US mother charged with involuntary manslaughter.

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

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?

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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

That was one of the issues in this case.

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.

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.

Or bully Xls cone to that

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

As parents we feel pride in the achievements of our children
(well I do) even from the first steps they take. We also feel
it was part of our parenting and encouragement that helped
them achieve. How come when they do something
really bad all that changes and they are no longer responsible
especially before a child reaches adulthood. I hope the punishment handed out to the parents will wake up alot of others.

Also, if anyone is interested in why the States will never ban or make their gun laws tougher, watch Micheal Moores ‘Bowling for Columbine’ it’s old now, the stats will be out of date (and probably worse) but it is so worth a watch.

I don’t know enough about the ins & outs of the case but it seems a worrying precedent to me.

Yes, she bought him the gun, but with guns being so prevalent in the States (I’ve spent a reasonable amount of time there due to DH work trips & could never get over the fact you can buy them & ammunition in the larger supermarkets!) it would have been easier to get hold of one, it’s easy to buy them second hand from private sellers with no checks. Maybe she thought by taking him to the gun range etc would show him how to use it responsibly. Maybe not, I need to read more about this.

Also, I do wonder how much judgement was based on their lifestyles, the affair etc. the states are very (in my view) moralistic & hypocritical particularly in the smaller towns. Even the larger cities often function as a series of small towns, if you don’t fit in, even the law seems to not be on your side. I’ve stayed in both & it is a much more obviously judgmental country than ours as far as I could see.

He definitely should have had help for his mental health but that’s difficult enough here & even more so in the states with their healthcare model & I suspect the family would have had either no or the very basic health insurance which covers next to nothing.

There are so many complexities about this, both about personal responsibility but also some of the societal issues. I’m going to read up more about this. Might reread ‘we need to talk about Kevin’ whilst I’m at it!

I’m not anti the US, I love going there & we still do, in fact we are going this year, but it’s so different in many ways. The local papers were always eye opening & some often used very judgemental language about lifestyle choices.

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....

No Kinder eggs allowed

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.

It was the facilitating his crime that made me wonder. I’m not sure how it would work in less obvious circumstances, e.g. in Brianna’s killing.
Could the parents be responsible for not monitoring their children Internet access to social media or even worse, the dark web? That’s really what Brianna‘s mother is asking for.
I think the original gun case might give some parents pause for thought, but I’m not sure how it can be applied in every case.

This is the first I’ve heard about this.

All I can think is what kind of mother would buy her child a gun?

The good thing about the harsh sentencing of the mother is that it should lead to the reduction of gun ownership especially amongst young people and that is a positive thing. No culpability on her part would have been far less effective.

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.

Galaxy

All knives are vicious though, I have numerous in my house. I think they may view guns in the house in the way we view knives in the house. I am not excusing anything I hate the gun culture but I think trying to unpick it because of the different cultures is impossible.

All knives are vicious though, I have numerous in my house.

As have millions of us - because they have a purpose other than to maim and kill, unlike firearms. Oh, I suppose they can be used for 'target practice' as a harmless hobby (?) - like Archery, I guess.

I can understand 'young' America in the 1750s, with all those 'wild frontiers' to guard, but almost 3 centuries later, you have to question why the 2nd Amendment isn't given a good academic-makeover. Apart from the obvious $$$.

I know other countries allow gun ownership, and it's a complex issue, but given the level of social incoherency and division in the USA, these evens will be a constant.

In 2020, firearm injuries became the leading cause of death in children. This is according to data from the CDC. If you read some of the analyses, it's grim.

That is a big, big issue that Donald Trump falls short on. Totally pro guns. Frightening.

Most parents feel a sense of responsibility when their children misbehave. Curtaintwitcher, would you prosecute the parents of the two teenagers who killed Brianna? I haven’t seen any reports suggesting they should or could be blamed.
Some children are easier to bring up than others. We need to improve services to support parents who need it.

I find the gun culture in America beyond understanding. The idea that school shootings have become normalised so the authorities consider giving teachers guns is terrifying.