Ethan Crumbley’s Mother Found Guilty of Involuntary Manslaughter

[Palmguy]

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*.

Reality was a bit more nuanced than the above in this case from what I saw of the trial.

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.

No.

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.

And yet Ethan was tried and convicted as an adult, and sentenced to life in prison without parole at least in part based on his statement that this is nobody’s fault but his own. Is there any disconnect here?

[MickAK]

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*.

It's rarely the initial situation that causes concern but the potential abuses that the precedent lays the path for in the future.

This was a lot of people's concern about red flag laws (Well, most people were just getting outraged about whatever their favorite outrage outlet told them to, but that would be the legitimate concern). You and some other LEO on the forum did a good job of explaining how those laws were implemented and the alternatives and history.

This seems a lot less clear. I don't give a shit about 'slut-shaming', but there do seem to potentially be legitimate concerns. Refusing to provide mental health treatment means different things in different places.

[RoyGBiv]

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.

It's the jail time part that's troubling.... Kids make mistakes... sometimes deadly ones. I can think of 3 incidents from my teen years where a kid died doing something stupid, in one case he killed a friend accidentally, doing stupid shit with a car. Just a few years ago, our neighbors kid DUI'd into a tree, killing his passenger. The parents lost their home, savings and business. Should they also have gone to jail?

Slippery slope indeed.

[JohnO]

There is an underlying scent of gun control advocacy in this prosecution. This case could certainly persuade people to be reluctant to bring a gun into a home with children.

I have 4 kids all adults now. When they were old enough I trained them in firearm safety and how to shoot. They never had access to any firearm without my supervision. Only when my youngest son returned from Army OSUT/Airborne/Ranger and purchased his own pistol did I give him access to my safe. Prior to that only his older brother who lives on the other side of the country had the combination in case something happens to me. My wife and two daughters don't have access.

[Stephanie B]

And yet Ethan was tried and convicted as an adult, and sentenced to life in prison without parole at least in part based on his statement that this is nobody’s fault but his own. Is there any disconnect here?

Of course there is. He was fifteen years old. A kid that age can't sign a contract, get married, drive a car, enlist in the Army, rent an apartment, buy a beer, vote or do any of the other things that come with being an adult. A fifteen year old kid can't petition for emancipation.

The only thing I know of that a fifteen year old kid can legally do as an adult is commit crimes. Which reads to me as society's consensus is that a fifteen year old is too immature to make most decisions, but he or she damn well should know the difference between right and wrong.

[45dotACP]

When you have a child, you give up the right to certain levels of stupidity or selfishness that you can have as a single or married couple. Neglect your relationships with your family and don't keep your house in order and you will suffer for it.

As a parent, you give up the right to have unsecured guns in the house. You give up the right to just leave your kid in school when they call you and tell you they're worried he may commit suicide and he's got ultraviolent drawings that he's turning in for assignments or was caught searching shooting videos. You don't get to just say "well, I can't leave work" when it's clear that you make time for side pieces and horses and whatever the fuck else....

Slut shaming be damned, this was just pure old selfishness and not being able to see beyond one's own existence.

Denial is not just a river in Egypt...those things should be taken as serious as a heart attack, but I fear this generation of parents is unprepared for one very honest and serious realization:

You may be bouncing that kid on your knees hoping he becomes the next Albert Einstein or Michael Jordan, but you had best start to worry about the chances that your kid could become the next Adolf Hitler.

With the level of self centeredness I see in society more and more....people had best start to worry. At least worry that you're not letting your kids become monsters. If you cannot pull yourself away from your own desires and needs and drives and tendencies to help your kid be the best they can be....at least find a way to keep them from being the worst.

That's about all I can say about this.

[BillSWPA]

These parents were a disaster and clearly contributed to the problem. I do not have a problem with this particular conviction. However, I agree with the concerns about the precedent creeping into less severe situations. I just hope parents who are not a mess but make a mistake in the level of trust they place in their children are not in the same mess.

I had full access to my Dad’s guns and ammo when I was 13. I never misused it. Does that make him a bad parent? Perhaps showing me the level of trust he placed in me helped motivate me to be sure I was worthy of it.

