GUILTY MI - 4 students killed, 6 injured, Oxford High School shooting, 30 Nov 2021 *Arrest incl parents* *teen guilty* #5

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
So they both feigned sleep when the cops broke down the door to the artist's studio even though LE were using forced entry on the door just a few feet away from the mattress ( LE witness says that yes would have heard LE arrive quite a while earlier)

Also prosecutors seemed to be going hard on the atmosphere of the raid that night to suggest that they were dangerous fugitives or to sell consciousness of guilt to the jury. Maybe both?

( No weapons found at the studio)
 
cottonweaver said:
So they both feigned sleep when the cops broke down the door to the artist's studio even though LE were using forced entry on the door just a few feet away from the mattress ( LE witness says that yes would have heard LE arrive quite a while earlier)

Also prosecutors seemed to be going hard on the atmosphere of the raid that night to suggest that they were dangerous fugitives or to sell consciousness of guilt to the jury. Maybe both?

( No weapons found at the studio)
Click to expand...
The couple could have been armed and LE thinking otherwise would have been dangerously naive.
 
Does anyone know if there was a list of the witnesses released for both the state and the defense?

I'm very curious who Smith will be calling.
 
cottonweaver said:
So they both feigned sleep when the cops broke down the door to the artist's studio even though LE were using forced entry on the door just a few feet away from the mattress ( LE witness says that yes would have heard LE arrive quite a while earlier)

Also prosecutors seemed to be going hard on the atmosphere of the raid that night to suggest that they were dangerous fugitives or to sell consciousness of guilt to the jury. Maybe both?

( No weapons found at the studio)
Click to expand...
The state is def trying to make consciousness of guilt happen. I’m not convinced. I think they should be charged with aggravated child abuse (by neglect). They could’ve given EC a 25 year sentence in exchange for testifying against his parents after giving him a thorough forensic evaluation as to why he did what he did. I would be fine with that precedent. Any time one of these neglected or abused children do a school shooting, charge the parents for abuse and neglect following that formula. I realize it won’t work in every case. JMO
 
Weki said:
The state is def trying to make consciousness of guilt happen. I’m not convinced. I think they should be charged with aggravated child abuse (by neglect). They could’ve given EC a 25 year sentence in exchange for testifying against his parents after giving him a thorough forensic evaluation as to why he did what he did. I would be fine with that precedent. Any time one of these neglected or abused children do a school shooting, charge the parents for abuse and neglect following that formula. I realize it won’t work in every case. JMO
Click to expand...

You have a very good idea here. It would hold parents accountable, because changes need to happen.

I think this case is particularly extreme, and I am glad these two are being prosecuted. I wish for justice for the victims.
 
Izzylizzy said:
The couple could have been armed and LE thinking otherwise would have been dangerously naive.
Click to expand...
Absolutely.
I don't have any issue with an LE armed raid in the circumstances

but was just posting on how the Prosecution covered that. ( Not making a point about the cops) The prosecution reiterated Coffee Company guy's ' Locked and Loaded', asked another LEO to describe what he was wearing, how many vehicles, all the details from sirens, command posts etc
It felt as the Prosecution wanted to evoke all the drama of that capture.

ETA
TBC @Izzylizzy my personal opinion is that the evocation of the subsequent drama was not necessary to the successful prosecution of these charges. You don't need mens rea for IM charge.
 
Last edited:
Weki said:
The state is def trying to make consciousness of guilt happen. I’m not convinced. I think they should be charged with aggravated child abuse (by neglect). They could’ve given EC a 25 year sentence in exchange for testifying against his parents after giving him a thorough forensic evaluation as to why he did what he did. I would be fine with that precedent. Any time one of these neglected or abused children do a school shooting, charge the parents for abuse and neglect following that formula. I realize it won’t work in every case. JMO
Click to expand...
What totally baffles me is quite a few of school shooters and mass shooter's parent(s) purchased a firearm for them or knew that their mentally troubled kid had firearms.
cottonweaver said:
Absolutely.
I don't have any issue with an LE armed raid in the circumstances

but was just posting on how the Prosecution covered that. ( Not making a point about the cops) The prosecution reiterated Coffee Company guy's ' Locked and Loaded', asked another LEO to describe what he was wearing, how many vehicles, all the details from sirens, command posts etc
It felt as the Prosecution wanted to evoke all the drama of that capture.
Click to expand...
That's the job of the prosecutor.
And by Smith basically ignoring his testimony speaks volumes.
 

