The Daily - A New Strategy for Prosecuting School Shootings

Episode Date: December 7, 2021

Last week, after a shooting at Oxford High School in the suburbs of Detroit that left four teenagers dead, local prosecutors decided on a novel legal strategy that would extend criminal culpability beyond the 15-year-old accused of carrying out the attack. But could that strategy become a national model?Guest: Jack Healy, a national correspondent for The New York Times.Sign up here to get The Daily in your inbox each morning. And for an exclusive look at how the biggest stories on our show come together, subscribe to our newsletter. Background reading: Prosecutors say James and Jennifer Crumbley, the parents of the 15-year-old accused of killing four classmates, failed to act on troubling signs. The parents pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter charges.After a manhunt and an arraignment, scrutiny of them has intensified.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday. 

From The New York Times, I'm Michael Barbaro. This is The Daily. Last week... We are following the breaking news of a shooting at a high school in Oxford, Michigan, outside of Detroit. When the shooting was over at Oxford High School in suburban Detroit... The four who lost their lives are 17-year-old Justin Schilling, 14-year-old Hannah St. Juliana, 17-year-old Madison Baldwin, and 16-year-old Tate Meyer. The suspected shooter is a sophomore, a 15-year-old classmate. He is in custody this morning.

Local prosecutors decided on a novel legal strategy that would extend criminal culpability beyond the gunman himself. I spoke with my colleague, national correspondent Jack Healy, about what's behind that strategy and whether it could become a national model. It's Tuesday, December 7th. Jack, you have covered a depressingly large number of mass shootings, and we know that because we've talked to you about a lot of them here on The Daily. So I'm curious what you were thinking when you learned about this latest shooting in Michigan. I think the response from a journalist like me is not too dissimilar from that of the American public, which is, my God, not again. But after that, I and my colleagues had to get to work.

But after that, I and my colleagues had to get to work. So we started calling the local law enforcement officials. We reached out to witnesses on the ground, students who had fled from the shooting, all of the things that unfortunately we have gotten too practiced at doing in the wake of these horrible shootings. But in this case, there was something kind of extraordinary. The local prosecutor suggested very quickly that she was considering charging not just the shooter, but also his parents. And what did you make of that? Well, to me, it was remarkable and something that I had almost never heard before. There are always questions surrounding the parents and family of a mass shooting suspect, questions about how could they have let this happen? What warning signs did they miss? Did they do something wrong? But they are rarely held criminally responsible. And that's what is so different and so unique about this case. Good afternoon. I'm Karen McDonald. I'm the Oakland County prosecutor. The prosecutor, Karen McDonald, made the decision to file charges against the mother and father of the suspected 15-year-old school shooter. The charges are as follows. James Crumbly is

charged with four counts of involuntary manslaughter. Jennifer Crumbly is also charged with four counts of involuntary manslaughter. Jennifer Crumbly is also charged with four counts of involuntary manslaughter. So in effect, she was holding them partially criminally responsible for the shooting that their son has been charged with carrying out. While the shooter was the one who entered the high school and pulled the trigger, there are other individuals who contributed to the events on November 30th, and it's my intention to hold them accountable as well. On Friday, she held an extraordinary news conference in which she stepped in front of the cameras and laid out a detailed case against the two parents here, James and Jennifer Crumbly. It begins on the day after Thanksgiving.

On November 26, 2021, James Crumbly purchased a Sig Sauer 9mm model... The 15-year-old suspect's father took him along to a local gun shop in Michigan to buy a 9mm semi-automatic Sig Sauer. A store employee confirms that Ethan Crumbly was present with James at the time of the purchase. Prosecutors say this gun was not for either of the parents. On or about November 26, 21,

Ethan Crumbly's social media posts reveal photos of the semi-automatic handgun, along with the caption, just got my new beauty today, including emoji with hearts. Instead, it was actually a Christmas gift for the 15-year-old suspected gunman. Subsequent to the purchase of that weapon, one of Jennifer Crumbly's social media posts on about 11-27-21 read, quote, mom and Sunday testing out his new Christmas present, end quote.

