CDZ Should the parents of gang members be arrested for accessory to murder, manslaughter and attempted murder?

Short version:

To be guilty as an accomplice, the alleged accomplice has to share the “mens rea” with the primary criminal actor and to have performed some some act (the “actus reus”) in furtherance of that crime.

I don’t know if there’s any evidence that the Crumbley parents were even aware of their son’s murderous thinking. So, if not, it is difficult to believe they could “share” his culpable mental state. They may be guilty of different crimes based on what they did know and what they failed to do. But I’m not sure manslaughter is legitimately on the list.
Do you think that they were aware of the fact that their son may not have been mentally stable enough to be presented with a handgun as a present at age 15? That's kind of negligent to put it mildly, in my opinion.
 
Why don't you let this just play out while all the evidence is collected.
The parents may or may not have known he was going to shoot up the school.
Mom texting "Don't do it." is evidence or not?

Let me ask..... Is it fact or just alleged that she sent this ^^^^^^^^^ text? "Don't do it."
From what I read, she sent it once the reports of the shooting had begun coming in. It did cross my mind since it was after the fact that she may have been telling him to not take his own life.
 
I am....I am addressing the other posters who have already convicted the parents......without knowing anything about the situation the same way they convicted Kyle Rittenhouse....
In the very least, it is very irresponsible to purchase a lethal weapon for a child that cannot even legally possess it for several years, with no training or apparently supervision.

I can't even imagine why they didn't just take him home to at least have a conversation with when the school asked them to.
 
From what I read, she sent it once the reports of the shooting had begun coming in. It did cross my mind since it was after the fact that she may have been telling him to not take his own life.
Timestamps will tell the truth.

So, if it is proven that she sent the "Don't do it" text before the shooting, will you hold her responsible and complicit?

If it's proven that she sent that text AFTER the shooting time, then maybe it means what you want it to mean.

I still don't understand WHY you want to defend any of the Crumbley's?
 
Do you think that they were aware of the fact that their son may not have been mentally stable enough to be presented with a handgun as a present at age 15? That's kind of negligent to put it mildly, in my opinion.
I have no idea. However, even if the kid has no mental defect, I think 15 is too young anyway for a handgun as a gift. Unless the idea had been for dad to keep and properly secure the gun except when at a shooting range, it seems like asinine parenting.
 
Timestamps will tell the truth.

So, if it is proven that she sent the "Don't do it" text before the shooting, will you hold her responsible and complicit?

If it's proven that she sent that text AFTER the shooting time, then maybe it means what you want it to mean.

I still don't understand WHY you want to defend any of the Crumbley's?
I'm not defending them, I'm just relaying some of my initial thoughts.

I don't know if they can be held criminally liable (involuntary manslaughter) but I can't imagine the parents not being found civilly liable to the families of the students he killed.
 
Well, at least until they’re 18. You are absolutely on the right track though it should be a lot longer. A human’s brainstem doesn’t fully connect to the frontal lobe, where logical thoughts are formulated, until around the age of 25.

Had we known this information 2 1/2 centuries ago, our US laws would be much up-to-date with actual “body clocks”. The legal age of drinking alcohol, possibly other laws, would’ve been set at a higher age. Can you imagine the public outcry now if congress tried to raise it now? Lol No way will any state attempt to raise legal drinking age to match this info of course- Mutinies and riots would break out in all states!
I believe women are about 3 to 5 years ahead of men....we could be 20 to 22 with full mental growth.... Girls brain development begins at a younger age than boys, thus finishes before boys, I have read... And in general girls begin to mature sooner....
 
I believe women are about 3 to 5 years ahead of men....we could be 20 to 22 with full mental growth.... Girls brain development begins at a younger age than boys, thus finishes before boys, I have read... And in general girls begin to mature sooner....
Along that same train of thought boys more than girls are held back a year before entering first grade, due to needing that time to mature more. I’m not a big supporter of mandatory school for preschoolers as many aren’t ready, but understand for some home situations it’s better that the three-year-old go to a half day of school as opposed to not going.

The brainstem connection, however, is not determined by gender and the time of frontal lobe attachment varies according to one’s genetics.
 
The parents of the Michigan school shooter have been arrested and charged with manslaughter......the warning they apparently recieved about their child was a scary picture and scary writing...the day the shooting occurred....

Meanwhile...the parent/parents of actual gang members have far more knowledge of their violent children and their activities........up to and including murder, manslaughter.....

Should the parents of gang members be charged with the same crimes as the Michigan school shooter>
You mean Parent. They don't have any Pappys.
 
I have no idea. However, even if the kid has no mental defect, I think 15 is too young anyway for a handgun as a gift. Unless the idea had been for dad to keep and properly secure the gun except when at a shooting range, it seems like asinine parenting.


