Law&Crime Sidebar - Mom of Oxford Shooter Guilty of Disturbing Deaths at Son’s Hands — Full Trial Recap

Episode Date: February 8, 2024

Jennifer Crumbley was just found guilty on four counts of involuntary manslaughter by a Michigan jury. Her son, Ethan Crumbley, was responsible for the 2021 Oxford High School shooting, which left four students dead and others injured. Jennifer was responsible for buying the deadly weapon her son used in the horrific event and failing to prevent the tragedy. The trial spanned over nine days and featured testimony from Jennifer, fiery moments between the attorneys, and more. Law&Crime’s Jesse Weber breaks down the full trial. PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:If you’re ever injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can submit a claim in 8 clicks or less without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit: https://www.forthepeople.com/LCSidebarHOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokePodcasting - Sam GoldbergVideo Editing - Michael DeiningerScript Writing & Producing - Savannah WilliamsonGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wonderly Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wonderly Plus in the Wondery app Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. views shadows. Joshua Jackson delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller that will

keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible. I was like, oh my gosh, he's a school shooter's going to kill himself because in my mind that's what school shooters have done. They've killed themselves after. So I yelled in my talk to text. Ethan don't do it because I thought he was going to kill himself. It was an unprecedented trial with a groundbreaking verdict. Jennifer Crumbly, the first parent in American history to be criminally charged for a mass school shooting committed by their child. This is a full recap of the trial from beginning to end.

Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse Weber. We have covered so many high-profile and important trials here on Sidebar and Law and Crime. That's a given. But I will tell you, when you think about the impact, the repercussions, what the verdict to mean in a trial, the Jennifer Crumbly case could really result in significant changes in our society. And I say that because Crumbly is the first parent in American history to be charged for a mass

school shooting that their child committed. Let me rephrase that. Her and her husband charged because her husband, James, is set to go to trial next month. And it was ordered that they be tried separately. You'll see why. And each were charged with multiple involuntary manslaughter counts after their son opened fire inside of Oxford High School in Michigan on November 30th, 2021, killing four students and injuring others. Now, the shooter himself entered a guilty plea, set to serve a life sentence. But here was the idea. Here's the concept. The prosecution contended that the crumblies are responsible for what their son did because they

purchased him the gun that he used in the attacks only days before they ignored warning signs about their son's mental health, mental well-being. And when we say a charge of involuntary manslaughter, we are talking about a prison term of up to 15 years. Jennifer Crumbly faced four involuntary manslaughter charges for each of the victims. So let's do a full trial recap. Now, we're not going to be covering every witness that testified in everything they said, but what we are going to do is giving you the big points, okay? Now, if, course, we have to start with the opening statements, right? Each side laying out what to expect at this trial. By the way, openings and later on closing arguments, they're not evidence,

but they're a guide for the jury. Here we go. First up, the prosecution, and here is them laying out the actual law. So how can she be held responsible when her son pulled the trigger? And the answer is, she's not charged with murder. She's charged with involuntary manslaughter. You see, murder is, it's an intentional killing. Involuntary manslaughter, by definition, is unintentional. It's rooted in negligence. You've heard Judge Matthews tell you that every crime is made up with something called elements. This is no exception.

You're going to learn that involuntary manslaughter is committed when someone's acts or their failures to act or their failures to perform their legal duty were grossly negligent. and that gross negligence was a cause of death. A cause of death, not the cause of death. And that's very important. Because as you've heard and you'll hear it again and again in this trial, that in a case such as this, when somebody else was a cause of death, the person who was grossly negligent can and still will be held responsible

that is if the person who pulled the trigger, if the shooter in this case, his act was reasonably foreseeable to the defendant to the defendant specific to her not to everybody else in the world not to a stranger not to a teacher but to his mother one of the two people in the world who raised him who lived with him for 15 years one of the two people in the world who had all the the information necessary to put that drawing into context. So what's gross negligence? You will learn that it is a willful disregard of danger. In other words, this shooting was foreseeable.