And furthermore, prosecutors say that the parents did not keep the gun in a locked safe or in a secure location out of the reach of their son. Further investigation revealed that the Sig Sauer 9mm handgun purchased by James Crumbly was stored unlocked in a drawer in James and Jennifer's bedroom. Okay, so what happens next, according to the prosecutor? The day before the shooting, one of the suspect's teachers notices him conducting a search online for ammunition while he's at school. Jennifer Crumbly was contacted via voicemail by school personnel regarding that son's inappropriate internet search. School personnel indicate they followed that voicemail up with an email but received no response from either parent.

The parents are notified, but instead of responding with alarm, prosecutors say the mother of the suspect almost seemed to make a joke out of this. Thereafter, Jennifer Crumbly exchanged text messages about the incident with her son on that day, stating, quote, LOL, I'm not mad at you. You have to learn not to get caught, unquote. So the mom's response to his search for ammunition is basically do a better job of concealing that kind of search. That's what the prosecutors say, yes. And things get even more disturbing the next day. One of the suspect's teachers found a note on his desk that contained a litany of incredibly disturbing and violent images.

The note contained the following. A drawing of a semi-automatic handgun pointing at the words, quote, the thoughts won't stop, help me, end quote. In another section of the note was a drawing of a bullet with the following words above that bullet, quote, blood everywhere, end quote. Between the drawing of the gun and the bullet is a drawing of a person who appears to have been shot twice and bleeding. Below that figure is a drawing of a laughing emoji. Further down the drawing are the words, quote, my life is useless, end quote. And to the right of that are the words, quote, the world is dead, end quote. And the teacher, understandably, was incredibly alarmed,

and the suspect's parents were quickly called into the school for a meeting with the suspect and counselors. At the meeting, James and Jennifer Crumb a meeting with the suspect and counselors. At the meeting, James and Jennifer Crumbly were shown the drawing and were advised that they were required to get their son into counseling within 48 hours. Both James and Jennifer Crumbly failed to ask their son if he had his gun with him or where his gun was located and failed to inspect his backpack for the presence of the gun, which he had with him. The subject comes up of him being basically taken out of class that day. But according to prosecutors, the parents resisted that idea.

Instead, James and Jennifer Crumbly left the high school without their son. He was returned to the classroom. It's hard to understand the mind frame of the people inside of that meeting. But I think what is very clear is that that was the last opportunity that school officials and this teenager's parents had to potentially head off the shooting. And it did not happen. the shooting and it did not happen. Instead, what happened is at about 12.50 that day, school security cameras record the suspect carrying his backpack into a bathroom and walking out armed with the very handgun that his parents had bought him as a Christmas present. And according to prosecutors and law enforcement, as the suspect is walking

through the halls, fatally shooting four of his classmates, wounding seven other people, as other students are cowering in classrooms, word is starting to race through this small community that there's a school shooting at Oxford High School. When the news of the active shooter at Oxford High School had been made public, Jennifer Crumbly texted to her son at 1.22 p.m., quote, Ethan, don't do it, end quote. This is before, hours before,

any of the reporters covering this story were officially told about the suspect's name. At 1.37 p.m., James Crumbly called 911, reporting that a gun was missing from his house, and he believed his son may be the shooter. So both parents seem to intuit, according to the prosecutor and their behavior, that their son is quite possibly the shooter. and their behavior, that their son is quite possibly the shooter. Yes. Most parents in this community, I think, were terrified that their children could be among the victims of this shooting. But according to prosecutors,

these two parents quickly came to suspect that their son could be the suspect. And he was arrested shortly after the shooting that afternoon and charged with terrorism and four counts of first-degree murder. I want to be really clear that these charges are intended to hold the individuals who contributed to this tragedy accountable and also send a message that gun owners have a responsibility. When they fail to uphold that responsibility, there are serious and criminal consequences. So, Jack, to summarize the prosecutor's evidence for bringing these criminal charges

against the parents of this alleged shooter and how they allegedly contribute to this shooting, they buy the gun, they make their son feel as if it's his. They are offering support to him when he's researching ammunition and even suggesting that he keep it secret. And when they learn he has very disturbing, violent thoughts that are connected to the gun, they don't pull him out of school. and when the shooting starts, they see him on some gut level to kind of know that it's him. That's the case.