There are teenagers who are more trustworthy than some adults, and it is a shame the law does not recognize that fact.

My almost 17 year old daughter is a few months away from being in solo control of a 4,000 pound missile that carries passengers and travels 70 m.p.h., but in my state I cannot give her access to a handgun until she is 18. She has been driving for less than 6 months but shooting since she was 10. If I am going to be held responsible for her then I want to be the one determining how much trust she deserves.

[BehindBlueI's]

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 think it's not as far reaching as you think. Parent/child relationship is not the same legally, morally, or socially as shopkeeper/customer or what-have-you. The notion of 'accessory to' a crime is certainly not a modern invention and the whole concept of negligence means you don't have to be the one who pulled the trigger. How long have we had laws that held bar tenders partially responsible if they overserved someone then made no effort to stop them from driving? Lesser offense and more tenuous relationship, but same concept. Anyone with a teaspoon of common sense would know you've created a dangerous situation, even if you're not the one behind the wheel, by helping someone mentally impair themselves then drive.


If manslaughter is the right charge or not, I don't know, I'm not up on MI law and don't care to research it. My point is simply let's look at this as it is without reverting to a tribalistic "rally around the gun owner/that could be me" reaction or just on the headlines. This isn't every gun owner or even every thug kid's parent. I think it's a pretty narrowly defined set of circumstances. Neglect causing death of a dependent is pretty universally a crime, I have no moral qualm with neglect resulting in dependent killing others holding legal weight as well.

[BehindBlueI's]

I had full access to my Dad’s guns and ammo when I was 13. I never misused it. Does that make him a bad parent? Perhaps showing me the level of trust he placed in me helped motivate me to be sure I was worthy of it.

Were you showing signs of mental illness?

If you had a brother who was showing signs of being suicidal and dad gave you both a gun, would you think that both gifts were equal ethically?

[45dotACP]

These parents were a disaster and clearly contributed to the problem. I do not have a problem with this particular conviction. However, I agree with the concerns about the precedent creeping into less severe situations. I just hope parents who are not a mess but make a mistake in the level of trust they place in their children are not in the same mess.

I had full access to my Dad’s guns and ammo when I was 13. I never misused it. Does that make him a bad parent? Perhaps showing me the level of trust he placed in me helped motivate me to be sure I was worthy of it.

There are teenagers who are more trustworthy than some adults, and it is a shame the law does not recognize that fact.

My almost 17 year old daughter is a few months away from being in solo control of a 4,000 pound missile that carries passengers and travels 70 m.p.h., but in my state I cannot give her access to a handgun until she is 18. She has been driving for less than 6 months but shooting since she was 10. If I am going to be held responsible for her then I want to be the one determining how much trust she deserves.

I would bet money on the reality that both you and your father care very much about their children.

The public seems to be of two minds about this. One is "kids do stupid shit sometimes." and the other is "some kids are more mature than adults." and both of those can be true.

Both are a reflection on the effectiveness of the parents. I know it's not popular to say that in society now...but it is true.

It sounds like these "parents" were in their own universe when they were told by the school that their kid was showing disturbing tendencies. Who gets that kind of call from school and does not immediately leave work and find their kid to try to get to the bottom of what's going on?

Access to guns isn't my concern here. Lots of kids have access to guns. I had access to guns in high school and like yourself, it never ONCE occured to me that I should shoot my classmates.

The concern is a negligence that is born from being too focused on oneself.

As for precedent being set? I have no clue. I understand that a precedent being set doesn't mean it must always be adhered to no? No doubt so many convictions have happened that a load of precedents have been set that are completely idiotic. Should we allow these two to be free of the consequences of their terrible parenting just because of our fear?

The father of the kid who shot up a July 4th parade in Highland Park, IL was also charged with misdemeanor charges for sponsoring his son's FOID card while being fully aware of his suicidal and homicidal tendencies and expressed desire to carry out a school shooting.

These aren't the same as some kid driving under the influence and killing a pedestrian accidentally.

Should the parents of someone known to be homicidal be free of the consequences of facilitating that person's legal access to firearms?