Do you know if they let him have unlimited access to the gun?

There are children younger than him who are "given," rifles and shotguns for hunting....they are not allowed to use it without parental supervision....

Do you know the arrangement of the parents with the shooter?
 
In the very least, it is very irresponsible to purchase a lethal weapon for a child that cannot even legally possess it for several years, with no training or apparently supervision.

I can't even imagine why they didn't just take him home to at least have a conversation with when the school asked them to.


There are children younger than him who are given shotguns, and rifles to go hunting with their parents......they use the guns under the direct supervision of the parents...

How do you know that the pistol was used differently?

There are so many assumptions because of the need to make an example of these parents......and the anti-gun left sees this as an opportunity to push their agenda.

why they didn't just take him home

How about they needed time to process what they learned and what they needed to do.....and they may have considered he was in a safe, secure location, surrounded by education professionals .......they were in a very stressful situation....perhaps they wanted to be able to discuss what to do without the kid in the home so they could talk freely?

Ever think of that?
 
Do you know if they let him have unlimited access to the gun?

There are children younger than him who are "given," rifles and shotguns for hunting....they are not allowed to use it without parental supervision....

Do you know the arrangement of the parents with the shooter?
I have absolutely no way of knowing. I’ve heard that the kid took the gun from dad’s drawer. Did he? Or was it given to the kid by the parents? I don’t know.

I have even less knowledge of if the parents had any arrangement or not with the kid.

All good questions which might have a bearing as trial issues. But the answers are not out there yet as far as I’ve seen.
 
Last edited:
The parents of the Michigan school shooter have been arrested and charged with manslaughter......the warning they apparently recieved about their child was a scary picture and scary writing...the day the shooting occurred....

Meanwhile...the parent/parents of actual gang members have far more knowledge of their violent children and their activities........up to and including murder, manslaughter.....

Should the parents of gang members be charged with the same crimes as the Michigan school shooter>
All of them should be arrested and convicted and sent to prison ---- hundreds and hundreds and thousands of black parents, or as many of them as they can identify; the fathers would be hard to catch. But if they are going to prosecute the parents of the Oxford school shooter, ALLL, 100%, all the thousands of the other parents MUST be prosecuted!

It might even sort of work, if you think about it --- apparently black parents, or at least the mom, don't care if the kid gets into murderous gangs, drug selling, thieving, flash mobs, etc., etc. Maybe we should put some penalties on the moms.

But unless the parents of ALLLL the young black killers are arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced, there is no excuse for charging the white parents. This is racist. They are political prisoners, charged from pure racist animus.
 
I have absolutely no way of knowing. I’ve heard that the kid took the gun from dad’s drawer. Did he? Or was it given to the kid by the parents? I don’t know.

I have even less knowledge of if the parents had any arrangement of not with the kid.

All good questions which might have a bearing as trial issues. But the answers are not out there yet as far as I’ve seen.


Thank you........that was a great reply....too many of the others posting here are making assumptions about the situation....without any knowledge or understanding of what actually went on.
 
Why don't you let this just play out while all the evidence is collected.
The parents may or may not have known he was going to shoot up the school.
Mom texting "Don't do it." is evidence or not?

Let me ask..... Is it fact or just alleged that she sent this ^^^^^^^^^ text? "Don't do it."
It seems like a good sign to me: she was telling him not to do anything bad; surely that will tell in her favor.
 
In the very least, it is very irresponsible to purchase a lethal weapon for a child that cannot even legally possess it for several years, with no training or apparently supervision.

I can't even imagine why they didn't just take him home to at least have a conversation with when the school asked them to.


You should ask members here on U.S.message who are gun owners with children.....who may shoot or hunt with them.....you will find it isn't unusual at all....the kids don't have unsupervised access to the guns, and never use them without the parent present.....

You might be interested in how they treat guns and their children and how young those children actually are....

For example.....16 years old...




And these youngsters....teenagers and younger....they did not shoot students at schools....

 
In the very least, it is very irresponsible to purchase a lethal weapon for a child that cannot even legally possess it for several years, with no training or apparently supervision.

I can't even imagine why they didn't just take him home to at least have a conversation with when the school asked them to.


7 year old competitive shooter.......

 
The parents of the Michigan school shooter have been arrested and charged with manslaughter......the warning they apparently recieved about their child was a scary picture and scary writing...the day the shooting occurred....

Meanwhile...the parent/parents of actual gang members have far more knowledge of their violent children and their activities........up to and including murder, manslaughter.....

Should the parents of gang members be charged with the same crimes as the Michigan school shooter>
We should wait until all the evidence comes out in the case of the Michigan shooter. They went on the run and were found hiding.
 

Forum List

Back
Top