And there are two theories here presented by the prosecution. One is that Crumbly was grossly negligent in how she stored the gun and the ammunition, giving her son easy access to this. And number two is that she failed in her legal duty to control her son. Now, in the opening statement, Prosecutor Marquise talks about one of the most important events in this case when Jennifer and James Crumbly were called to the school on the day of the shooting just hours before their son opened fire

when the school alerted them to these disturbing drawings from the shooter, drawings of the gun that they purchased for him and that he would eventually use in the shooting, along with an illustration of blood, and the words, help me, my life is useless, the world is dead, and blood everywhere. The two people in the world with all of the information, all of the background, to put this drawing into context

with James and Jennifer Cromwell. And you will learn that in that meeting, they didn't share any of it. They didn't say anything about the fact that that firearm was identical to the six hour nine millimeter, identical. They didn't mention how that going was stored. They didn't mention anything about his increased mental distress. You'll

learn that after the meeting when they left, they didn't embrace him. They didn't stop by the house to look for the gun. You'll learn never once did they ask their son, where's the gun? They did nothing. They didn't do any number of tragically small and easy things that would have prevented all of this from happening. So not only did they not tell the school about the gun they purchased for him, which is an important fact. You know what else they didn't do?

They didn't take him out of school that day. Another important, although you will see disputed fact. We're going to get into that. Okay. So that was a portion of the prosecution's opening statement. Here's the defense attorney Shannon Smith. And she started in a rather unique and interesting way. band-aids don't stop bullet holes and that's what this case is about it's about the prosecution

attempting to put a band-aid on problems that can't be fixed with a band-aid those are Taylor Swift lyrics by the way if you're not familiar and she said that she had been listening to Taylor Swift's song the idea here is that the state needs a scapegoat and they're trying to hold Jennifer accountable for what her son did but the defense not only disputed the evidence, but they put the blame on the school and James Crumbly. Much of the evidence in this trial is also going to center around James Crumbly, who is not on trial in this case. He has a separate trial, as Mr. Keyes told you. You're going to hear evidence that James Crumbly and Ethan Crumbley liked guns.

They had three guns, two guns that were purchased earlier in 2021, and a gun that was purchased at a Black Friday sale the day after Thanksgiving in 2021. James was responsible for storing the guns, and to be quite frank, Jennifer Crumbly didn't know anything about guns. You will hear that the school never advised Mrs. Crumbly of problematic issues that if she had heard about, she would have jumped right on top of it. Despite the fact, the evidence will show that Mrs. Crumbley is on power schools managing missing assignments by her son in his grades. The school never told her about times the shooter was trying to sleep in class, about a test he had. failed about the shooter being called to the office she was never informed you will hear testimony she was never informed that the shooter wrote an autobiographical get to know you poster where he says he feels terrible and his family's a mistake the school never notified mrs crumbly of

this you will hear testimony that the school never notified mrs crumbly that that the shooter was having a quote rough time when he spoke to the school counselor. You will hear testimony that the school never notified Ms. Crumley that previous work found in the shooter's files showed that it leaned a little bit towards the violence side. At the end of the day, we ask that you pay attention to to the evidence that Mrs. Crumbley knew. And quite frankly, when you evaluate that evidence and know what she knew and what she didn't know

and learn the context behind the slivers of evidence this prosecution's presenting, you will see that this was absolutely not foreseeable. Big theme here, she did not know what the school knew. She did not know what her son was feeling. She didn't know what he was wrong. writing in his journal. She didn't know what he was texting his friend. That's a big theme from the defense. But okay, moving forward. Before the prosecution can even prove

that Jennifer Crumbly is criminally responsible for the shooting, they have to prove a shooting took place. That's in and of itself, one of the essential elements. And we heard some very compelling witnesses from that tragic day explain in harrowing detail what they saw and heard. And I see someone dressed in dark, oversized clothing. And you're looking through that glass paint next to your door. Okay. They have the mask on, a hat, glasses, and a hood. And I lock eyes with them.

