Historic Jury Verdict With Unforeseen Consequences?

[2012Bearcat]

Jennifer Crumbley trial: Michigan jury finds school shooter's mother guilty of involuntary manslaughter

A Michigan jury found Jennifer Crumbley, mother of Oxford High School shooter Ethan Crumbley, guilty of four counts involuntary manslaughter on Feb. 6.

www.foxnews.com

Let me state I have no problem with this verdict if what has been reported is accurate but I don't think the people prosecuting and celebrating this case understand the consequences. One of the ideals of this country is everyone is equal in the eyes of the law and if that is true these charges can be applied anytime a kid commits a heinous crime. For example a young black kid kills another person and it can be proven the mother/father knew he was a POS, this same charge can be made against the kids mother/father. Are people OK with that? I'm not sure if it's Constitutional but if it is I'm all for it.

 

[Marocain Poke]

Jennifer Crumbley trial: Michigan jury finds school shooter's mother guilty of involuntary manslaughter

A Michigan jury found Jennifer Crumbley, mother of Oxford High School shooter Ethan Crumbley, guilty of four counts involuntary manslaughter on Feb. 6.

www.foxnews.com

Let me state I have no problem with this verdict if what has been reported is accurate but I don't think the people prosecuting and celebrating this case understand the consequences. One of the ideals of this country is everyone is equal in the eyes of the law and if that is true these charges can be applied anytime a kid commits a heinous crime. For example a young black kid kills another person and it can be proven the mother/father knew he was a POS, this same charge can be made against the kids mother/father. Are people OK with that? I'm not sure if it's Constitutional but if it is I'm all for it.

I think the linchpin of the Crumbley case is that they purchased a firearm for their child, who they know was severely mentally ill.

 

[2012Bearcat]

I think the linchpin of the Crumbley case is that they purchased a firearm for their child, who they know was severely mentally ill.

Would that be any different than a mother/father knowing their kid had a firearm, was in a gang or was committing crimes? I don't know but it would seem to me if the case holds up to appeal a new precedent has been set.

 

[Marocain Poke]

Would that be any different than a mother/father knowing their kid had a firearm, was in a gang or was committing crimes? I don't know but it would seem to me if the case holds up to appeal a new precedent has been set.

Perhaps, if the parents had made a straw purchase of a firearm for said POS.

 

[2012Bearcat]

Perhaps, if the parents had made a straw purchase of a firearm for said POS.

The only reason this woman was charged was because she bought her son a firearm and he then used it to kill 4 people? If she hadn't purchased the firearm she would not have been charged?

 

[LAY THE WOODY]

As always has been, we're all punished because of the few.

 

[windriverrange]

Jennifer Crumbley trial: Michigan jury finds school shooter's mother guilty of involuntary manslaughter

A Michigan jury found Jennifer Crumbley, mother of Oxford High School shooter Ethan Crumbley, guilty of four counts involuntary manslaughter on Feb. 6.

www.foxnews.com

Let me state I have no problem with this verdict if what has been reported is accurate but I don't think the people prosecuting and celebrating this case understand the consequences. One of the ideals of this country is everyone is equal in the eyes of the law and if that is true these charges can be applied anytime a kid commits a heinous crime. For example a young black kid kills another person and it can be proven the mother/father knew he was a POS, this same charge can be made against the kids mother/father. Are people OK with that? I'm not sure if it's Constitutional but if it is I'm all for it.

Very scary & more of an attack on buying a weapon than protecting the public. What if you buy a car for your kid, a kid known to speed & drive recklessly & has wrecked other cars driving recklsssly. Can that parents be hauled into court on the same charges? This happened only because it was a weapon.

I’m not letting her entirely off the hook though. She was a terrible parent & not much of a moral guiding light for the kid.

Trying to hold parents/people accountable for not being clairvoyant is scary.

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

Very scary & more of an attack on buying a weapon than protecting the public. What if you buy a car for your kid, a kid known to speed & drive recklessly & has wrecked other cars driving recklsssly. Can that parents be hauled into court on the same charges? This happened only because it was a weapon.

I’m not letting her entirely off the hook though. She was a terrible parent & not much of a moral guiding light for the kid.

