Article Summary –
James Crumbley is on trial for involuntary manslaughter for allegedly failing to safely store a gun that his son used in a 2021 school shooting. The prosecution argued that the tragedy was preventable if Crumbley had made small efforts to secure the weapon, and that parents can be responsible gun owners regardless of their child’s intentions. The defense countered that there was no evidence proving Crumbley knew his son was a threat or had access to the gun, using as proof a journal entry by the son indicating he had to find where his father had hidden the weapon.
Jury Deliberations Kick-off in James Crumbley’s Involuntary Manslaughter Trial
The involuntary manslaughter trial of James Crumbley, accused of failing to secure a gun that his son used in a deadly 2021 school shooting in suburban Detroit, began its jury deliberations on Wednesday.
In the closing arguments, Oakland County Prosecutor, Karen McDonald, reminded the jury of Crumbley’s panicked 911 call after the shooting that claimed four students’ lives. She emphasized that Crumbley, who purchased the gun used in the shooting, never expressed surprise about his son accessing the firearm.
The prosecution asserted that the tragic fatalities were avoidable and predictable if Crumbley had taken minor yet essential preventive measures. McDonald refuted the defense’s claim that merely purchasing a firearm doesn’t make one culpable, insisting that parents can responsibly own guns, regardless of their children’s intentions.
A 12-member jury is determining whether Crumbley, 47, is guilty of involuntary manslaughter for either failing to secure the firearm sufficiently or neglecting to exercise “reasonable care” to prevent his son from executing the mass shooting.
The case is similar to last month’s trial of his wife, Jennifer Crumbley, who became the first parent in the U.S., held accountable criminally for a school shooting carried out by their child. She was found guilty on four counts of involuntary manslaughter and faces up to 15 years per count. Her sentencing is scheduled for April.
Ethan, their son, pleaded guilty to the murders of four students and was sentenced to life without parole. He did not testify in his parents’ trials.
Defense lawyer Mariell Lehman argued that the prosecution had provided no evidence proving Crumbley was aware his son had access to the gun or posed a public danger.
During the trial, the jury heard from only one defense witness, Karen Crumbley, James’ sister. She testified about her interactions with her brother and Ethan before the shooting. She refuted the notion of giving a child unrestricted access to a firearm but saw no issue with adult-supervised usage.
Assistant Prosecutor, Marc Keast, challenged her claim during cross-examination, highlighting the limited communication between the siblings in 2021, suggesting a distant relationship.
Throughout the trial, numerous testimonies and pieces of evidence were presented, many mirroring those presented in Jennifer Crumbley’s trial. The prosecution argued that James Crumbley was aware of Ethan’s troubled mental state and access to firearms, amounting to “gross negligence” in failing to prevent the shooting.
Evidence presented also included Ethan’s journal entries, in which he expressed feelings of neglect and made clear his plans for the shooting.
Lehman, in her closing argument, emphasized that James Crumbley did indeed hide the gun used by Ethan, countering the prosecution’s arguments. The trial’s conclusion awaits the jury’s verdict.
—
Read More Kitchen Table News
