Prosecutors charge parents of Michigan school shooting suspect

My best guess is that that can happen and *should* have happened immediately.

There was a school policy that girls could not wear tank tops if the strap was thinner than two fingers. My neighbor's daughter showed up in spaghetti straps too thin, was refused entry to go to her class and was held in the office until her mother could leave work and bring her another top or take her home. That all happened in under than 30 minutes.

So, no it's not shocking to me that this meeting happened so quickly. It was essentially an emergency meeting.

 

It works the other way too as in granting devious juveniles leverage over their Parents.

 

That's one parent showing up.... Getting both should harder, although we don't know their work statuses or work location(s).

Not saying anything suspicious, just seems sort of amazing to happen on that timeline.

That meeting counselor deposition will likely be the most interesting thing in this case..... sadly, he or she will be ripped apart by the RW for doing their job, as seems to be the default these days...

 

call 911, if the school honestly thought this kid was gonna kill students, mandatory reporting laws require it do they not?

this is what I am saying, the school must not of thought he was a threat or they would not of put him back in the classroom

 

The school has the right to search a student, in most states with the parents present, by the police and often the faculty with cause. They clearly had that cause.

 

I already articulated my position, you just refused to look at the proof of my position. You do you.... I'll stick with the facts.

The next time you ask me for proof or a link... I'll likely just laugh and ignore.

 

You really think a school is going to make that call with nothing more than a picture, a google search, and disinterested parents??

Schools would be calling 911 a dozen times a day....

The school has already said "no discipline was warranted" as a result of the meeting... But again, they didn't have all the facts in front of them....

 

you think the parents should do something, but don't think the school should have done something

if the school thought someone was gonna be a school shooter, dozens of times a day, that is sad

 

The lawyers for the parents say the gun was locked up.

Michigan school shooting: Crumbley lawyer says gun was locked up, accuses prosecutor of creating media circus
The defendants' attorneys said they did not hear back from the prosecutor's office on Friday

..."That gun was actually locked, so when the prosecution is stating that this child had free access to a gun, that is...absolutely not true," Lehman said Saturday morning during the couple's arraignment."


""Unlike the prosecution, we weren't attempting to make this a media ... spectacle. This case is absolutely the saddest, most tragic, worst case imaginable," Lehman said Saturday. "There is absolutely no doubt. But our clients were absolutely going to turn themselves in. It was just a matter of logistics, and all the prosecution had to do was communicate with me about it."

[the attorney's]...argued that they were going to "make arrangements" to have their clients turn themselves in on Friday and tried to contact the prosecutor's office multiple times on Friday "but never got a call back."

"The prosecutor's office, instead of getting back to us in any way, decided to have a press conference, and as Miss McDonald admitted, try to find a way to act to surprise our clients and catch them off guard when it was so unnecessary," Lehman said. "And last night and throughout the day, we were in contact with our clients. They were scared. They were terrified. They were not at home. They were figuring out what to do. Getting finances in order."
https://www.foxnews.com/us/ethan-crumbley-parents-lawyers-gun-prosecution

And as to the taking them into custody the local sheriff also complained that they were blindsided by the press conference and had they been told beforehand they could have prepared to take them into custody without a scene and was curious as to why law enforcement was left out.

Michigan DA Karen McDonald slammed for announcing Crumbley charges at media event -- long before arrests
The Oakland County prosecuting attorney appeared before cameras many hours before a teenage shooting suspect's parents were in custody

The Michigan sheriff at the center of the investigation into Tuesday’s deadly Oxford High School shooting said Friday night he was blindsided earlier in the day when the county prosecutor held a news conference announcing charges against James and Jennifer Crumbley, parents of the teenage suspect in the case.

"I’ve been sheriff for 21 years," Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard told "NewsNation Now," "and I’ve never had anyone have a press conference announcing charges before we had the opportunity to have somebody in custody."....

...Bouchard said during his TV interview he was surprised by the timing of DA McDonald’s appearance before the cameras – because the Crumbleys hadn’t been arrested first.

"We actually talk to, even our judges, that if they’re in court, and decide to remand somebody to custody, to not say that before we have deputies in the courtroom," the sheriff continued, "because the natural indicators typically are that as soon as somebody knows they’re gonna be arrested, they go in the wind."

