US mother charged with involuntary manslaughter.

Thanks monica
Yes I m afraid I do think the parents are responsible if they bring guns, knives, machetes poison into the house then they have the responsibility to keep it/them locked away out of any chance of any child or anyone else getting their hands on them
Hopefully this might be a big warning to others who are so free with their firearms

Or bully Xls cone to that

Dee1012

Dickens

Curtaintwitcher

It's about time parents were held responsible for what their children do. Give a child a weapon of any kind and, of course, he's going to use it. In Britain there is a problem with air-guns and catapults. Swans and ducks are constantly attacked by children who have these things. Firing stones at windows is another activity resulting from possession.
If irresponsible parents were prosecuted for what their children do, there might be less juvenile nuisance.

It's about time parents were held responsible for what their children do.

That would open up a can of worms for the Law.

Put simply, children from good homes do bad things.

Attempting to decide the proportion of blame, the culpability of the parents, would be a legal nightmare, lengthening court cases, setting up an appeals system, etc.

Only in very limited circumstances could this work.

That's looking at it simplistically. But your proposal is simplistic, too. Deciding on the level of "irresponsibility" of parents other than in cut-and-dried cases of obvious guilt or neglect of parental duty would require a major overhaul of the Law.

I've said before that my work is connected to the Criminal Justice System and there's a connection also to Youth Justice and while I agree there are young people from good homes with a solid background who do commit offences, so many have parents who literally do not care.
Especially in the areas of Antisocial Behaviour incl' criminal damage.
The parents won't engage with professional support, they refuse to accept it's their youngsters (even with CCTV evidence), behaviour is excused as minor / a joke / not that bad.

I do wonder if this is something that must be looked at....

Well, yes - I see your point. If a child has been given an ASBO, and the parents won't engage or co-operate with the appropriate agencies involved, then obviously there is a case to be heard against them.

And I do know what you mean about parents that appear not to give a hoot about their offspring's bad behaviour.

We have it in my small town. Our Facebook Community website often heralds complaints about youths behaving in an anti-social manner - usually late at night - and someone will mention it and suggest that parents reign in their kids when they are being a PITA and annoying (and sometimes intimidating) others in the neighbourhood... only to be met with jeers and sneers from some, abusively calling them "miserable old fogeys" etc and bleating, "weren't you young once". Basically, just making excuses for bad behaviour.

... and, it's usually the same families causing trouble.

So yes, if parents are not co-operating and allowing their child to run riot when he or she has been ASBO'ed, there might well be a fairly cut and dried case to hold them responsible - though I'm sure they have a ready-made list of excuses why they are not.

I'm always puzzled why some parents don't appear to care where their teenage kids might be when they're out in the evening... I could never relax until my son came home. We always asked him where he intended to go, and with whom, though he was sometimes a bit vague about where they would all 'hang-out'. On a couple of occasions, we actually followed him discreetly (by car) just to see what he was up to because he'd been so vague. Though I got a bit of flack for admitting to that.

I actually think it's a cop out. Prosecute parents whilst the gun lobby, senators, etc have created this culture. Tackling it on an individual basis wont work, it's a societal problem.

If you have legal gun ownership then you should ^keep them safely.

That was one of the issues in this case.

In the case of Jennifer Crumbly I think she was stupid irresponsible and criminally negligent and should be prosecuted, the gun her son used bought by her was used yo kill 4 people.
The above said I don't think they should make all parents criminally responsibly, a Mother known to me had 5 children, 2 went in the forces, 2 are working, one self employed, the other is skilled, but one went to prison, is a thieving little git who I would not trust as far as I could throw him. Is she to be blamed for his bad behaviour, not in my opinion, this particular son was easily led and got into a bad crowd.

There were several issues that I think led to her conviction - it really went beyond being clueless and was negligent

The son had been displaying clear MH issues - talking of being haunted by demons and ghosts - yet she bought him a gun 4 DAYS before the shooting and took him to the range to teach him how to use it.

Prosecutors introduced evidence that Ethan Crumbley texted his mother in spring 2021 about “demons” throwing bowls and other hallucinations. But she told the jury that it was “just Ethan messing around.”She refused to get any medical help for her son - not believing he had any mental health issues.

She had been called to the school because of some very graphic and disturbing drawings on the day of the shooting. On the morning of the shooting, school staff members were concerned about a violent drawing of a gun, bullet and wounded man, accompanied by desperate phrases, on Ethan Crumbley’s math assignment.She did not tell the school that he possibly had access to a weapon, cut the meeting short and refused to take her son home as the school requested.

In the messages she sent to other people before attending the school meeting on the day of the shooting she said that she was afraid her son would do "something dumb".

