Jennifer Crumbley verdict thread (Michigan school shooter mother)

[bolverk 29660]

Ten-year minimum sentence for each parent.

Quote

 

https://apnews.com/article/james-crumbley-jennifer-crumbley-oxford-school-shooting-e5888f615c76c3b26153c34dc36d5436

“These convictions are not about poor parenting,” Judge Cheryl Matthews said. “These convictions confirm repeated acts, or lack of acts, that could have halted an oncoming runaway train.

“About repeatedly ignoring things that would make a reasonable person feel the hair on the back of their neck stand up,” the judge said. “Opportunity knocked over and over again — louder and louder — and was ignored. No one answered.”

Defense attorneys asked that the Crumbleys be spared a prison term, noting they have already served nearly 2 1/2 years in jail after failing to meet a $500,000 bond after their arrest.

The Crumbleys will be eligible for parole after serving 10 years in custody and will get credit for the jail time. If parole is denied, they can’t be held longer than 15 years.

Before sentencing, family members of the slain students asked the judge for a 10-year term, condemning the parents as failures whose selfishness led to four deaths and a community tragedy.

“The blood of our children is on your hands, too,” said Craig Shilling, wearing a hoodie with the image of son Justin Shilling on his chest.

Nicole Beausoleil, the mother of Madisyn Baldwin, recalled simple things she enjoyed doing for her daughter, such as scheduling an oil change for her car or helping choose senior year classes.

“While you were purchasing a gun for your son and leaving it unlocked, I was helping her finish her college essays,” Beausoleil told the Crumbleys.

 

 

[HouTex 1866]

Ten years seems a little light to me. 

[Goredho 17399]

On 2/6/2024 at 1:05 PM, Frank Drebin said:

Strictly liable criminally?

What if they get drunk and kill someone driving your car?  Same rule since you handed them the keys?

I'm late to this, but if the kid was obviously drunk and impaired when a parent gave them the keys -- like this kid was obviously mentally disturbed and with no business owning or operating a gun -- then yes.  Same rule since you handed the keys to someone who had no business operating a car.  It's pretty fucking common sensical.

[Frank Drebin 5663]

Just now, Goredho said:

I'm late to this, but if the kid was obviously drunk and impaired when a parent gave them the keys -- like this kid was obviously mentally disturbed and with no business owning or operating a gun -- then yes.  Same rule since you handed the keys to someone who had no business operating a car.  It's pretty fucking common sensical.

That would not be strict liability.

[Goredho 17399]

1 minute ago, Frank Drebin said:

That would not be strict liability.

Then your original question about strict liability was invalid, because the parents didn't just give a kid a gun, they gave a gun to a kid who was glaringly at risk of harming himself and others.

[Smax 3800]

1 hour ago, HouTex said:

Ten years seems a little light to me. 

 

 

agree, should have been life

[Frank Drebin 5663]

26 minutes ago, Goredho said:

Then your original question about strict liability was invalid, because the parents didn't just give a kid a gun, they gave a gun to a kid who was glaringly at risk of harming himself and others.

No.  Here was the original exchange:

  On 2/6/2024 at 1:56 PM, NorthLoop said:

You buy your kid a gun and he uses that gun to kill people - you should be prosecuted. Don't like it? Don't buy your kid a gun. 

So strict liability?

 

In other words, I questioned whether there should be strict liability in response to someone who says you should be prosecuted if you buy your kid a gun and they turn around and kill someone with it.  It was about that scenario -- literally just giving a kid access to a gun and nothing else.

['stache 21802]

On 2/6/2024 at 4:15 PM, 'stache said:

Strict liability has nothing to do with this case, so I guess we're "just asking questions"?

I thought this sounded familiar, so I'll just quote myself here, still "asking questions" I see.

[Frank Drebin 5663]

6 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I thought this sounded familiar, so I'll just quote myself here, still "asking questions" I see.

No.  I was not just asking questions.  I was responding to someone who was proposing a parent should automatically go to jail in the event their kid uses a gun they provided to hurt someone.

That is called responding to someone else's hot take.  Not "just asking questions". 

[Goredho 17399]

 

Oh, sorry, I thought this was a discussion about Jennifer Crumbley's specific case.

Wait...

[Baboontyme 2810]

The fact that this bitch sat up there today and said that they were good parents and that this could happen to anybody alone should be enough to throw away the key. She does not get it.