In a landmark case that puts parents across America on notice, particularly those with guns in their homes, an Oakland County jury Tuesday convicted Jennifer Crumbley of involuntary manslaughter, concluding she’s responsible for the deaths of four students murdered by her son in 2021 at Oxford High School.
The four guilty verdicts reverberated across the country, with opinions varying wildly.
Child-safety advocates hailed it as a big step in ensuring parents are more responsible with how they store their guns, while criminal defense experts saw it as overreaching, with the potential to create a dangerous precedent for parents.
For Craig Shilling, however, whose son Justin was among the four students murdered in the 2021 massacre, the verdict brought a sense of justice.
“I feel most of all that the cries have been heard. And I feel that this verdict is going to echo throughout every household in the country,” Shilling said after the courtroom was cleared, adding that accountability is something Oxford parents have been asking for, but the verdict is just one step in that process.
“We all have work now. We all know that we are to be held responsible for anything that we do,” Shilling said.
Assistant Prosecutor Marc Keast shook Shilling’s hand and leaned over the bench for a hug. So did Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald, who also hugged other relatives of the victims who sat in the otherwise quiet courtroom as the guilty verdicts were announced.
Jurors reached their verdict after seven days of testimony and about 11 hours of deliberation.
Jury forewoman: Mother ‘was the last adult with the gun’
In a brief interview with reporters, the jury forewoman discussed the daunting task of reaching a verdict in this highly emotional, sensational case that terrorized the still-grieving Oxford community.
The 26-year-old hairstylist and mother, who declined to provide her name, described the convictions as “very difficult” to reach.
“It wasn’t an easy decision. Lives hung in the balance, and we took that very seriously,” the woman said in an interview captured by NBC News.
“I will say, both sides were well represented,” the forewoman said.
She stressed: “The thing that really hammered it home is that she was the last adult with the gun,” having brought it back to the family home from a trip with her son to the shooting range.
Jennifer Crumbley, alone and quiet in the courtroom
Jennifer Crumbley showed no emotion as the verdicts were announced. She kept her head down, lips pursed and eyes closed. She had no family support in the courtroom on Tuesday, or during the trial. Her parents were on the witness list for both the prosecution and defense, though they were never called by either side. No friends were there, either, except for two pastoral workers who left the courtroom visibly shaken Tuesday, with a deputy asking one of them whether she needed a tissue.
Crumbley has not spoken to her son or husband since her arrest more than two years ago; a court order prohibits that. She returns to court on April 9 for sentencing. She faces a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison for the deaths of Madisyn Baldwin, 17; Tate Myre, 16; Hana St. Juliana, 14; and Justin Shilling, 17. Crumbley’s husband, James, faces trial in March on identical charges.
Their son, Ethan Crumbley, who was 15 at the time of the shooting, pleaded guilty to the murders and is serving life in prison without the possibility of parole. Six other students and a teacher were also injured.
Due to a gag order in the case, the prosecutors cannot comment on the verdict, or make any public statements about the case. Former federal prosecutor Mark Chutkow hailed the outcome as “an extremely important, if not landmark, criminal prosecution.”
A road map for other prosecutors
“Since the time of the Sandy Hook shooting over 10 years ago, there have been calls for greater accountability for parents who allow their children access to guns in their homes,” Chutkow said, adding the Crumbley case is an “extreme example” of how the acts and omissions of a parent can have tragic consequences outside the home.
Chutkow explained that the jury may have felt the combination of the shooter’s age and his mental health put greater responsibility on his parents to stop him from hurting himself or others. He said other prosecutors will likely look at this case as a road map for how to bring a similar prosecution.
“But I don’t think there will be a landslide of these cases because the facts here were so extreme,” Chutkow said, stressing that the parents knew “their son was lonely and delusional, yet they bought him a lethal weapon just four days before the mass shooting.”
Jennifer Crumbley said her son was never delusional, but only had an ongoing family joke that their house was haunted, made videos of himself pretending there were ghosts in the house, and even had names for two house ghosts: Victoria and Boris.
Chutkow, like the prosecution, argued that the Crumbleys, more than anyone else, could have prevented the shooting because they were the only ones who knew their son had access to a gun — not the school officials who concluded he was no threat on the day he drew a picture on a math sheet of a gun, a bleeding body and the words “The thoughts won’t stop. Help Me.”
That was on the morning of the shooting. The boy’s parents were summoned to school over the drawing, but they left him in school, returned to their jobs and vowed to get him therapy within 48 hours.
How Jennifer Crumbley’s testimony may have hurt her cause
School officials said the boy posed no threat to the school and let him return to class. They never asked the parents whether the teen had a gun, and concluded he would be better off in school with peers than being at home alone. The backpack, which the dean of students brought from a classroom to the office, was never searched.
Chutkow also said Crumbley probably was hurt by a comment she made while testifying in her own defense.