But she thought it appropriate to give her son a gun and did nothing to secure it.

Galaxy

I actually think it's a cop out. Prosecute parents whilst the gun lobby, senators, etc have created this culture. Tackling it on an individual basis wont work, it's a societal problem.

A very good point Galaxy, well made.

Of course the NRA and all those who are in favour of gun ownership will say that it's each person's responsibility to make sure that their guns are kept securely, and can't be accessed by minors or anyone who doesn't have a certificate, etc, etc, putting the onus firmly on the individual.

The last thing these individuals would ever admit is that in the third largest country in the world (I think) where there's a huge disparity (and lack of cohesion) between people, and even between States; where (in common with other countries) mental health is a crisis (according to a recent survey most adults believed it was a crisis) - an outsider could be forgiven for thinking it's a madness to believe that firearm ownership is a sensible amendment to the Bill of Rights.

I read the comments on this with interest. I was puzzled that any parent would arm a child who had been experiencing hallucinations. She described him talking about seeing demons throwing bowls as ‘just Ethan messing about’. This made me question whether IQ is relevant when selling firearms. Google wasn’t very helpful though the US discussion groups stressed the right to bear arms “that’s the thing about rights, you don’t have to qualify for them “
I know I shouldn’t be but, I’m shocked that any mother would arm their child, especially a child who you worried ‘might do something dumb’
In a country where a parent can arm a child then I suppose they should be held legally responsible if it all goes horribly wrong

Raffiagran Is she to be blamed for his bad behaviour
No not necessarily but she would be if she bought him a gun that’s the whole point

rafichagran

In the case of Jennifer Crumbly I think she was stupid irresponsible and criminally negligent and should be prosecuted, the gun her son used bought by her was used yo kill 4 people.
The above said I don't think they should make all parents criminally responsibly, a Mother known to me had 5 children, 2 went in the forces, 2 are working, one self employed, the other is skilled, but one went to prison, is a thieving little git who I would not trust as far as I could throw him. Is she to be blamed for his bad behaviour, not in my opinion, this particular son was easily led and got into a bad crowd.

But would she give a gun to the child and teach him how to use it?

Iam64

I read the comments on this with interest. I was puzzled that any parent would arm a child who had been experiencing hallucinations. She described him talking about seeing demons throwing bowls as ‘just Ethan messing about’. This made me question whether IQ is relevant when selling firearms. Google wasn’t very helpful though the US discussion groups stressed the right to bear arms “that’s the thing about rights, you don’t have to qualify for them “
I know I shouldn’t be but, I’m shocked that any mother would arm their child, especially a child who you worried ‘might do something dumb’
In a country where a parent can arm a child then I suppose they should be held legally responsible if it all goes horribly wrong

Quite so Iam64.

In the light of all the evidence given in court - evidence of his unstable mental state (which she appears to have laughed off, mostly) to then add another gun to her collection - "for Ethan" - makes her criminally negligent. In spite of the 'gun culture' that she and half of America appears to be steeped in.

It was mentioned that she appeared to be focusing on 'horses' and an extra-marital affair. How relevant that is though I'm not sure. Would she have been any more 'focused' on her son otherwise?

She seems incredibly stupid. A son showing signs of obsession with demons - asking to see a doctor... she thinks, "oh, I know, I'll buy another gun to add to the two I already have, one for him". .

Young boys don't normally ask to see a doctor, he - allegedly did - and she, allegedly, laughed it off. Maybe being a mother was too much of a bother for her?

... and four families are now grieving

rafichagran - my working and personal life means that I met many families like the one you describe. One child out of 3, 5 or 7 goes right off the rails, whilst their siblings are hard working members of society leading ‘ordinary’ lives. Often the difficult child describes a totally different childhood experience than the other adult children. They’ll blame their parents, seeming unable to take responsibility for their own behaviour.
Having acknowledged that not all parents can be held responsible - this mother buying a gun for her disturbed 15 year old is in a different league.

In the case of Jennifer Crumbley I made it quite clear given the circumstances she should have been prosecuted and mad to stand trial, but not all parents of children who go of the rails are to blame as I quoted upthread.
Crumbley in my opinion is culpable.

rafichagran

In the case of Jennifer Crumbley I made it quite clear given the circumstances she should have been prosecuted and mad to stand trial, but not all parents of children who go of the rails are to blame as I quoted upthread.
Crumbley in my opinion is culpable.

You did make it clear. We know that not all parents of children who go off the rails are to blame. This was a parent who facilitated, or contributed to her child’s ability to kill by supplying the gun and ignoring signals of his deteriorating behaviour.
A concern now might be should parents be held responsible for their children’s actions if they don’t monitor their use of the internet?