'When a child commits a mass shooting, are parents to blame?'​

A troubled past​

Before the Oxford shooting, Kayla LeMieux had not thought about Ethan Crumbley since he was a nine-year-old boy living across the street from her in nearby Lake Orion, Michigan.

Ms LeMieux worked with Ethan's mother, Jennifer, at a restaurant in 2015 and was close with the Crumbley family after they moved into a nearby apartment in Lake Orion before settling in Oxford.


She said Mr and Mrs Crumbley would frequently leave Ethan home alone when he was nine for hours while they would go into town to drink.

During this time, Ethan would sometimes wander over to her house, where her interactions with him proved troubling, she said.

"He was very monotone, very distant, manipulative. He lied a lot," Ms LeMieux said.

She recalled one time when she watched him take a bird's nest down from a tree and then stomp on it.


The behaviour raised alarm bells for Ms LeMieux and her boyfriend.

"We would say, 'He's going to kill someone one day,'" she said.

In court, Ethan Crumbley's attorneys have painted a similar picture of the boy's childhood, calling a psychological expert who said he was a "feral child" who was neglected by his parents and suffered from mental illness.

Ms LeMieux said Mr and Ms Crumbley's parenting eventually led her to call Child Protective Services.

"Ethan was so neglected. He was just a baby. I was worried for him. That's not a way for a kid to grow up," she said.




www.bbc.com

Jennifer Crumbley: When parents get the blame for a child's mass shooting

The conviction of a Michigan mother for her son's school shooting could have far-reaching implications.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
 
Weki said:
The state is def trying to make consciousness of guilt happen. I’m not convinced. I think they should be charged with aggravated child abuse (by neglect). They could’ve given EC a 25 year sentence in exchange for testifying against his parents after giving him a thorough forensic evaluation as to why he did what he did. I would be fine with that precedent. Any time one of these neglected or abused children do a school shooting, charge the parents for abuse and neglect following that formula. I realize it won’t work in every case. JMO
Click to expand...

For me, it's gross negligence. This was reckless and foreseeable.
James Crumbley goes back to the house within minutes to check if the gun was missing. They knew that allowing him access to a gun was a risk.
I wouldn't be surprised if they had even discussed it at some point prior and then brushed it off. State doesn't have to show that they knew he was going to do it & I don't think they did but I think it was a foreseeable risk.
( I appreciate that she's going to blame the husband for unsafe storage)

' attorneys for the state argued the case is not about bad parenting or gun rights.
Prosecutor Marc Keast told the jury: "Jennifer Crumbley didn't pull the trigger that day, but she is responsible for those deaths."
"We're not here to talk about good parenting or bad parenting," he added. "It's not illegal to be a bad parent."
Involuntary manslaughter has been “well-defined for ages, and its elements are definite and plain: gross negligence causing death”, the assistant prosecutor Joseph Shada said
 
77 pages of JC messages and a firefighter.
Message on 11-30 before going to school meeting JC told him she's "afraid he'll do something stupid".

Held up due to Smith's claims she only has 8 pages.
JC has the obsessive need to contact people 24/7, she has no boundaries.

Break..discussing facebook messages.
 
I forgot to add the link

Reiterating part of Keast's opening statement

"But there is no claim that she gifted that firearm to her son, knowing he was going to commit the attack.

There's no claim that she wanted him to commit the attack.

So how can she be held responsible when her son pulled the trigger? And the answer is she's not charged with murder. She's charged with involuntary manslaughter.

You see, murder is it's an intentional killing. Involuntary manslaughter, by definition, is unintentional. It's rooted in negligence," Keast said. "You're going to learn that involuntary manslaughter is committed when someone's acts or their failure to out or they're failures to perform their legal duty or grossly negligent. And that gross negligence was a cause of death. A cause of death, not the cause of death."

Crumbley is not on trial for murder – but four charges of involuntary manslaughter. Keast said when somebody else was a cause of death, the person who was ‘grossly negligent can and still will be held responsible’.

"That is, if the person who pulled the trigger, if the shooter in this case, his act was reasonably foreseeable to the defendant"

Keast finished his statement by saying that Crumbley is not on trial for being a bad parent, neither are gun owners, or the school's inability to search a backpack. Instead, he said she's on trial for her negligence that could have prevented the tragedy.