Had you ever seen that person with the hood? I had not, no. And then instantly I noticed I see some movement. And so I looked down and I realized he's raising a gun to me. I saw the gun and I moved. Which way did you move? I moved away from the last partition away from the door toward back into the room. Okay.

You just described. You saw something in your peripheral vision. You looked up. You locked eyes. I locked eyes. He didn't hesitate. Very tough. Very tough.

And in fact, the attorneys got into a fight about this. The prosecution took issue with defense counsel becoming visibly emotional during this testimony. They said they thought they were instructed to keep emotions in check and not try to influence the jury. In the end, the judge acknowledged that this is a very difficult case, understood the difficult nature of this subject matter. They took a break and they ended up coming back to court. I think they took an early lunch break that day, too. Now, one of the key parts of the prosecution of Jennifer Crumbly was the text messages. Like, for instance, there were messages from the shooter to his mom where he thought the house was haunted.

Then says, I cleaned until the clothes started flying off the shelf. And then what? This stuff only happens when I'm home alone. It's March 20, 2012, 21 at 2.34 p.m. Correct. And this is the same date and time? Yes, it is. And what are you right?

I picked the clothes back up, though. Okay. It's March 20th at 234? Correct. And when was the next response? that by Jennifer was on the 22nd of March at 8.17 p.m. The more the prosecution can show that the shooter had hallucinations, that he wasn't quite right, and was seemingly being ignored by his family, the better it is for their case.

I mean, she doesn't even respond back to her son in a timely fashion because prosecution will say she was preoccupied with her own stuff, not addressing his mental health issues. But the text got worse. For instance, listen to what she wrote her son after the school, found out he was researching ammunition the day before the shooting. So November 29th at 1153 a.m. This is a few minutes after she listened in the voicemail. What did she write to her son? She says, seriously, two question marks, looking at bullets in school, question mark, question mark, question mark. And then what are you right?

Completely harmless. Teachers just have no privacy. They said, I'm all good. She responds with LOL, I'm period, not mad. You're not, you have to learn, not period, two period, get caught, period. That's a bad one. That's a bad one. You have to learn not to get caught. Prosecutors arguing that this is what she writes to her troubled son, looking up bullets, doesn't care, almost endorsing his behavior.

Now, she will later say that this was kind of an inside thing between them, that she was kind of a troublemaker herself. But when the shooting happened, talking about text messages, look what she texted her son and boss. November 30, 2008, 2021, at 118 p.m., did she respond to the message that he sent her at 1242? Yes. What is you right? She said, I love you too.

Then says, but immediately after that, you okay? Then four minutes later, she says, Ethan, don't do it. They said she sent message to her boss, Mr. Smith? Yes, she did. We'll go back to exhibit 126. What did she write him at 123 p.m.? 123, she texts, the gun is gone, and so are the bullets. And then when he responds?

He responds with, I'm praying everything is okay. And Jennifer says, OMG or, oh, my God, Andy, he's going to kill himself. He must be the shooter. Prosecution arguing knowledge. It's all about knowledge. She knew what her son was capable of. She knew what was happening. She wasn't surprised by this.

Now, the defense will say, don't do it. It doesn't mean don't kill people. It means don't kill yourself. And that's an interesting point. We'll talk about a little bit later, too. But let's actually address the testimony of Nicholas Ejack, the former Oxford High School dean of students. And he explained to the jury about that meeting that he had with the Crumblies

the morning of the shooting regarding that drawing I mentioned. And he testified how he told the Crumbly, that they should get the shooter counseling, but he said that they decided not to take their son home, that he would have to walk home and remain alone because they had to go to work, which, by the way, for Jennifer, was problematic because there was testimony from her boss

that indicated if she needed to take time to be with her son, she could have. But again, the idea here is that she was too preoccupied with work. Now, the school thought leaving him alone was not a great idea, so apparently they all agreed that he should, should stay in class. Now remember, the school claims they didn't know about the gun the Crumbly's bought him, that if they knew that, things could have changed. They maybe would have said, you got to take him home. You got it. He can't stay here. But Ejac also testified that he

