mental illness months before that. And he wasn’t suffering from simple depression. Eight months before the massacre, Ethan started texting his mom, saying he was seeing things around the house.

Advertisement

Quinn Klinefelter: He was afraid that he was having hallucinations, that he was lonely in the house, that there was a demon throwing bowls around everywhere, that somebody slammed the door in the bathroom and it’s haunted. There was a psychiatrist later that showed this was a sign of psychosis. The mother claims that Ethan had got a Ouija board at that time, him and his friend, and that they liked to pretend that it was a haunted house and that they would actually fake things like slam a door and say, “Oh, did you hear the ghost do that?” And so she thought that he was just messing around with her, that he wasn’t seriously having any kind of a breakdown.

Advertisement

Later on, Ethan wrote to a friend and said that he wanted to call for a doctor himself, call 911, but that he was afraid that “his parents would be really pissed about that.” He worried that he was going to have a mental breakdown. He wrote later that when he had said something to his parents about it, they just laughed at him, his mother did. And his father told him just to take a pill and suck it up.

Advertisement

Now, the defense argues the exact opposite. Much of those came from messages that Ethan Crumbley sent back and forth with a friend of his about what the........

© Slate


Get it on Google Play