Good point Mollygo. It’s so difficult to monitor what high school children are seeing on line.
I understand Brianna’s mother has suggested a mobile phone for under 16 year olds, which blocks access to unacceptable, dangerous sites.

Yes Iam64, but experience with teens shows me that as fast as we put limitations on what children access, those who want to will find a way round it. The leader of the group who bullied my DHD certainly did.

Most of the parents of high school, or even upper primary don’t know how to stop or even limit access.
I’ll be interested to see a phone that imposes the limits that Mrs Ghey wants
and to see how long it would take those children so inclined to get round the limitations.

I saw the headline and thought it was ridiculous. But as I read on I actually started agreeing it. Why on earth someone would buy their kid a gun confounds me.

Iam64

Good point Mollygo. It’s so difficult to monitor what high school children are seeing on line.
I understand Brianna’s mother has suggested a mobile phone for under 16 year olds, which blocks access to unacceptable, dangerous sites.

I understand Brianna’s mother has suggested a mobile phone for under 16 year olds, which blocks access to unacceptable, dangerous sites.

You can understand her reasoning, but I fear it would have limited success. Unless it was a mandatory ruling, I believe some parents wouldn't bother, and under 16s might well set themselves up with the standard smart 'phones. In similar fashion to the manner in which they got hold of 'adult' material - magazines, literature, videos, etc, before the birth of the internet.

I think the genie is out of the bottle. I don't know what the answer is. It appears the general consensus - regarding the internet - is that it's almost a human right to allow unrestricted content and that any attempt to curb it is censorship.

The only way we are ever going to deal with the problem is through education - not only of the under 16s, but those in charge of them.

I witnessed in my own family the disintegration of a young mind. My late ex husband's widowed sister allowed her son free-rein whilst she was pre-occupied with her own interests. Night after night he would rent, buy, steal or 'borrow' inappropriate videos (this was back in the 70s) and gorge himself on all kinds of sickening violence and perversions. When we visited, he'd regale us with the previous night's 'entertainment' in a manner that indicated a boastful 'victory' of his ability to enter into the 'adult' world. Fortunately, he was of a cheerful (and simple) disposition so there was no negative affect on his mental health. But he certainly had a warped mind. In this case, it was the parent in need of 'education'.

I admire those like Brianna's mother - trying to make something 'good' come out of such an awful tragedy; so painfully aware of their own misery they want to prevent it happening to others. And, of course, it's a (positive) way of processing their grief. Unfortunately, if it involves government action, they will be very hot on sympathy but unless such preventative action directly coincides with their self-interest as individuals and as a party, I don't think there's much hope for any real change.

The genie is indeed out of the bottle Dickens and like you ^ I don't think there's much hope for any real change.^
I’m not sure that any government will be able to put a stop to it without cooperation from all parents, even those who think my child would never do that.

What could they do?

One way to evaluate that possibility of government action will be to see if the current or future governments put that on their election manifesto and follows it up promptly.
If that doesn’t appear . . .

Louella12

Just been hearing this mother giving evidence. It appears she didn't actually but him a gun, but it was a gun owning household and he had access to them.

We find it hard to understand how/ why guns are readily available, however in USA it's quite normal for millions.

Toddlers are taught to shoot and you can even purchase pistols, rifles and shotguns in different colours.

Not exactly true…his father bought him a gun…shortly after the school had had them in to discuss their son’s worrying behaviour. The mother was having an affair and it appears there was general neglect. The son’s own diary said he needed help but his parents were never there for him, etc, etc…
Obviously apportioning blame is a difficult one but following this case I think justice was done…interestingly the father’s case isn’t being held until March. I despair of the US legal system and the time it takes to get people to justice! Far worse than here…and just look at Trump’s indictments. He should be in Jail by now! But….

I think this is the right verdict in this particular case. It is not just a case of ignoring all the signs of something being seriously wrong and buying him a gun but their neglect all the way through that boy's life. In a way, he is their victim.
In our own country, I often see youngish children out on their own at all hours of the night making mayhem. When I was a youth worker, we had children much younger than our allocated age group (14-21) because they had been chucked out of the house whilst parents were down the pub. They would stay out until the parents returned home after pub chucking out time because they couldn't get in. Those children became troubled adults with criminal records. One has to ask, who was the criminal really.

For quite some time, especially with all the stabbings by those tregarded as chikdren that the responsibble adukts shoujd be charged too. Yes, supplying a weapon, definitely responsible too albeit lesser degree.I have

He was 15 yrs and she took him to a shooting range to practice.

Vintagegirl

He was 15 yrs and she took him to a shooting range to practice.

But obviously left him with access to the gun.