never checked the shooter's backpack, which contained the gun that he would use in the shooting, said there was no reasonable suspicion to check and that there was no need to discipline him. Listen to Crumbly's attorney question Ejac about this stuff. Not only was he looking up the bullets, but that when she reviewed his previous work that he's completed, it leans towards the violent side, correct? That's what it says, correct? Did you go and ask Ms. Covina to provide you some of the work he completed that appeared violent? I did not do that as it wasn't necessarily.

So it was not necessary for you to specifically speak with Ms. Crumbly in any way about the bullets drawing, or research. It was not necessary. Did you ever talk to Mrs. Crumbly that there was an indication from a teacher that her son had prior work that leaned on the violent side? during the meeting that we had on the 30th. You're saying you discussed... We discussed that during the meeting we had on the 30th. But at that time, you didn't even have the violent-leaning materials, correct? That is correct, yeah.

And you didn't show her any of the examples that you would say would be violent-leaning materials. I didn't have those to show her none. At no point in time, did you believe that Mrs. Crumbly's son posed a threat to the school? He did not pose a threat to the school. That is a big point for the defense. If the school didn't think he was a threat and didn't foresee the shooting happening, how could Jennifer Crumbly? Especially, as Crumbly argues, that the school didn't share a lot of this disturbing information about her son with her.

Now, a big theme for the prosecution was that, that Jennifer Crumbly was ignoring the warning signs, right, regarding her son because she was too busy thinking about herself and she missed something, that she was distracted with her hobbies like horses and her work and her affair. Yeah, she was having an affair with this guy Brian Maloche. He testified too in this trial. And what he did was really helped the prosecution's case to try to show Jennifer knew or should have known her son was a danger. The morning of November the 30th, 2021, do you recall receiving a message from Jennifer Crumman? Yes.

She had to go to a meeting at the school. Jennifer, is she had to go to a meeting at the school? Okay. And what happened? Tell me what happened next in the conversation? It was that something would even. Her son? Yes.

Okay. And he was worried he was going to do something dumb. So you knew that they had got him that handgun by the time that Jennifer messaged you on November the 30th that she was afraid her son was going to do something. Yes. Okay. Now when she sent you that message November 30th, what was your response? I asked where the firearm was. And why did the firearm click in your head at that point? That's with my background and everything. I know that would just be if something was going to

occur um that would be produced just a repairable damage and what was jennifer's response to that that it was in her vehicle okay and what did you think about that uh i said that wasn't a good place it's not it should not be there so he had the good sense to know to worry about the gun jennifer didn't and never did anything about it and then there was what jennifer said to him after the shooting Jennifer Crumbley wrote what at just after midnight on December 1st, 2021. I failed as a parent. I failed miserably. And then what does she say regarding the charges she might be facing? They're saying in the bottom of her manslaughter.

Can you read us, please, what was deluded from Jennifer's phone? We're out of the run again, helicopters, not sure where to message you. Okay, few things here. First, her admitting that she failed as a parent, That plays right into the prosecution's argument that, yes, she realizes this was her fall. Then the prosecutors say she and James fled from authorities when they were apprehended at an art studio in Detroit. The idea here is they ran because they knew they committed a crime. They knew they were in trouble. It's called consciousness of guilt.

