FRANKIE
.308 Win
Redirect Notice
www.google.com
I guess it depends what they knew and when.Ummm...they could be potentially guilty of not securing firearms from acquisition by prohibited persons (depending on Michigan laws). But, charging with manslaughter would appear to be prosecutorial overreach.
Any chance that the government wants to simply continue to demonize firearms ownership and make such ownership appear onerous? Nah, can't be.
I guess it depends what they knew and when.
This will all be too little too late of course. I wonder if any precedent can truly be set. If you've got a psychopathic kid (in this case I have no clue what warning signs there were) you need to be careful with what they can do.
Obviously not all the details are known, but it seems to me at least a few days prior to the shooting the parents had an inkling that something wasn't right yet they failed to secure the gun. Furthermore, when the school contacted them (on the day of the shooting no less) that there was an issue they refused to take the kid home (why the school didn't force this issue or get a resource officer to remove him from the premises are unclear to me at least and I wouldn't be surprised if there was some negligence on the part of the school here too).
Perhaps I'm reading between the lines a little bit but the moment news of a school shooting were alerted the mom texts the son saying "Don't do it."Sorry but NOTHING in the timeline is concerning until the picture incident THAT MORNING.
They should have checked the gun ASAP after that meeting but parents can be amazingly blind to their children's flaws.
The terror charges and the manslaughter charges are purely political.
He is too young for a gun, but will be charged as an adult.
Which is it, adult or child?
I know,
Parents need to be held to account, the kid is a murderer and should be put down as such.
They should change it to “charged as old enough to know better “He is too young for a gun, but will be charged as an adult.
Which is it, adult or child?
I know,
Parents need to be held to account, the kid is a murderer and should be put down as such.
Perhaps I'm reading between the lines a little bit but the moment news of a school shooting were alerted the mom texts the son saying "Don't do it."
I have a really hard time believing they did not have an idea that something was wrong until the day the school called them about the picture he drew.
I agree with @ManrisFrack that with the timeline mentioned nothing alarming until the note. Googling ammo prices isn’t alarming, for example.Perhaps I'm reading between the lines a little bit but the moment news of a school shooting were alerted the mom texts the son saying "Don't do it."
I have a really hard time believing they did not have an idea that something was wrong until the day the school called them about the picture he drew.
That's a poor argument considering we are becoming a less violent society as a whole.This only happened, and I can't think of it ever happening, when I was young, by the true insane. Of course we had the belt, back of the hand, Fly back paddle, shoe, something from the kitchen drawer to keep you this side of the straight n narrow. One mother, one father, religion, schools with shooting ranges, shop class, corporal punishment at school.
Now, two moms, two dads, no responsibilities, no religion, no shop, no punishment, only feelings, "Walk It Off!", you little wussy.
That's a poor argument considering we are becoming a less violent society as a whole.![]()
It's not really about humor so much as it is reality.Haha, less violent.
You so funny.
It's not really about humor so much as it is reality.
It's an objective observation.
“Involuntary manslaughter is the killing of another without malice and unintentionally, but in doing some unlawful act not amounting to a felony nor naturally tending to cause death or great bodily harm, or in negligently doing some act lawful in itself, or by the negligent omission to perform a legal duty.” People v Ryczek, 224 Mich 106, 110; 194 NW 609 (1923). This is distinct from voluntary manslaughter which parallels the crime of murder where the defendant must be found to have an intent to kill or an intent to do serious bodily harm to the deceased, but malice was negated under the circumstances by provocation and the homicide was committed in the heat of passion. People v Townes, 391 Mich 578, 589; 218 NW2d 136 (1974).
A person is guilty of involuntary manslaughter if the prosecutor can prove all of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt (Michigan Criminal Jury Instruction 16.10):
First, that the individual caused the death of the victim, that is, that the victim died as a result of the individual’s act.
Second, in doing the act that caused the victim’s death, the individual acted in a grossly negligent manner OR in doing the act that caused the victim’s death, the individual intended to injure the victim. For example, an individual who commits assault and battery with the intent to inflict injury but instead causes an unintended death, then this amounts to, at least, involuntary manslaughter. People v Datema, 448 Mich 585; 533 NW2d 272 (1995).
Third, that the individual caused the death without lawful excuse or justification.
![]()
Parents of MI shooter Ethan Crumbley break down in court
James and Jennifer Crumbley broke down in tears Saturday morning as they each pled not guilty to all four charges of involuntary manslaughter. Bail was set for each parent at $500,000.www.dailymail.co.uk