Yeah, according to the prosecutor in this case, it all adds up to four charges of involuntary manslaughter against the mother and father. Mm-hmm. But in the hours after the prosecutor wraps up her press conference, there was no quick arraignment. There was no arrest of the parents. Instead, they disappeared.

We'll be right back. We'll be right back. So, Jack, what happens next after these two parents disappear? Good evening. There is a manhunt underway right now in Michigan. A massive manhunt starts to unfold across the metro Detroit area. The local sheriff, the FBI, the U.S. Marshals Service, all involved. Local law enforcement release photos of the parents as well as a description of their car. If the public sees or hears them, we're pushing out their pictures and their license plate.

Call 911. It seems like everybody is looking for these parents and basically wondering, where have they gone? Are they trying to flee? They are making their way back here. They will be arraigned. They will be turned in. In the middle of all of this. They're not out on the lam.

They are turning themselves in. Two lawyers for the parents say they're not trying to flee. The cops do not buy that at all. As day turns to night and hours pass without them actually showing up anywhere, questions just mount about where they have gone and what their plans are. Where are the parents of the Michigan school shooting suspect? Where are they? Eventually, early Saturday morning, a tip leads the police into Detroit where the parents are arrested.

They were arrested the next morning inside this empty commercial building nearly an hour away. Jennifer Crumbly, I'm going to arraign you first. And they are brought before a judge. Not guilty. They plead not guilty. Not guilty. And they not guilty. Not guilty. And they're held on a $500,000 bond. And so far, what has been their defense?

Well, their lawyers have basically said that the prosecution is cherry-picking facts and trying to make an example of them. And lawyers for the two parents have said that the gun actually was kept locked up. So this basically signals they're going to fight these charges and that there still may be a lot of facts yet to come out. So now that the parents are in custody and they have been charged with involuntary manslaughter, let's turn to what it means to bring a case like this against the parents of a shooter and why the prosecutor would think that this is a good strategy beyond just the evidence in this case. Well, the prosecutor in this case made a really crucial point.

She said that there are other people in this shooting who bear responsibility. And gun control advocates for years have said that you have to look at charging people beyond just the children involved. That the United States does not

have sufficient or uniform laws about how people should store guns to keep them safe and to keep them away from children. And gun control advocates say that it's just far too easy for children and teenagers to get access to their parents' guns or guns in the houses of family or friends. And that when that happens, there are often no legal consequences for the people who should have been responsible for those guns in the first place. So the thinking is that in the absence of a national standardized way that guns are supposed to be handled or locked away in the U.S.,

that charging parents is a potentially different legal path for encouraging better gun behavior. Mm-hmm. But I wonder if charging parents diverts attention from the culpability of everybody else in a shooting like this, namely the shooter and potentially the school or even the rest of society at large? Yeah, it's a fair question. But Michael, charging the suspect's parents

in this case in Michigan, it's not like the 15-year-old has been let out of jail or the charges have been dropped. It's not like as if, you know, the possibility of suing the school for negligence or, you know, somehow missing warning signs has gone away. What's happening, gun control advocates say, is that the circle of responsibility is expanding. They say that you might be able to persuade parents to lock up their guns or to keep them away from underage children and teenagers who can find those guns and carry out acts of violence with them. And that you might be able to persuade people that if they could face charges of manslaughter for something that children do with their guns,

they might secure them and prevent those kids from getting access to them in the first place. What they would seem to be arguing for here is a legal strategy of scaring the crap out of parents so that they don't leave their guns available to their kids, because parents wouldn't want to face these kinds of charges. That's the argument. What's worse, having to secure your gun or being thrown into jail and facing years of prison time after your child shoots someone either accidentally or on purpose?