The defense suggested that the Crumblies were never on the run from law enforcement. They were never trying to escape justice. They were escaping all the media attention and that they were always going to turn themselves in. And I will just say from a personal point of view, I never believed that this was the biggest issue in the case. It would have been different if there was a murder and you're trying to find out who did it and someone flees the state. Then you could say, oh, that's the killer. Why would that person flee if you did nothing wrong? Here, even if you accept that they ran away, it doesn't really mean that they're guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

It's not about identity. It's not about intent. It doesn't go to the heart of the analysis of whether they acted negligently for the shooting. So for me, I was never sold on that aspect of the case, although the jury accepting that they ran away, doesn't really hurt the prosecution's case. But I want to talk real quick now about the testimony of Detective Timothy Willis from the Oakland County Sheriff's Office, because he read the shooter's journals and listened to these absolutely disturbing writings. But let's remember, no evidence that Jennifer saw this. The shooter writes, I have zero help. as you can see old, for my mental problems,

and it's causing me to shoot up the fucking school. I want help, but my parents don't listen to me, and I can't get any help. My parents won't listen to me about help or therapist. The shooter writes, I want to shoot up the school so badly. Soon, I'm going to buy a 9mm pistol. Shooter writes, I'm about to shoot up the school

and spend the rest of my life in prison. Do you have any evidence to believe? that Mr. Crumbly or Mrs. Crumbly saw the journal. No, I just, if I had evidence of that, they would imagine the charges would be different. If you had evidence, they saw the journal, the charges would be different? Yeah, murder, I would imagine.

So not only are those writings chilling, but if authorities knew the Crumbly saw this and let him commit this shooting, he says that they would have been hit with murder charges. But even if Jennifer never saw the journal, if the jury accepts what the shooter wrote that his parents are ignoring him and not helping him, that all of that, that helps the prosecution's case that they were responsible for what happened. They should have done more.

By the way, I really enjoy doing these trial recaps because I love talking to law and trial strategy. Hey, I went to law school. I'm an attorney. I better love it, right? But that is why I always enjoy talking about Morgan and Morgan, a crowd sponsor here on Sidebar, because it's the largest personal injury law firm in the whole country. You want to talk legal skills and strategy for a second? Morgan and Morgan, they don't settle for low-ball offers from insurance companies.

No, no, no, no. They win a lot of trial. The past couple of months, Morgan and Morgan saw a verdicts of $12 million in Florida, $26 million in Philadelphia, and $6.8 million in New York. Mind you, this is considerably higher than the highest insurance offers for these accidents. And get this, the fee is absolutely free unless you win. They make it super easy and convenient for their clients because from submitting your claim to signing documents to talking to your whole legal team, it's all done on your smartphone. That's it.

They completely have modernized the process. You can get started with your claim and see if you have a case in only a few minutes. So to start your claim now with Morgan and Morgan, go to for the people.com slash LC sidebar or click the link in the description and pinned in the comments. All right, let's get back into this recap of the Jennifer Crumbley trial. We have to talk about one of the most memorable moments because after the prosecution, rested their case. Jennifer Crumbly, the defendant herself, took the stand, and this was her chance to reframe the narrative. First to say, I'm not a neglectful mother, but I was invested and cared about my son. How often would you and James talk about or talk to Ethan?

Well, talk to him every day. Talk about him, probably every day too. In terms of your relationship with your son, how did you? think your relationship was i thought we were pretty close um we would talk we would i mean we did a lot of things together um i trusted him and i felt like i had an open door and he can come to me about anything i mean i felt i felt as a family where we were three of us were really close this is all a way to humanize herself and her relationship with her son after everything that was said about her, showing that this wasn't a dysfunctional family, but a normal, positive family, positive experiences for their son.

She was there for him. She checked on his grade. She tracked his location using an app. She knew what was going on with him, or maybe so she thought. But she also took time to explain herself a bit. Yeah, I could seem cold. I could seem like I cared more about myself after the shooting and what was happening. But to me, it was, I'm analytical.

