Legal experts on James Crumbley verdict: 'That is a strong message to parents'

The jury that returned with a guilty verdict Thursday night in the case against James Crumbley, the father of the Oxford shooter, saw a more dignified trial than that of his wife, who was found guilty by a separate jury, said one legal expert, but the message in both was the same: parental responsibility.

Birmingham criminal defense attorney Wade Fink, who paid attention to both Jennifer and James Crumbley's trials, said the jury's finding Thursday was clear.

“That is a strong message to parents nationwide about their duties as parents,” Fink said in a text message. “There are very much reasonable opinions on both sides of this issue — of whether a parent can be held criminally responsible for their child’s heinous conduct — but the fact is we live in a society where we rely on each other to make sure our children are safe.

“And when you are just so brazenly irresponsible and selfish in your own life, it affects others."

Still, Fink warned that criminalizing bad parental behavior could be troublesome.

"At the same time, hopefully prosecutors, though, will be very discriminate when they criminalize bad parents because it’s a slippery slope," he said.

Former U.S. Attorney Matthew Schneider, a Honigman law firm partner, saw a "very strong and powerful presentation by the prosecutors in this case, and that certainly showed in Crumbley’s reaction."

“I watched the defendant closely as the verdict was read, and he did not appear surprised," Schneider said. "He didn’t even flinch."

The verdict for James Crumbley in Oakland County Circuit Court came five weeks after his wife, Jennifer Crumbley, was found guilty by a separate jury Feb. 6, capping an emotional 11-day trial. She was found guilty of the same charges: four counts of involuntary manslaughter.

"I think James Crumbley's trial was a little bit more about what is the responsibility of the parent who controls access to the firearm," said University of Michigan law professor Eve Brensike Primus. "Not surprisingly, I think this verdict sends a similar message to the many law changes that we're seeing around the country, requiring safe storage of weapons in light of the increase in mass shootings and deaths related to firearms violence in the country."

Still, Primus said she's unsure the convictions will "open the floodgates to prosecutions like these," because the Crumbley's case was "particularly unique."

"But I do think the fact that they got a conviction for both Jennifer and James demonstrates that it's not that one or the other was a fluke," Primus said. "There was something about the combination of the facts that were portrayed with respect to how the Crumbleys behaved with Ethan that led to different juries unanimously to conclude that this rose to the level of a criminal homicide violation for the parents."

The New York-based nonprofit Everytown for Gun Safety said parents and gun owners have a responsibility to prevent children from accessing deadly weapons, which was at the crux of the prosecution's case against both Crumbleys.

“Once again, today’s guilty verdict of James Crumbley further underscores this critical duty of responsible gun ownership,” said Nick Suplina, senior vice president for law and policy, at Everytown for Gun Safety in a statement.

“The deadly shooting at Oxford High School in 2021 should have been prevented had Jennifer and James Crumbley taken basic precautions, like securely storing firearms in the home, to prevent their 15-year-old son from bringing a gun to school and killing four children and wounding seven others.” 

Ekow Yankah, Thomas M. Cooley Professor of Law at the University of Michigan, described the case as "uniquely horrific" and said the verdict might be that parents take plea deals in similar cases in the future.

"Anytime you get 12 people in a box, you could get different ruling, Yankah said. "If they would have gotten a different ruling on it, what was originally controversial or, you know, (an) innovative theory of liability — they could have made the prosecution look lucky instead of seeking justice. On the other hand, and I'm sure I've said this before, lawyers are trained to argue by precedent."

The Crumbleys were charged in connection with the deaths of Hana St. Juliana, Madisyn Baldwin, Tate Myre and Justin Shilling in a first-of-its kind prosecution of holding parents responsible for children who commit mass murder. They face up to 15 years in prison.

His son, Ethan Crumbley, was convicted and sentenced to life without parole after he marched through the school Nov. 30, 2021, with a 9mm SIG Sauer handgun his dad had bought for him.

Some people during both trials, including prosecutors, who honed in on what they called the neglect of Ethan as he crumbled mentally, saw missed opportunities for intervention to stop the carnage at the school, and before, to find help for Ethan. Crumbley's writings spelled out appeals to his parents for help with his depression.

Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard said after the verdict that were many opportunities by James and Jennifer Crumbley when they could have changed the course of events.

“If you’re very first thought when you hear about an active shooter at your child’s school isn’t, ‘Is he OK?’ but to worry if your son is the shooter or to rush home to find out if the gun you irresponsibly left unsecure is still there, then you should’ve done something in advance."