A few more things about the Crumbley case
In addition to my post from yesterday about Jennifer Crumbley’s manslaughter conviction, and my four previous posts on the case that I linked there, I want to add a few things.
The first is that I believe that if their son Ethan Crumbley had murdered the same people at the school with a knife, the Crumbleys would never have been charged. This case is a roundabout way to get at more gun control or at least to intimidate gun owners.
The second is that this verdict should strike fear into the heart of every parent. There’s a potentially slippery slope here.
The third is this:
For more than two years [the parents] have been kept in a county jail, unable to make bail.
That’s quite something.
The fourth is this:
Stephen J Morse, a professor of law and psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania, said he disagreed with the verdict, arguing that because Ethan Crumbley had pleaded guilty, he was the only one responsible for the shooting.
“I understand that she was not necessarily the best mother in the world, but this is not a crime,” he said.
Mr Morse said he believed the decision could set a bad precedent, causing courts to look for “scapegoats” in similar situations.
Ya think?
The fifth is this:
Others say this case was so unusual that it is unlikely to have wider ramifications.
“I don’t fear that this is going to open the floodgates to parents being charged in a run of the mill case, if there is such a thing,” said Frank Vandervort, a University of Michigan clinical professor of law.
No, of course it won’t be “run of the mill parents” who are charged. But in these school shooter situations, there are often warning signs that go unheeded, or that are not dealt with properly. Hindsight is 20/20, and as I said before, these particular parents don’t seem to have exercised good judgment. But they are not guilty of any crime. And finding them guilty of a crime opens the door to the state using the precedent and the tool as it sees fit, in particular to punish parents who might espouse positions it doesn’t like.
And then we have the sixth, which is pretty obvious but needs to be stated nevertheless:
Families of the victims have expressed frustration that school officials have not faced the same legal consequences as Mr and Ms Crumbley.
“Why isn’t the system allowing the people to decide when it comes to the failures at the school?” Mr Myre told the BBC on Tuesday after the verdict.
“Is our government under a different set of rules?”
The answer is: YES.
I wrote earlier that the school system had an enormous responsibility – and supposed expertise, unlike the parents – which it shirked. But no, I don’t think they should be held criminally responsible, either. Civilly responsible perhaps; but not criminally.
These were awful parents, at least the mother, against whom the evidence of her maternal malpractice has been presented. They ought to have been charged with neglect and maybe abuse. It’s the son who is a murderer, and he was charged and pled guilty as an adult, I think. Accepting a bad legal outcome because this woman is a horrible example of motherhood is dangerous.
Can’t help but repeat myself here.
In situations like this, it is imperative that SOMEBDODY be hurt, and that hurt the equivalent to that felt by victims, next of kin, and anybody else who’s heard about the/any such issue.
But you can’t get–metaphor alert–more than 55 gallons into a 55 gallon drum, the drum standing for the perp. The excess still has to go someplace.
And when some parties–the school–are ducking responsibility, and some parties are looking for political gain, the excess hurt is immensely valuable if it can be aimed…someplace else.
I am unfamiliar with the laws in the jurisdiction in question, but in Pennsylvania, with which I am familiar, School Districts and other “political subdivisions” and “local agencies” are statutorily immunized against civil liability, except under certain circumstances. Negligent supervision is not one of them, so it is possible that the result in the subject case was mandated by a similar immunity law.
Not a slippery slope, but rather a race to the bottom. This will be used and maybe quite soon. And yes it will be the parents of a shooter that will be charged.
Kate, I respect you. I want you to know that. But I don’t want to get into the business of criminalizing parents who can’t believe the worst about their children.
As I understand it, the boy was charged as an adult and admitted to the charges of murder. To me that would/should exonerate anyone else – the mother, the father, school officials – from any responsibility in this case.
This is clearly an attempt at some sort of gun control expansion, even if just to intimidate otherwise lawful citizens from acquiring guns.
Steve57, I think we’re in agreement about this.
Along with others, I think this is a back door attempt at gun control.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2024/02/ny-school-district-sued-for-allegedly-secretly-transitioning-12-year-old-student/
==
While we’re at it, the cogs in the school apparat are, by default, swine.
Michigan is an odd state. It elected Whitmer. And what about the prosecution of that young guy for the shooting during the riot. County attorney was whacked out.
Completely OT but… neo, you’ve provided us with so much intellectual, artistic and simply entertaining videos that I would like to return the favor. I hope that you haven’t seen these, but in any event, thank you and here:
An instrumental I like a lot.
Something ballet-ish.. kinda, sorta.
My favorite pointe piece.
That was Kyle Rittenhouse and it was Kenosha Wisconsin. Unless you are remembering someone unjustly prosecuted/persecuted in Michigan. The Whittmer “kidnappers” were in Michigan but didn’t shoot anything except their mouths.