I go into planning mode when something bad. happened. So she's trying to put context into everything the prosecution put forward. But Jennifer Crumbley had to explain away a lot of things. For instance, the idea that her son was experiencing hallucinations, that he was having a mental health crisis. She said she never thought it was actually a serious problem. She said he was always sarcastic, that she thought he was joking around, like with the idea of the house being haunted. It wasn't anything that was anything serious. It was Ethan just messing around. to the jury. How did Ethan mess around? So he's been convinced our house has been haunted since

2015. It was built in 1920. Around that time frame, him and his friend would go down to the basement and play a Ouija board. So they thought we had a house ghost. So it was around that time when he would mess with us that things were going on in the house. Silver was flying across the room. Doors were slamming. He actually took a video. of the door and showed me when I got home and you can clearly see where he's standing back with his phone looking at the door that's open you can see him walk up the door and you can kind of see him slam it of him trying to say see our house is haunted so it was that kind of stuff that he he did she also explained that she tried to secure the gun while also putting that responsibility on james did he have free access to that gun no it was for him to use

at the shooting range only. Was he allowed to take it out? Not without my husband around. Did he know where it was kept? My husband hit it usually in our bedroom in different spots. Okay. What was the intention of hiding it? That's just what you're supposed to do.

She also explained how she never saw his journal entries or his text messages between him and his friend where he was saying he needs help. And despite her son claiming that he told his parents, about his problems, Jennifer Crumbley said that never happened. And she also argued that the school never told her about certain issues with her son. It starts off with an email from Ms. McConnell to Sean Hopkins. It says, can you please touch base with Ethan Crumbly?

In his autobiography poem, he said he feels terrible and that his family is a mistake. Were you aware this was ever a discussion or an issue? No. Were you aware that Mr. Hopkins ever talked to or tried to talk to your son? No. Did anyone ever call you to make you aware of any of this? No. If you heard this, how would you react or what would your reaction be?

I would be definitely concerned why he feels like his family's mistake and he feels terrible. So that would be a concern to me. Okay. And all of this led up to the day of the shooting. November 30th, 2021, remember both parents went to the school when a counselor raised concerns about this drawing of the gun that they purchased for their son only a few days before with the blood everywhere, the words helped me,

the thoughts won't stop. But ultimately, she tried to explain the decision not to take him out of school. How did that meeting go? It was pretty, it was pretty nonchonement. it was pretty brief. He basically filled me in what my son and him were talking about for the last hour and a half. He said that my son told him that he was feeling sad over the death of our dog that we had. My mother-in-law, the loss of his friend. So we talked a little bit

about that. We confirmed it. We agreed it was hard on him. He told us that he didn't feel my son was a risk and actually gave him the option if he wanted to stay at school or go home my son wanted to stay at school so we all discussed we all discussed that did you feel like you were taking the position of i am leaving him at school whether he can be here or not no absolutely not i thought the advice that they were giving us was a good advice we we talked with him being sad and then he said being around peers usually helps but there is never a good advice we we talked about him being sad and then he said being around peers usually helps but there is never a time where I would refuse to take him home I could easily if he wanted to go take him with me I had no issues with that and she's

then asked about sending the text to her son don't do it once news of the shooting breaks my husband called me and he asked me where I hid the bullets and I told him and then he said the the gun was missing um so instantly it just I'm like oh my gosh he's he's got the gun. I didn't actually think he was at the school shooting it. I thought maybe he walked home and got the gun and was in the field by the school shooting. I just, I didn't imagine my son actually going into a school shooting. And then when we got more updates, I was like, oh, my gosh, he's a school shooter. He's going to kill himself because in my mind that's what school shooters have done. They've killed himself after. So I yelled in my talk to text. Ethan, don't do it

because I thought he was going to kill himself. And at the end of her direct testimony, provided one final crucial state. In some of the messages, the prosecution admitted, you say that you failed as a parent. Do you feel, are you a failure as a parent? I don't think I'm a failure as a parent, but at that time, I guess I didn't see, I felt bad that Ethan was sad at those things,

and I guess I just, I don't know, I just felt like I failed somewhere. Do you believe that you knew or had reason to know your son was a danger to anyone else? No. Of course, I look back after this all happened, and I've asked myself if I would have done anything differently, and I wouldn't have. If you could change what happened, would you? Oh, absolutely. I wish she would have killed us instead.