Trying to hold parents/people accountable for not being clairvoyant is scary.

The charges are appropriate in this case, as she had the opportunity to take her child home that same day because of things he wrote on his paper. However, were her actions negligent? It's a tough one to second-guess her decision. She didn't encourage this behavior, which is why you have to focus on the negligent aspect. The question I have would be was she reasonably aware of the risk? That her son was a danger to the school, I would say yes, that her son was going to murder his classmates, no. Does that meet the charges, I don't know, it's very close and a difficult decision for 12 people to make. Glad I was not on that jury while thinking that the precedent is concerning, but I didn't have to make that choice, so it's hard to second guess here as well.

 

[2012Bearcat]

The charges are appropriate in this case, as she had the opportunity to take her child home that same day because of things he wrote on his paper. However, were her actions negligent? It's a tough one to second-guess her decision. She didn't encourage this behavior, which is why you have to focus on the negligent aspect. The question I have would be was she reasonably aware of the risk? That her son was a danger to the school, I would say yes, that her son was going to murder his classmates, no. Does that meet the charges, I don't know, it's very close and a difficult decision for 12 people to make. Glad I was not on that jury while thinking that the precedent is concerning, but I didn't have to make that choice, so it's hard to second guess here as well.

As I've said I don't have a problem with the verdict but I do have concerns with the precedent this sets. As we see with many of these far left Soros controlled DAs abusing their position of power to advance the leftist agenda, I can see how the precedent could be abused. Same holds true for a far right wing DAs. I guess we will just have to wait and see.

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

As I've said I don't have a problem with the verdict but I do have concerns with the precedent this sets. As we see with many of these far left Soros controlled DAs abusing their position of power to advance the leftist agenda, I can see how the precedent could be abused. Same holds true for a far right wing DAs. I guess we will just have to wait and see.

I'm with you. This sets a very slippery precedent. Someone will try to keep pushing the envelope here.

 

[Marocain Poke]

The only reason this woman was charged was because she bought her son a firearm and he then used it to kill 4 people? If she hadn't purchased the firearm she would not have been charged?

Honestly I don't believe so. The Sandy Hook shooter's mother also provided guns to her insane kid. I think she locked them away but he knew the combination anyway, used it, and blew her away. She got the ultimate sentence for her stupidity. The Crumbley's are quite fortunate they didn't pay the same price.

 

[2012Bearcat]

Honestly I don't believe so. The Sandy Hook shooter's mother also provided guns to her insane kid. I think she locked them away but he knew the combination anyway, used it, and blew her away. She got the ultimate sentence for her stupidity. The Crumbley's are quite fortunate they didn't pay the same price.

If it wasn't for buying the firearm why was she convicted? Being a negligent parent? Who determines what is considered negligent parenting?

 

[ClintonDavidScott]

If it wasn't for buying the firearm why was she convicted? Being a negligent parent? Who determines what is considered negligent parenting?

Maybe she was convicted because she fled to another state and concocted different stories to the police?



carry on

 

[Marocain Poke]

If it wasn't for buying the firearm why was she convicted? Being a negligent parent? Who determines what is considered negligent parenting?

The degree to which her and Mr. Crumbley could have prevented the attack. Apparently the jury felt that they could have 100% have prevented it based on things they did, didn't do, and should have done.

By the same token, the guidance counselor should have absolutely sent the kid home or at the very least have searched his backpack. Remember, it's alleged, but not proven, the parents knew the gun was in his pack.

 

[2012Bearcat]

The degree to which her and Mr. Crumbley could have prevented the attack. Apparently the jury felt that they could have 100% have prevented it based on things they did, didn't do, and should have done.

By the same token, the guidance counselor should have absolutely sent the kid home or at the very least have searched his backpack. Remember, it's alleged, but not proven, the parents knew the gun was in his pack.

If it wasn't proven they knew the kid had a gun in his backpack how did the jury justify the conviction?
I don't know much about this case as I didn't follow it but from what I've seen it looks to me like the jury convicted her on feelings, not the law. That's scary.

 

[LAY THE WOODY]

I'm a proud dad of an electrical engineer. I am so blessed.