Ethan Crumbley’s Mother Found Guilty of Involuntary Manslaughter

[Mas]

I don't, Cory, but we have enough lawyers here at P-F to staff a good size law firm. Perhaps they can check the law and caselaw in Michigan in that respect, especially from the mandated reporter angle.

[JCL]

Admittedly, I haven't read a damn thing about this. One particular instance of parents being held liable doesnt concern me, the implications do. Parents, gun manufacturers, FFLs, and so on are not responsible for the acts of an individual. Children are however an obvious gray area, and this time may be obviously the parents at fault.

In many places school systems are considered "in loco parentis" with all the authority and responsibility of a parent. Should the school system be liable because they were "in loco parentis" when it occurred?

Food for thought.

This kid had to fall through a lot of cracks to be able to do what he did, but providing a clearly disturbed minor with access to a firearm is a level of negligence bordering on recklessness. I tend to think that this would have been better handled as a civil matter, but I'm fine with a criminal conviction if the appeals process determines that the law was properly applied.

[BehindBlueI's]

Of course not. As I just posted above, I will have to treat my own children differently.

This kid in Michigan and his parents were clearly a mess, but when “looking at ammo websites” is part of the reasoning, I get concerned. Many of us do that often.

That's how totality of the circumstances work. We all swerve in our lane sometimes but we aren't all drunk driving. That doesn't mean swerving in a lane isn't a valid step toward suspecting DUI. It's just not proof in and of itself, but you don't have to then ignore it.

Defense attorneys take the approach you just did. They try to isolate a given piece of evidence, argue that there's plenty of innocent explanations for it when you look at it in a vacuum, and then repeat over and over. Their hope is you do look at each thing in a vacuum and write it off. The prosecutor's job is to remind you it didn't happen in a vacuum, to look at the entire body of evidence, and then see if all those little things add up to something bigger.

[WobblyPossum]

Isn’t one of the general standards for involuntary manslaughter (obviously different jurisdictions have their own nuances) that you did something that wasn’t necessarily unlawful but you did it in a negligent or reckless manner and, while you didn’t mean for anyone to die, someone died? From what I’ve seen described here, as I haven’t followed the case myself, it sounds like the parents’ actions meet that definition. They ignored their son’s violent ideations and other mental health issues and allowed him easy access to their firearms. In and of themselves those aren’t unlawful actions but, when taken in the totality of the circumstances here, sure seem reckless and negligent to me. Those actions played a role in the death of innocent people.

[UNK]

So the parents of all these run amuck kids are now liable. Awesome. Bring some accountability to the table.

[JHC]

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*.

Weird eh? Give her hard time. A lot of it.

[RoyGBiv]

https://www.arthursido.com/2024/02/i...ed-evenly.html

There's a lot of 3rd rail commentary in there, but one of the comments poses an interesting question.....

What about progressive DA's releasing recidivist criminals without bail?
A step further.... What about parole boards?

[BehindBlueI's]

There's a lot of 3rd rail commentary in there, but one of the comments poses an interesting question.....

What about progressive DA's releasing recidivist criminals without bail?
A step further.... What about parole boards?

Seems irrelevant giving the legal and moral differences between adults and children, as well as the obvious and distinct difference between a gov't agency and a parental relationship.

I also rather doubt parole boards are giving out guns to parolees, denying them medical care, etc. Parolees are, quite the opposite, given job training, half way houses, the ongoing threat of parole/probation visits in an attempt to limit their access to firearms, etc.

[BehindBlueI's]

So the parents of all these run amuck kids are now liable. Awesome. Bring some accountability to the table.

I don't think it's that broad a ruling or precedent. It's not enough to just have a shithead kid doing shithead things.

[BWT]

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.

That’s a fair point of view with context shared I’m not familiar with as far as the first paragraph.

In the second paragraph I had some anecdotes about “tribalistic” mentalities in one of my replies. But, I got a few sentences in and was like “Is this relevant?”. I can understand and honestly am partially persuaded. My gut still is fearful of how this will be weaponized, but I’m hopeful. I’m hopeful you’re right and I wish you would be right. I have doubts, but we’ll see.

I’m glad your here BehindBlueI’s - you add a lot and I appreciate it.

Have a great evening.