Crap! I should have watched that last one to the end before posting. Whoever clipped it a bit short.
full version
As you point out, Neo, that this was gun violence at a school played heavily in this judgement. I also think that the fact that the parents can be seen as unsympathetic “white trash” rather than a minority group plays here too.
Just wait and see if the same parties who cheer this verdict cheer when the precedent is applied to underage minority murderers and their often struggling parents or, more likely, single parent (mother). If you think the Crumbleys were shitty parents, just wait until you get the case-by-case on parenting styles of the inner city!
Bad, bad precedent.
This happened to a much lesser extent with the Highland Park, IL parade shooter’s father.
The father was charged because he sponsored his son’s application for a Firearm Owners Identification card (FOID). The soonsorship was required because the son was under 18. The son bought the murder weapon after he got his FOID.
The father was charged with reckless conduct causing great bodily harm, which is a felony, although the son could have conceivably obtained an FOID and the gun without his father’s signature, *after* he turned 21, nine months before the shooting. The father accepted a plea deal, spent a month in jail and was fined I think $20K.
I believe the prosecution of the father was political, because people were understandably outraged by the shooting, (and yes, there is a strong anti-gun culture in Highland Park.) While it was obviously a mistake to sign the FOID application, the father argued persuasively (IMO) that he shouldn’t have been expected to predict what would happen two and a half years after he signed the paperwork.
https://www.lakemchenryscanner.com/2022/12/16/prosecutors-file-reckless-conduct-charges-against-father-of-highland-park-parade-shooting-suspect/
“Along with others, I think this is a back door attempt at gun control.” (from Kate, above).
It’s quite a bit more than that, primarily overreach of state authority. If persons associated with, and potentially subordinate to, an event can be caused to suffer full responsibility for that event, there is no limit to what government can do in the arena of demanding, and enforcing, responsibility. One has to ask how far down the “degrees of separation” chain prosecutors intend to go.
One version of this is suing a gun manufacturer because Person X procured one of their fully functional products, through means legal or iillegal, and used it criminally. The future version will be the owner of a gasoline station serving felony time for selling the gasoline fueling the car that a drunk driver operated which wound up in an accident that claimed the life of some valued personage.
That such punitive action is employed selectively is evident by the lack of similar prosecution for single inner city mothers whose offspring populate the crime report pages. I also note that quite a few members of that same “prosecutorial class” embrace no-bail release programs for miscreants, a number of whom are initially charged with crimes of violence.
With this precedent, when do we go after the FBI agents who had terrorists and mass murderers on their radar, but failed to act?
As another example, the mother of the 6-year-old who shot his teacher in Virginia Beach was sentenced to two years for child neglect and another federal term of 21 months for using marijuana while owning a gun. She was not charged with attempted murder. She’s black, and the badly injured teacher is white.
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4362563-mother-of-six-year-old-who-shot-teacher-sentenced-to-two-years/
“…this verdict should strike fear into the heart of every parent…”
I think that was the point.
For more than two years [the parents] have been kept in a county jail, unable to make bail.
So, two years with no income.
If found not guilty, they have still lost everything they owned.
And for those who say the parents should have got help for the kid, what kind of help? A psychiatrist cannot talk a crazy person out of being crazy, and that same crazy will generally stop taking prescribed meds that may, or may not, calm him down.
All true, but the fact that she seemed to care more about her job and her horses than her son’s problems or the misery he caused damned her in the eyes of the public and the jury. Like Meursault, the (anti-)hero of Albert Camus “The Stranger” she was condemned for her strange and indifferent responses to events (though Meursault actually did commit murder). She was found guilty as much for how she behaved after the killing as before it. For all the concern about hovering, intrusive “helicopter parents,” indifferent, apathetic, uninvolved parents earn more condemnation — certainly when something like this happens.
I wonder if the case will become a topic of discussion, or even a cause celebre for feminists: the defense of a career woman who breaks with traditional ideas of family and “leans in” the business world too much. Probably not, as the shooter’s father is also going on trial. If the children of people like this shouldn’t have guns, it’s also true that people like this probably shouldn’t have children, and that’s probably the takeaway for feminists and others.
Too bad the kid wasn’t trans.
Then the poor dear would have been “VICTIM”.
And the parents would have been vindicated….
+ Bonus:
“Five trans players dominate women’s college volleyball game, sparking outrage and claims of ‘cheating’ “—
https://nypost.com/2024/02/07/news/video-allegedly-showing-five-trans-players-playing-in-womens-volleyball-game-sparks-outrage/
Yep, keep on letting that “freak flag fly”….
Abraxas:
Remember this case?