Jennifer Crumbley is seeking to serve her sentence on house arrest alongside her lawyer, rather than going to prison for her involvement in the tragic Oxford High School mass shooting committed by her son. However, prosecutors are strongly advocating for a prison term of 10 to 15 years, highlighting her disturbing lack of remorse.
Assistant Oakland County Prosecutor Marc Keast strongly criticized the proposed sentence, considering it a disrespectful response to the immense tragedy caused by Jennifer Crumbley’s extreme carelessness. In a sentencing memo filed recently, Keast expressed his concern for the victims and their families. The memo also shed light on Jennifer Crumbley’s desire to evade imprisonment and revealed additional information about the parents of the Oxford school shooter.
Michigan has recommended a sentencing range of 43 to 86 months, equivalent to a maximum of around seven years, for both parents. The sentencing is scheduled for April 9, following separate juries convicting them on four counts of involuntary manslaughter. It is important to note that each count carries a potential prison term of up to 15 years. Jennifer Crumbley is making efforts to completely avoid any prison time.
The state guideline serves as a recommendation, taking into account post-conviction interviews and the facts of the case.
Details about James Crumbley’s threats
According to the prosecutor’s memo, James Crumbley has requested to be credited for time served after purchasing the gun that was used by Ethan Crumbley in the tragic incident on November 30, 2021. The shooting resulted in the deaths of four students and left six other students and a teacher injured.
The prosecution dismissed the request, countering with their own proposal that James Crumbley receive a prison sentence of 10 to 15 years. This is due to his failure to properly secure a gun, allowing his son to take it from the house and use it to tragically murder his classmates.
In his sentencing memo, Keast argues that the defendant’s request for time served as a suitable sentence is a blatant display of a lack of remorse. He believes that this request undermines the severity of the tragedy caused by the defendant’s gross negligence and is a disrespectful gesture towards the victims and their families.
According to Keast, James Crumbley should face severe consequences for his actions. Keast also mentioned that James Crumbley made several threats towards Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald during a jail phone conversation. In the conversation, he referred to her as a derogatory term and warned her that she should be afraid because she would face repercussions.
In addition to the defendant’s extreme negligence, his phone conversations while in jail demonstrate a complete absence of remorse. He consistently places blame on others, refusing to accept responsibility for his actions. Furthermore, he even went so far as to threaten the elected Prosecutor. Keast highlights that the shooter’s father exemplifies the same lack of remorse, stating that he too “has shown a chilling lack of remorse for his culpability in this matter.” Similar to the defendant, the father has consistently shifted blame onto others and views himself as a martyr.
Jennifer Crumbley seeks to explain her testimony
Jennifer Crumbley faced criticism from Keast regarding her request to be placed under house arrest, wearing a tether, in her lawyer’s guest house located in Oakland County. Keast also expressed disapproval of Crumbley’s attempt to clarify a damaging statement she made during her trial while testifying in her defense. In an interview with investigators for her presentencing report, Crumbley stated: “…”
-
- “At trial, when I was on the stand I was asked if I would have done anything differently, I testified that I would not have — and that is true without the benefit of of (sic) hindsight that I have now. With the information I have now, of course my answer would be hugely different. There are so many things that I would change if I could go back in time.”
-
- “I knew my son to be a quiet, good kid, who loved his pets. I never imagined he would hurt other people in the way that he did. I have been in jail for over 26 months and have been locked down 23 hours per day. I am hopeful the Court will sentence me in a way that allows me to be released from jail for the balance of my sentence.”
Prosecutor: Jennifer Crumbley lied about her drinking
The prosecution implored Oakland County Circuit Judge Cheryl Matthews to go beyond the state’s recommended sentencing guidelines and impose a prison term of 10 to 15 years instead.
According to Keast, the defendant’s actions following the shooting indicate a lack of remorse and a desire to downplay her responsibility. Even after the trial, the defendant continues to minimize her involvement in the incident. Keast highlights the defendant’s suggestion of being placed on house arrest at her lawyer’s guest house as evidence of her lack of remorse. This suggestion implies that the defendant sees her current living situation as an upgrade from her previous home in Oxford, where the shooting occurred due to her gross negligence.
Jennifer Crumbley was depicted by Keast as a woman with a drinking problem, labeling her as a dishonest individual.
During the presentencing investigation report interview, the defendant claimed to have consumed alcohol only once or twice a week. However, according to Keast, this statement is clearly false. To support his argument, Keast presented over a dozen receipts for whiskey and vodka purchases made by the Crumbleys in just one month.
He also emphasized the significance of the defendant’s lack of remorse, highlighting that it reveals her inability to establish any other support or connections within the community. Consequently, she is compelled to depend solely on her retained attorney for assistance in finding a suitable placement.
The Crumbleys, a couple who became the first parents in America to be criminally accountable for their child’s involvement in a mass school shooting, have been found guilty of four counts of involuntary manslaughter. Each count can result in a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison. However, it is common for such sentences to be served concurrently rather than consecutively. The judge also has the authority to deviate from the recommended guidelines and impose a sentence that is either higher or lower.
James Crumbley purchased handgun for Ethan Crumbley
According to testimony given during the trial, James Crumbley and his son visited an Oxford gun shop on Black Friday in 2021. The purpose of their visit was to purchase a 9mm Sig Sauer handgun, which the teenage boy had been persistently requesting, as noted in his journal. The mother of the teenager also mentioned the gun in a social media post, referring to it as an early Christmas present.
During the trial, the defense contended that the gun was not truly owned by the boy, but rather concealed in the parents’ bedroom armoire. They also emphasized that the ammunition was stored separately and that its purpose was solely for use at the shooting range with his father. The mother gave testimony indicating that her husband was responsible for storing the firearm, which became a focal point of the prosecution’s case against James Crumbley.
Prosecutors say Crumbleys could have prevented the massacre
The prosecution and defense hammered away at the same themes at both trials: one side claimed the Crumbleys were careless, negligent parents who bought a gun for a troubled son and failed to secure it, while the other side contended that the parents never saw any signs that their son was mentally ill or would ever harm someone, that the gun was not a gift their son could freely use, and that it was hidden.
Prosecutors have long argued that the Crumbleys, more than anyone else, could have prevented the tragedy by revealing to school officials that their son had access to a pistol during their summons for questioning about his disturbing conduct. The morning before the shooting, school officials pulled the youngster from geometry class for drawing a gun, depicting a human being bleeding, and writing “Bloods everywhere…” on a homework page. My life is worthless… The ideas will not stop; please help me.”
Despite the school summoning the parents over the painting, the Crumbleys returned to work after meeting with the counselor and dean of students, promising to secure their son’s help within 48 hours. The school administrators judged that the boy posed no threat to himself or others and allowed him to return to class.
Two hours later, the child took his first shot.