Now, I've heard some criticism about that. Did she go too far saying she did nothing wrong, that she wouldn't do anything differently? look, my perspective, she had no choice. If she admitted that she failed or made mistakes, she is basically playing right into the state's case. She is making the state's case for them. Speaking of which, let's see how Jennifer Crumbly did when she was pressed on cross-examination by the state,

like about her reaction to her son's drawing of the gun and blood. You told us yesterday you found it, I think your quote was a little concerning. I thought it was a gun. Yeah. What about the fact that it is identity? to the gun that you got him for Christmas a couple days before. I mean, honestly, just like it looks like a gun to me.

I didn't even notice. Well, you took a picture of the gun. You posted on Instagram. You know what it looks like. I do, but I didn't analyze it. What about the thoughts won't stop help me? Did that ring out to you? Yes, that was what was concerning to me.

Blood everywhere, and there's a bullet, and actually you were the one who bought the bullets in November of the 27th. Correct. You later came to learn that those bullets were used in the shooting. I did. Okay. So you said yesterday it was a little concerning. starting, yet you told your husband emergency in all cats.

Correct. That's why I left to go to the school and I text it on. He wrote back, my God, WTF. Correct. And then you told him he was distraught about last night. Correct. Distraught's an intentional word you chose. Correct. Again, not only questioning that she should have known that his drawing was a warning sign

needing immediate attention, but that her credibility is in question. And the one thing that seemed consistent with your son, to you at least, is his desire to obtain a weapon. Is that right? I don't, I wouldn't say that, no. You didn't know about the 9mm? Oh, I knew about it. Okay. You didn't know about the 22s?

I knew about them. And in fact, you posted on Instagram that he got himself at 22. Correct. In June of 2021. Correct. And from that time, up until the November 26th, 21 purchase, he was wanting to get a 9mm. I know him. My husband had discussed getting a 9mm. I'm not part of those conversations. But you knew about it.

I knew, but not that he was so, however he described it. I said he consistently had a desire to obtain a weapon. I know they consistently talked about it, correct? They didn't just talk about this is a gun. He's talking about how he wanted the gun. You don't deny that. No. In November 26, you said you weren't there for the gun purchase. No, it's not. Okay. But are you?

telling us you didn't know what was going to happen? I did not know they were going the gun store that day, no. Okay, okay, so you're telling us that there was a surprise purchase to you? It was surprised to me that they went to the gun store that day. It was not surprising to me that they purchased a gun that day. And it didn't upset you that it bought a gun? Not, no, it did not. It upset you that it cut into your Christmas tree shopping time, but it didn't upset you that they bought a gun. Correct. Okay. And you told us that it was, in your words, James' responsibility to take care of that gun?

Correct. Now, you don't deny that, at least according to the cell phone evidence, the photographic and video evidence, you're the last adult to have possession of that gun? Correct. Okay. You were with him at the range on November the 27th? Correct. You saw your son shoot the weapon?

Correct. You saw him shoot the last practice round before the shooting in November 30th? At the range? Yeah. Yes, correct. So in other words, she wasn't upset about him getting a gun. She didn't stop it. She was the last one to have the gun.

She took him to the range. She was also pressed on her claiming that she was a helicopter parent but was really too preoccupied with her own life. And then tried to be caught in these inconsistencies. Like she claimed, for instance, she took her son's phone away, but there was evidence that he recorded a video on his phone. That's a major issue of her credibility. But it was a rather short cross-examination. And I will tell you, look, from my...

perspective, it was necessary for her to take the stand to explain away all of these bad, bad facts. But for me, it kind of gave me pause. It kind of made me wonder about reasonable doubt here. It was important for her to explain that. Well, after she took the stand, the defense ultimately rested. And we had closing arguments. Closing arguments, the last opportunity to persuade this jury about your case. First up, once again, the state. about the text messages in March that he was about a demon, throwing bowls, clothes flying off the shelf. She knew about the March 18th incident of waking up in his parents' bedroom and like he had way too much to be in asking why he was in

their room. She knew he had previously asked for help and to go to the doctor and she laughed at him. She knew there were multiple guns in the home. She knew her son had been gifted a gun just a few days before the shooting. She had pulled posted it on Instagram, but apparently it's absolutely fine for all your Instagram friends to know that you got him a Christmas present with a 9mm handgun, but it's not okay or relevant to the people sitting in that room with that drawing. She knew that that gun looked identical to the one in the drawing. She knew that the gun was accessible to him.

