Juvenile Justice and Accountability: Insights from the Oxford High School Shooting

The Oxford shooting case involving Ethan Crumbly, that occurred around Thanksgiving 2021, is one of the most significant cases in Michigan. At just 15 years old, Crumbly entered his high school and tragically shot and killed four students while injuring others, including a teacher. The situation was further complicated by the fact that the gun used in the shooting had been purchased for him just two days earlier by his parents. It was discovered that the weapon was not stored properly, and there were numerous warning signs that the parents failed to address—signs that could have prevented the tragedy.

With over two decades of experience as both a prosecutor and a criminal justice attorney, particularly in juvenile justice, Dan Geherin has a unique perspective on this case. In the latest Michigan Justice Chronicles podcast, Dan discusses how the Crumbly case intersects with various aspects of his practice, including juvenile justice, parental responsibility, manslaughter, and gun rights. 

What were the outcomes of the case for both the juvenile Ethan and his parents?

In a notable development, Ethan Crumbly, in a rare turn of events, pleaded guilty to first-degree murder. Such pleas are extremely uncommon and, given his conviction, he received a life sentence without the possibility of parole. Although there was a slim chance he could avoid this due to being a juvenile charged as an adult, the judge imposed the maximum penalty. At 17, Ethan will spend potentially 63 years in prison if he lives to 80, with no chance for parole.

In addition, both of Ethan's parents faced separate trials. His mother, Jennifer, was convicted of manslaughter, followed by her husband, James, who was also convicted of manslaughter. They each received the maximum sentence of 10 to 15 years in state prison. This is particularly notable because it's unusual for first-time offenders to receive the maximum sentence. The Crumbly case was unprecedented in U.S. history, as they were the first parents ever prosecuted for their child's actions in a school shooting.

As of May 2024, both parents and Ethan are serving their respective sentences, although appeals are ongoing.

What can you tell us about how those cases with the parents actually unfolded? 

“There was a significant backlash from some defense attorneys who were outraged by the decision to hold parents accountable for their child's actions. However, from my perspective and that of many who work in both civil and criminal law, including wrongful death cases, there was a clear connection between the parents' actions and their son's behavior.

To simplify, the core issues were not just that they bought their 15-year-old son a gun, which wasn't illegal at the time, but that they failed to secure it. Ethan Crumbly was clearly struggling with serious mental health issues, which the parents seemed to ignore. The most striking fact, and one that shocks many who learn about the case, is that just an hour before the shooting, Ethan was found drawing disturbing images of guns and blood on his math homework. His math teacher reported this to the principal, and the parents were summoned to the school. Despite being informed of these troubling signs and having recently purchased a gun for their son, they chose to return to work and left Ethan at school. He then used that unsecured gun to commit the shooting.

This failure to act—failing to secure the gun, ignoring clear warning signs, and not taking immediate action—was a crucial element in the prosecutor's case for involuntary manslaughter. The argument was that the parents' inactions contributed significantly to the tragedy, and their decisions may have played a role in the deaths of the students.”

What are the implications now that this has been decided?

Prosecutor Karen McDonald emphasized that her goal was not to set a new precedent but to hold accountable those she believed were responsible. “I believe she was sincere in that intention. However, with these convictions now established, it's likely that other prosecutors will consider pursuing charges against family members or parents in cases of mass shootings, especially when there is negligence involved in providing firearms,” says Dan Geherin.

“I hope that this case will have a deterrent effect, encouraging parents to be more cautious. For instance, it might prompt them to delay giving a child access to a gun until they’re mature enough to handle it responsibly, and to be more vigilant about warning signs in their children. This case could indeed set a precedent, making it easier for prosecutors to pursue similar charges in future cases involving negligence related to tragic shootings or mass killings.”

Do you think we'll see more parents being prosecuted for school shootings in the future?

“I think it's likely. Often, these kids have access to weapons that come from their own homes. If parents don’t become more vigilant about securing these weapons and restricting access, we might see more prosecutions similar to the Crumbly case. Once the precedent is set, other law enforcement agencies and prosecutors across the country may follow suit, leading to more individuals being held accountable for such tragedies, rather than just the shooters themselves.”

How is representing juveniles different for you?

“When representing a juvenile facing a life sentence, it’s not only emotionally difficult but also procedurally complex. For adults convicted of first-degree murder, the outcome is straightforward: life without parole. Juveniles, however, face additional considerations. In cases like these, a Miller hearing is conducted to assess whether a life sentence without parole is appropriate, taking into account the juvenile's potential for rehabilitation and the fact that their brain is still developing.