"Gross negligence is when you could use ordinary care, just ordinary care to avoid an unknown danger. And you don't, even though it is apparent that serious injury could occur. And that's what this case is about. It's about Jennifer Crumbley's willful disregard of the danger'
www.fox2detroit.com

Jennifer Crumbley trial: Prosecutor says negligence led to Oxford High School shooting, not bad parenting

Jennifer Crumbley's trial for the Oxford High School shooting started Thursday with opening statements from Oakland County Prosecutor's Office. She's on trial for four cases of involuntary manslaughter.
www.fox2detroit.com www.fox2detroit.com
 
Like I said earlier, if he was 5 and the gun was left out and he shot and killed someone accidentally involuntary manslaughter would apply to the parents. I understand the prosecutor wants to frame this a certain way but the gross negligence is parental neglect. There’s no two ways about it. The evidence he has presented makes a case that these parents were so neglectful and self-absorbed that they failed to see how troubled their son was. The prosecutor knows he won’t win if he says this is a case of parental abuse/neglect leading to manslaughter.

If we apply the standard that the prosecutor is arguing, a whole lotta parents should be charged with involuntary manslaughter. JMO

I appreciate all perspectives - it really helps think this through.
 
Last edited:
This may be the most whiny defense attorney I have ever seen. All her points are being lost in delivery. It doesn't take all of that. And the judge is waaaaaaaaay passive. This case is pretty important and precedence setting so I don't understand the overall lackadaisical nature of how this trial is being conducted by her.
 
Bryan fireman friend was surprised they bought him the gun
She'd already told him that she was ' afraid Ethan would do something dumb'

The friend of Ethan who ' moved away' was recounted to Bryan as a suicide. Prosecutor says ' and did you later find out that this was not true' ( IDK why he didn't explain that)

Bryan facebook messages JC after the murders but hadn't realised that FB can give LE access to those. Whoops!

Can barely read the FB messages. ( Many of these were deleted or ' unsent' by Bryan)
Jennifer is complaining Kira won't let her see the horses and Bryan is telling J that he assumed James will be charged for unsafe storage ( Dec 1st messages)
Jennifer replies and claims the gun had the string lock on it but she'd never mentioned that to him prior to Dec 1st when they'd discussed the shooting ( I guess this is where the lies start)

Jenn texts Bryan that the news says both parents will be charged.
Bryan replies that he doesn't understand what the charges could be and says it will be media misinformation

Dec 1st
Jennifer ' everything was secured, not loaded, bullets stored away separately. omg omg omg'

Another message. Jennifer ' no I'll never be okay, i lost my son, my son's a murderer, never be able to live with the guilt of that, life's not worth living '

Dec 2nd, Jennifer complains to him that her mom won't speak to her, she blames them.
J also messages that it's like mourning death of her child
Also messages that they are retaining attorney and charges are involuntary manslaughter.

Dec 2nd?
J also messages ' we are on the run again, helicopters, not sure where to message you' !!!!
Also J messages him ' clear your cache' and he replies ' good move' !

Dec 2nd
J messages him ' We're F-----d'
( She says they've secured an attorney and heard they will be charged)

She then goes on to lie to Bryan about the infamous maths worksheet. ( She lied and said she'd only ever seen the later version where Ethan had scrubbed out the drawings)
 
Last edited:
Just to add - part of the problem with charging these parents for aggravated child abuse is that it would be very hard to prove because this is a case of child neglect. Physical abuse and s3xual abuse are the ones commonly charged. Unless you’re a psycho parent like Tim Ferriter who imprisoned his adopted son. Or Ruby Franke, of course, starving your child etc. But psychological abuse or casual neglect is hard to prove under the law, I think.

Regarding the judge, she seems to panic as soon as there’s any argument between the parties. She jumps in and interrupts and tries to “calm” things. Very irritating.

JMO
 
So state is showing text messages right now proving they knew about the charges before going on the run. Not a good look for Jennifer Crumbley. They are discussing hiring lawyers and going on the run at the same time.

Edited to add-whoaaaa so defense is now accusing the police of threatening this witness to change his statements. This is the guy Jennifer was having an affair with. Defense didn’t want the affair to come out but now she says I don’t care I want it to come out. Jury has been sent out so the judge can put on the record that defense is choosing violence today! Lol

JMO
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 132 more.
Total: 3,809 (members: 133, guests: 3,676)

Online statistics

Members online
133
Guests online
3,676
Total visitors
3,809
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
604,555
Messages
18,173,386
Members
232,667
Latest member
Boomirrin
Back
Top