But it feels like this prosecution, almost by definition, is unique. And therefore, it might be difficult to turn this into a model that prosecutors around the country could use because the details of this case and these parents' behavior, according to the prosecutor, it feels pretty egregious. And in a lot of cases, it feels like parents' behavior is going to be more ambiguous, right? Maybe they buy a gun and it's not secured, but they're not texting their child messages of encouragement or ignoring frightening warning signs and violent drawings. So I guess the question is, is this case an outlier that will make this prosecution unique

rather than a template that other prosecutors can use as a model? I think that's why this case against the parents is going to be watched incredibly closely by prosecutors across the country. Because I think every single prosecutor knows that it may only just be a matter of time before the next school shooting comes to their county, to their district.

And they are going to have to face questions about who bears responsibility beyond the person who actually pulled the trigger. And so, yeah, the word egregious that you just used, that's the exact same word that the Oakland County prosecutor used as she was describing these facts. And does that make the case potentially more easy for them to prosecute? Potentially. And so I think obviously a successful prosecution would probably bolster the argument for holding more adults responsible. But ultimately, juries make decisions based on facts

and details that are always changing and specific to particular cases. And so I think we're really going to have to wait and see how the individual facts of this case play out and ultimately what a judge or jury decides. But on the other side, I'm betting there are Second Amendment rights advocates who view this very differently

and will think that this prosecution shouldn't become a model around the country because it would represent a slippery slope. Perhaps the argument goes something like this. If parents are being charged, as they are in this case, for what their kid does with a gun that they facilitated the purchase of, what's to stop prosecutors from charging parents if they bought liquor for their kids and their kids get into an accident because they're drunk and they kill people? Or if their kid uses a hunting knife that they bought them specifically for hunting to stab someone to death? Will the parents be held responsible for more and more things in our society as the parents, in this case,

are being held responsible for what their son did? as the parents, in this case, are being held responsible for what their son did. Well, I think you would have to take that argument even farther up the ladder. Because gun groups have been quite effective in this country at limiting themselves from facing liability after mass shootings. Think about the efforts to hold gun manufacturers or ammunition companies responsible after something like Sandy Hook. The argument in those cases was always that it wasn't the gun company and it wasn't the gun seller

and it wasn't the ammunition maker. It was the person who pulled the trigger. The charges against the Oxford High School gunman's parents have kind of put us in uncharted legal waters. And really, it's going to be up to a judge and jury to decide whether this circle of responsibility after a mass shooting really can expand or whether it resides with one person and one person only.

And that would be the person who actually pulled the trigger. Well, Jack, thank you very much. We appreciate your time. Thank you, Michael. We'll be right back. Here's what else you need to know today. Omicron is here. No debate about it anymore. And you can expect, and I'm sorry to say this, you can expect community spread. On Monday, New York became the first city in the country to impose a vaccine mandate on all private employers in an effort to combat the Omicron variant of the coronavirus. A lot of folks in the private sector have said

to me they believe in vaccination, but they're not quite sure how they can do it themselves. Well, we're going to do it. Mayor Bill de Blasio said the mandate would apply to about 184,000 businesses and require any employee who works in person to have at least one vaccine dose by December 27th. However, the mandate does not apply to those who work remotely. Meanwhile, cases of the Omicron variant are surging across Europe. Britain has detected at least 246 cases, nearly double the number from Friday. Denmark detected 183,

more than triple the number reported on Friday. In response, US health officials are warning Americans against traveling to several European countries, including France and Portugal. Today's episode was produced by Daniel Guimet and Sydney Harper, with help from Luke Vanderplug. It was edited by Rachel Quester and Paige Cowan, engineered by Chris Wood, and contains original music by Brad Fisher. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landberg of Wonderly. That's it for The Daily.

I'm Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.