Representing juveniles in such serious cases involves navigating unique factors, such as the role of their parents, ethical considerations, and specialized legal procedures that differ from those in adult cases. It requires balancing the need for public safety with the possibility of redemption and rehabilitation for the young offender.”

What are some of the more common offenses committed by juveniles in Michigan? How does the system typically address these offenses?

Juvenile offenses typically fall into four categories, each representing a significant area of concern:

• Substance Abuse: This includes underage drinking, marijuana use, and other prohibited substances. Many juveniles face delinquency charges for possession, use, or related offenses like drinking and driving.
• Driving Offenses: Young drivers, often inexperienced, can face issues such as texting while driving, drinking and driving, or even causing serious accidents. These incidents can lead to charges of negligent homicide or reckless driving resulting in injury.
• Sexual Offenses: This category covers a range of issues from sexting and sexual harassment to sexual assault. These offenses are prevalent among juveniles and college students, leading to specialized court dockets for handling such cases with dedicated resources for treatment and counseling.
• Property and Theft Offenses: Common infractions include vandalism, shoplifting, and property damage. 

While these four areas cover the majority of juvenile cases, there are more serious, less frequent offenses such as murder or serious sexual conduct that are significant and complex.

When it comes to sentencing after a decision is made, what are the sentencing options for juveniles convicted of crimes in Michigan?

Juvenile sentencing in Michigan generally falls into two main categories, depending on whether the offense is a waiver offense or a traditional juvenile offense:

1. Traditional Juvenile Offenses: For juveniles not charged with a waiver offense, there are several levels of possible dispositions, which can be visualized as a ladder:
   • Top Tier: The most severe option involves placement in a juvenile facility, akin to a juvenile prison. Although there are fewer of these facilities due to budget constraints, a juvenile may still be committed to one if their offense is serious enough. In this case, the state takes over supervision, making the juvenile a ward of the state for a set period.
   • Middle Tier: Juveniles might be placed in specialized treatment facilities, such as drug rehabilitation centers or anger management programs, if their offenses require targeted intervention.
   • Lower Tier: The most common disposition is probation, which includes regular monitoring, rehabilitation programs, community service, and other requirements.
   • Bottom Tier: Diversion programs offer an opportunity for dismissal of charges through informal supervision or probation, focusing on rehabilitation and avoiding formal criminal records.
2. Waiver Offenses: If a juvenile is charged with a waiver offense, they are treated as adults within the criminal justice system. This means they face adult penalties, including state prison, county jails, or adult probation.

What is a memorable case involving a juvenile that you've handled, and maybe some lessons that you've learned from that particular instance?

“I often recall an early case that stands out vividly in my memory. As a young attorney, I was hired by the parents of an 8-year-old girl who was facing criminal charges. Just the sight of her—barely three feet tall and maybe 100 pounds soaking wet—was striking. It was a surreal experience to represent someone so young. The case was deeply unsettling, but ultimately, we had it dismissed due to her age and other factors. It's a case that always reminds me of the potential overreach of the legal system and the lasting impact it can have on a child's life. I can only imagine how that young girl, scared out of her mind, will remember that day.

Over the years, I've represented juveniles involved in various situations. Some were caught up as getaway drivers for older relatives or fell into trouble due to bad influences. Others faced serious charges that we fought hard to keep out of adult court, with some success. While some cases remain under the public radar, they still significantly impact the juvenile justice system.

Interestingly, I've found that most of the juveniles I've represented over 25 years never reappear in the system. This is a positive sign, indicating that the system, for the most part, is successfully rehabilitating these young clients. Unlike many repeat offenders in the adult system, it's rare for me to see these juvenile clients again, which suggests that the interventions and rehabilitative efforts are making a difference.”

Contact Geherin Law Group for Washtenaw County Criminal Defense

If you’re being investigated or charged with a criminal case in Washtenaw County, and want a firm with 25+ years of targeted Washtenaw County experience, please contact Dan and his firm at GLG Michigan immediately.  We’re available 24/7, and we’ll help put you at ease, form a plan to handle your case, and fight aggressively to restore your reputation and protect your freedom.  Schedule your consultation online here, or call 24/7 (734) 263-2780. We’re acutely committed to providing personal attention, personal options, and personal justice to every single client we represent.  

GLG Michigan:  To Us, Washtenaw County Criminal Defense is Personal.    

Listen to our latest podcast the Michigan Justice Chronicles here.