She knew it wasn't stored properly. She knew that he was proficient with the gun. She knew he had access to ammunition. And she knew that her son was upset the night before. Okay, so that was a sample of the prosecution. And then there was the defense. Can every parent really be responsible for everything their children do? Especially when it's not foreseeable.

And this clearly was not foreseeable to Mrs. Crumbly. Because there's no one in the world, including Mrs. Crumbly. Who would have let a school shooting happen and let what happened on November 30th take place? Her son was not a risk, and Mrs. Crumbly relied upon it. This school also failed to even really look at the situation and tell her about things from the year before. they made it very clear that he was not in any kind of discipline issue, which is shocking to me and was shocking to Mrs. Crumbly, considering he's off-topic looking at bullets in school,

he's looking at a video in school of some kind of violent pictures, and then he draws a gun on his math paper instead of doing the gun, instead of doing the math paper. So when school officials say, okay, this is really not a big deal. All we want is a counselor within 48 hours. Mrs. Crumley took that as a very strong sign that things were fine.

And once the closings wrapped up and the jury was given their jury instructions, they were sent off for deliberations. Now, during their deliberations, they had two questions. One was regarding the two theories presented by the prosecution, one that Crumbly is guilty by reason of being grossly negligent, again, how she failed,

and how she stored the gun and ammunition, and the other is that she failed her legal duty to control her son. The jury members, they didn't have to be unanimous as to the two theories as long as they found at least one of those theories beyond a reasonable doubt. Now, the other question that the jury asked is if they could infer something based on testimony they didn't hear, namely the shooter, not testifying. I thought that was interesting. Interesting questions made me wonder if they thought something was lacking in the prosecution's case.

But clearly this was a jury that was focused. in on the evidence. They took this responsibility seriously. The jury of six women and six men deliberated for 11 hours before coming back with their verdict. On count one of involuntary manslaughter as to Madison Baldwin, we find the defendant guilty of involuntary manslaughter. On count two of involuntary manslaughter in regards to Tate Newark, we find the defendant guilty of involuntary manslaughter. On count three, as to involuntary manslaughter, regarding Hannah, Hanna, St. Juliana, we find the defendant guilty of involuntary manslaughter. And in count four of involuntary manslaughter against Justin Schilling, we find the defendant

guilty of involuntary manslaughter. Historic, Jennifer Crumbly became the first parent in American history to be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter for a mass school shooting committed by their child. By the way, one of the jurors actually spoke to the media and said one of the deciding issues was the fact that she was the last person in possession of the gun before the shooting when she took him to that gun range. Now, at the time of this recording, Crumbly will be awaiting sentencing and she could potentially face decades in prison, but remember no criminal history and we'll see what the sentencing guidelines are. Now, before I let you go, I get asked

a lot, what are the repercussions of this case? What's the impact of the Jennifer Crumbley case? My opinion, does this mean it's going to be a wake-up call for parents across the country? Yes. Is this a wake-up call for schools across the country? Yes. Because the fact that they were just charged in it of itself is a big deal. Now being found guilty is a big deal. But what this doesn't mean, in my opinion, is this is going to be now the floodgates are open. Every parent of a mass shooter is going to be held criminally responsible.

No. The facts in this case were so uniquely bad for Jennifer Crumbly and arguably James Crumbly that that is what sets this case apart. And that is why I think they were charged. And that is why I think Jennifer Crumbly was found guilty. That's all we have for you here on Sidebar, everybody. Thank you so much for joining us. Please subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, wherever you get your podcasts.

I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next time. You can binge all episodes of this law and crime series, ad free right now on Wondery Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.