“Her admission that even in hindsight “I wouldn’t do anything differently” likely offended some of the jurors who had to sit through the horror of watching her son stalking through the school maiming and killing children,” Chutkow said.
While it’s unknown exactly how the jurors came to their conclusion, what is known is that they believe Crumbley was either grossly negligent in providing her son access to a gun that allowed him to kill or that she had a duty to control him and prevent him from harming others, but failed to do so.
Those are the two theories under which the crime of involuntary manslaughter can be proven.
Prosecutors had given the jury both options to consider in reaching a verdict in a case that revolved around this theme: The Crumbleys allegedly ignored a child with mental health troubles who was spiraling downward, and instead of getting him help, they bought him a gun.
During the trial, more than two dozen witnesses testified on behalf of the prosecution, which also showed jurors video footage of the actual shooting, text and Facebook messages among the Crumbley family, video of the shooter at shooting ranges with his parents, and excerpts from the shooter’s journal, including this one: “I have ZERO help for my mental problems, and it’s causing me to shoot up the F—– school.’
Testimony about the murder weapon
Jennifer Crumbley testified that she never saw any signs that her son was having mental health issues that required therapy, that she never saw him as a threat to others and that she never imagined or could have known that he would shoot up his school.
Crumbley also testified that the gun at issue was not given to him freely to use as he wished, but was secured in the home, and that her son was to only use it at the shooting range.
According to trial testimony, the gun was hidden in an armoire. The bullets were in another drawer under some jeans. And the lock to the gun case was hidden in a beer stein.
During the trial, defense attorney Shannon Smith argued that Jennifer Crumbley was an attentive parent who could not have foreseen her son’s rampage. She told jurors the prosecution was a “witch hunt” and “overreach” by prosecutors trying to put a Band-Aid on school shootings by punishing an innocent mother.
Due to a gag order that remains in effect, the prosecutors and Smith are prohibited from commenting publicly on the case, though multiple legal experts weighed in, some arguing the case was an “overreach” and dangerous.
‘I am satisfied justice has been served’
For Suzanne Jinerson, a former neighbor of the Crumbleys who knew the shooter as a young child, the verdict provided a sigh of relief.
“I am satisfied justice has been served,” Jinerson said. “Her behavior caused pain and suffering for many, including her own child, and cost the lives of four young people. This could have and should have been prevented.”
Jinerson added: “He didn’t have to turn out this way. He did not have a prayer as a child.”
Defense experts, meanwhile, expressed concern about the verdict, arguing it sets a dangerous precedent for parents everywhere whose children may commit bad acts.
“This was a guilty verdict in a case that I, along with several national pundits, have viewed as a major overreach in applying the law of involuntary manslaughter,” Detroit criminal defense attorney Michael Bullotta, a former federal prosecutor, said following the verdicts.
‘Quite frightening to imagine where this precedent will lead’
Bullotta said involuntary manslaughter charges are, by their very nature, “incredibly fact-dependent and demand level-headed and thoughtful charging decisions by prosecutors.”
“Those decisions should not be based on emotion or made to appease the voting public,” Bullotta said, adding he believes this case will subject more parents to unwarranted legal scrutiny.
“Now that we have an example in the books of what facts are enough to subject parents to 15 years or more in prison, I expect that prosecutors in Michigan and nationwide will consider charging parents, not only in school shootings but in many other crimes their children commit,” Bullotta said. “It is quite frightening to imagine where this precedent will lead.”
Moreover, Bullotta said, this verdict “helped the Oakland County prosecutor construct a slippery slope down which other prosecutors will attempt to slide any number of prosecutions of parents for the conduct of their kids, even where their child’s conduct was unforeseeable, as it was here.”
He added: “There is a reason why this is the only case of its kind ever brought. And it should be the last, at least on the facts in the Crumbley case.”
Veteran criminal defense attorney Art Weiss agrees, calling the verdict “very scary.”
“The verdict has the potential to create a horrible precedent for parents. Virtually anything in 20/20 hindsight can be questioned and criticized,” Weiss said. “Now the specter of criminal prosecution and incarceration is not just theoretical, but reality.”
He added: “The prosecution had over two years to nitpick everything she did or did not do. Who can realistically stand up to that kind of scrutiny? Parental discretion will now be usurped by prosecutorial oversight and second-guessing.”
Child-safety advocates disagree.
“Today’s verdict underscores the important responsibility of parents and gun owners in preventing children from having unsupervised access to deadly weapons,” said Nick Suplina, senior vice president for law and policy at Everytown for Gun Safety. “Plain and simple, the deadly shooting at Oxford High School in 2021 should have — and could have — been prevented had the Crumbleys not acquired a gun for their 15-year-old son. This decision is an important step forward in ensuring accountability and, hopefully, preventing future tragedies.”
Contact Tresa Baldas: [email protected]
This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Jennifer Crumbley guilty verdict involuntary manslaughter oxford school shooting
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.
