Ethan Crumbley’s Mother Found Guilty of Involuntary Manslaughter

[BehindBlueI's]

So to be clear, we're *against* the idea that a parent:

Refuses to provide mental health for a child who's complaining of hallucinations and demons tormenting him.
Then provides a hallucinating person a handgun.
Then continues to neglect the child.
Then the child kills others.

Has some legal responsibility here?

That's somehow the a betrayal by the government or slut shaming. It's child abuse and it's negligently allowing someone in your care and custody to become dangerous to himself and others *as a child*.

[Joe in PNG]

Someone’s kid gets into the liquor cabinet and then has a DUI accident with fatalities, the parents are now looking at jail time.

Crumbley’s going to be a huge precedent.

My understanding from a quick look at the oh so reliable internet- and INAL- is that in some states, if the kid gets into a DUI, the parents are liable. In some states, if the parent gave the kid the booze, then there's the possibility of jail.

The concept that a parent is liable for their child's actions is from ancient. There's a reason for the definition of minors in the laws.

[0ddl0t]

So to be clear, we're *against* the idea that a parent:

Refuses to provide mental health for a child who's complaining of hallucinations and demons tormenting him.
Then provides a hallucinating person a handgun.
Then continues to neglect the child.
Then the child kills others.

Has some legal responsibility here?

That's somehow the a betrayal by the government or slut shaming. It's child abuse and it's negligently allowing someone in your care and custody to become dangerous to himself and others *as a child*.

You can make a good argument for child neglect, but charging the parent who didn't buy the gun with manslaughter largely because she didn't fit society's idea of a devoted mother seems like a bridge too far. FWIW, my reading is that the son's "complaining of hallucinations" were text messages sent while he was home alone complaining that he thought the house was haunted.

Maybe the next jury will convict the father too (who not only bought the gun, but was also called into the school that day), but this trial sure seemed to focus on how the mom was a slut too wrapped up in her own life to see her kid's warning signs. How many workaholic fathers miss warning signs?

[Lon]

For the lawyers on the board (especially MI lawyers) - will this stand through an appeal?

Ohio law doesn’t follow the Model Penal Code (which I think MI law is based on), so I’m not informed enough to have an opinion one way or the other.

[octagon]

A decent synopsis for those that didn't follow the trial much.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68223118

The important parts are buying the gun and leaving access to it to a minor who has clearly indicated he has mental issues to parents. Would any responsible gun owner leave a gun available to small children, officially diagnosed person with suicidal or homicidal ideation or with compromised mental capacity to reality? If said gun owner did by accident or did not have any reason to believe such factors existed I think society wouldn't hold them to such a standard. However if given multiple opportunities to recognize a problem and address it but they continue to deny or ignore the issue there is responsibility present. I still believe civil case is the more appropriate method but a jury saw otherwise who heard all the testimony first hand.

[BWT]

So to be clear, we're *against* the idea that a parent:

Refuses to provide mental health for a child who's complaining of hallucinations and demons tormenting him.
Then provides a hallucinating person a handgun.
Then continues to neglect the child.
Then the child kills others.

Has some legal responsibility here?

That's somehow the a betrayal by the government or slut shaming. It's child abuse and it's negligently allowing someone in your care and custody to become dangerous to himself and others *as a child*.

I read this with concern as well.

It’s not that I condone and wouldn’t hold the parents responsible morally for this. My concern is and you may disagree is that we are starting to hold people, businesses, etc. other than the people that have perpetrated the crime responsible. I can’t say I don’t read this entire story without feeling an incredible sadness for this boy and the people he killed.

But, anti-gun activists are trying to sue manufacturers and the state of NY is trying to destroy/dissolve the NRA. So, I can honestly see some validity in the concern of “how far can the blame be spread” and its implications.We are fighting for our rights against a group of people that ideologically condemn any form of private firearm ownership and they are presently completely without regard for the rule of law. See California’s current situation as an example regarding ammo ban, magazine ban, and firearm ban being punted back and forth between the courts and dissenting opinions.

With that presently in mind just this week - I too share concern for what the ATF may even try to do with this. But it is what it is.

[RevolverRob]

So to be clear, we're *against* the idea that a parent:

Refuses to provide mental health for a child who's complaining of hallucinations and demons tormenting him.
Then provides a hallucinating person a handgun.
Then continues to neglect the child.
Then the child kills others.

Has some legal responsibility here?

That's somehow the a betrayal by the government or slut shaming. It's child abuse and it's negligently allowing someone in your care and custody to become dangerous to himself and others *as a child*.

No - we're not - I am in agreement with you here. And for the jury verdict. The body of psychological literature and studies is absolutely overwhelming supports that neglectful and/or abusive parents/guardians are a primary casual factor in the formation of psychopathic and sociopathic criminals. Holding parents/guardians accountable for the heinous actions of the minors under their care is a perfectly reasonable thing to do.

For all the blustery talk of self-responsibility - we seem to have forgotten that raising kids is a personal responsibility.

[BWT]

No - we're not - I am in agreement with you here. And for the jury verdict. The body of psychological literature and studies is absolutely overwhelming supports that neglectful and/or abusive parents/guardians are a primary casual factor in the formation of psychopathic and sociopathic criminals. Holding parents/guardians accountable for the heinous actions of the minors under their care is a perfectly reasonable thing to do.

For all the blustery talk of self-responsibility - we seem to have forgotten that raising kids is a personal responsibility.

I don’t believe it’s too morally relativistic to say “we may see some really bad legal precedent” from this. I can both condemn the parents and the potential case law. I deleted my personal anecdotes about responsibility because this story isn’t about me. I’m just stating there’s concern about how this will be misused that I think is valid.

I think in this specific case I could be on board with prosecuting the parents. However, I guarantee this is going to get ridiculous with precedent. I hope I’m wrong, but we’ll find out.

[UncleGabby]

Is anyone at the school being held accountable? They were aware of the problems also. At a minimum they could have checked the kid’s bag.

[DC_P]

The concept that a parent is liable for their child's actions is from ancient. There's a reason for the definition of minors in the laws.

Exactly. If you are going to have kids, they are your responsibility until they are 18