Also criticizing McDonald on Friday was Oakland County Undersheriff Michael McCabe, who questioned a reported claim by McDonald that she had been told by an assistant in her office that police had "eyes" on the parents in case they tried to flee.

That McDonald claim simply wasn’t true, McCabe told the Detroit News.

"We didn’t even know they had been charged with anything until we were informed [Friday] morning by the media," McCabe told the News.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/michigan...onald-crumbley-charges-oakland-county-sheriff


Not saying they are not guilty of anything but this prosecutor seems to be trying to make a name for herself here or something, she's not handling this very well.

 

I didn't remotely say that.... I just think the parents knew more about their son than the school did that day... the school knew that kid could potentially be a danger... the parents knew that danger could be imminent....

Even if the school "did something", I don't think calling 911 is the answer.... I'd have been 100% fine with a backpack search with the school security officer (problem probably averted, if that's where the gun was) AND daylong detention in the office every day until requirements met (problem delayed at least)... going back to a classroom that day is the wrong call, as it was for the Loudoun rapist from School A to School B in another thread...

 

It's possible. It happens all the time. One time my son went missing and the school had no idea where he was. I was at the school before the cops arrived (and they are fast when a kid is missing) and the ex got there in 20.

It sounds like the school expressed the urgency of the situation and that both parents would be required. Most people work somewhere near where they live and with COVID running rampant, one or both may not even be working right now. I doubt that given the bonds amount though. It's usually set higher than a person is reasonably able to obtain so $1M probably means they have some assets somewhere.

 

Don't wait for next time. Put me on ignore now.

 

Most would likely see it as icing on the cake.

 

ex speaking out

 

I do not know that the parents knew he had a gun at the time of the meeting

that is what I am saying, the school can't claim they knew he was a danger and send him back to class, those are conflicting statements

 

The thousands of ghetto slayings are no longer newsworthy. The hundreds of thousands of ghetto thefts are no longer newsworthy. Because when we refuse to accept the actual causes for these things and appropriately punish the actual criminals the end result is they become common.

 

Wouldn't that search as described be a violation of the 4th Amendment?

 

They want the kid to rat out his parents in exchange for a lighter sentence. If the kid is smart he will take the sea or he will spend decades in prison.

 

Based on your own experience, do you have any lockable draws in your bedroom?

 

I have never owned a gun, but I think if I bought one it would be because I was fearful and wanted my gun in easy reach

 

I don't have hard evidence, however a thought experiment led me to the conclusion that the type of killer in these situations is usually receptive of bullying - and the gun is the equalizer. I guess it's not easy to prove.

I think shootings happen so rarely that there is no (urban) institutional guidance in place to scaffold that kind of training.

Ha. Yes, but I still think that pragmatically speaking holding parents completely responsible is impracticable.

I think we would kind of agree then, that it's an urban problem, not exclusive to the US, but manifestly worse compared to other Western countries.

Back to the main point of who is responsible, the problem with holding parents responsible for poor childrearing (rather securing the gun) is that the only real solution is to have parents obliged to deem themselves fit to raise children before being allowed to have kids . Chucking the parents in jail for bad parenting is unlikely to be preventative (who is going to think that their child is going to kill? ). However punishing parents for an unsecured firearm accidents could make a difference.

 

this kid will never get a lighter sentence.

 

It is the prosecution that is making the claim the gun was unsecured. The defense says it was. The father called 911 after the shooting saying the gun was missing and his son may be the shooter. There is no law in that state about securing firearms.

Charging parents is virtually unheard of. The kid had no disciplinary record and parents normally do not think their kids will go on a shooting rampage.

The prosecution is also looking to charge the school.

 

The parents knew he had very recent access to/practice with a gun... the school did not...

The school isn't claiming they knew he was an immediate danger.... just the opposite...

Should they have?? All I can say is I hope other schools learn from this and begin detaining suspected dangers in the future if the parents abdicate.

Can't change the past, but we can learn for the future...

 

Whose other experience would I use to answer that question??

I do not have any lockable drawERs in my bedroom. If I was going to keep a handgun in my house (No) as a future present (No) for my 15 yo son (No), I would put it where he didn't know where it is, at least until he takes responsible ownership.

What did we solve there??