James and Jennifer Crumbley, the first parents in America to be held criminally responsible for a school shooting by their child, are to be sentenced Tuesday in Oakland County Circuit Court.
They were convicted by separate juries of four counts of involuntary manslaughter — one for each classmate their son murdered at Oxford High School on Nov. 30, 2021: Tate Myre, 16; Hana St. Juliana, 14; Madisyn Baldwin, 17; and Justin Shilling, 17. Each count carries a potential prison sentence of up to 15 years, though the sentences are expected to be served concurrently.
The prosecution is seeking 10- to 15-year prison sentences for each parent. Both Crumbleys, who have been jailed since their arrest Dec. 4, 2021, are asking to be sentenced to time served. Their son Ethan pleaded guilty to his crimes and is serving life in prison without parole.
The sentences are expected to be handed down by Judge Cheryl Matthews after the court hears victim impact statements. Follow here for updates.
Judge bats down defense objections to sentencing reports
Before victim impact statements, defense attorneys made several objections to the contents of the state’s sentencing reports, which call for sentencing the Crumbleys between 43-86 months in prison.
It challenged the scoring system that was used to come up with these guidelines, arguing it penalizes the Crumbleys for a crime that was carried out by a shooter who was charged as an adult, convicted as an adult and sentenced as an adult.
“He made the decision on how many people to shoot. He made intentional choices,” Smith argued. “At the end of the day, Mrs. Crumbley shouldn’t be sentenced” for four deaths.
Lehman echoed that.
“In this case, it is one grossly negligent act that resulted in four deaths,” Lehman said, stressing: “We haven’t seen this before.”
The defense objected to various points that were assigned to the Crumbleys and enhanced their punishments.
Assistant Prosecutor Marc Keast countered that the Crumbleys engaged in multiple acts of gross negligence — like not locking the gun or storing it in a locked safe.
“Case law is clear … four children were murdered … because of that each defendant was charged and convicted,” on four counts Keast. “They don’t get to have a scoring of zero as if three children weren’t killed.”
The judge agreed and upheld the scoring system.
Jennifer Crumbley’s marijuana use stricken from report
“I know this is an emotional day for everyone,” Matthews said before starting the sentencing hearing.
The hearing began with the defense objecting to the Crumbleys being labeled as having substance abuse problems in their presentencing report.
The prosecution, in its sentencing memo and in court, argued that the couple has substance abuse problems and cited 18 bottles of alcohol purchased in one month from a liquor store.
The defense has maintained that the Crumbleys entertained for Thanksgiving that year. The prosecution countered that they had only six guests at their Thanksgiving dinner.
The defense also objected to an assertion that Jennifer Crumbley had a marijuana problem. The prosecution said she started smoking pot as a teen.
The judge agreed to take the marijuana reference out of Jennifer Crumbley’s report.
Should Crumbleys be barred from contact with each other?
Jennifer Crumbley’s attorney Shannon Smith also contested the narrative of the state’s presentencing report, which included a claim that Jennifer Crumbley is rarely home.
“That is not a crime,” Smith argued.
“I agree,” Matthews said. “The same could be said about me.”
Smith said she wants it put on the record that the probation department — in her view — included a narrative that is pulled from inaccurate police reports that do not reflect what really happened.
“This is a document that will follow Mrs. Crumbley, so I wanted to make a record,” Smith said.
James Crumbley’s lawyer, Mariell Lehman, made the same objection.
Matthews noted that presentence reports typically rely on police accounts, not trial transcripts, noting that in this case, no one has ordered trial transcripts from either Crumbley trial, which cost about $35,000 each.
“I believe it to be accurate,” Assistant Prosecutor Marc Keast told the judge.
The defense also objected to the probation department’s recommendation that as part of their sentences, the Crumbleys not be allowed to have any contact with each other or their son.
That’s unconstitutional, the defense argued, maintaining the family has a right to keep its ties.
Matthews said she has spoken to state officials about this, and that once the Crumbleys are sentenced, they will be considered “as enemies.”
“I’ve obviously never faced this issue,” Matthews said.
Keast argued the Crumbleys, because they are codefendants, should not be allowed to have contact with each other after sentencing because of the nature of this crime and typical policy by the Michigan Department of Corrections.
“We want the Michigan Department of Corrections to do what it would do in any other case,” Keast said.
Matthews said she questioned if she has the legal authority to issue a no-contact order for the Crumbley family if they are all in MDOC custody.
Matthews agreed to delay making a decision on this matter. A decision is expected within a week.
James Crumbley: Defense attorney says Crumbley never threatened prosecutor, he was ‘venting’
Jennifer Crumbley: Defense attorney blasts prosecution’s narrative, seeks leniency in sentence
Prosecution: 10-15 years in prison sought for James, Jennifer Crumbley
Amanda Smith is a dedicated U.S. correspondent with a passion for uncovering the stories that shape the nation. With a background in political science, she provides in-depth analysis and insightful commentary on domestic affairs, ensuring readers are well-informed about the latest developments across the United States.
