• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Multiple victims in Oxford High School shooting, Oakland County Sheriff confirms


Very little press when a school shooting is clearly prevented. The media doesn’t want to talk about how no gun laws stopped the kid from getting a gun on the streets.
 

WaPo Podcasts 2-pack on Self-defense and Oxford.

The SD one is 1-sided and biased to the Nth degree - racists vigilantes will be carrying any guns anywhere and shooting black folks on false SD premises - and will get off easily. The mere presence of a gun carried for SD is violence and is justification for violent response - police should jump on anyone carrying a gun.

The Oxford one is odd - reporters were trying to find Oxford residents and officials willing to blame guns and weak gun laws. But only found a few that said, now is not the time, but there will be politics later. WaPo started out saying Oxford was light-blue but had shifted light-red in recent years - suggesting that that explains why folks there were not raging against guns.

Sad, that the liberal media view people unlike themselves as deficient. And that’s precisely why we can expect liberals to exact punitive revenge against conservatives whenever possible.

B48684D2-8DFF-4DC1-AD25-087EF5CEBCB3.jpeg
 
"Hi, I'm a journalist with the New York Times".

5wvfpk.jpg


Erin Marquis gesphincto est.
Hat tip: Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds.
 

"Middle and high school students in a Michigan school district will be required to use clear backpacks on campus, one of numerous new safety measures announced weeks after a deadly school shooting at Oxford High School.
Clear backpacks will be provided for all middle- and high-schoolers, the district announced Wednesday in a message to the community.
Before some returned to classrooms Monday, the district asked families not to send children to school with a regular backpack because they would receive a clear bag. High school students, who have yet to return in person, will get the bags when they do. Oxford High School, where a 15-year-old allegedly killed four on Nov. 30, has not yet reopened.
 Elementary school students will not be required to use the backpacks, but they will keep their bags in lockers or cubbies during the day."

OK, a pistol in a lunchbag looks like - a lunchbag.
 

"Middle and high school students in a Michigan school district will be required to use clear backpacks on campus, one of numerous new safety measures announced weeks after a deadly school shooting at Oxford High School.
Clear backpacks will be provided for all middle- and high-schoolers, the district announced Wednesday in a message to the community.
Before some returned to classrooms Monday, the district asked families not to send children to school with a regular backpack because they would receive a clear bag. High school students, who have yet to return in person, will get the bags when they do. Oxford High School, where a 15-year-old allegedly killed four on Nov. 30, has not yet reopened.
 Elementary school students will not be required to use the backpacks, but they will keep their bags in lockers or cubbies during the day."

OK, a pistol in a lunchbag looks like - a lunchbag.
Did they learn this from Parkland?
 
They're a little weird, too, I think. They'd be out on bond right now if they'd gone with the more conventional "stunned and confused" reaction. For some reason, they were spring-loaded to react proactively in all kinds of ways.
 
They're a little weird, too, I think. They'd be out on bond right now if they'd gone with the more conventional "stunned and confused" reaction. For some reason, they were spring-loaded to react proactively in all kinds of ways.

I saw a few minutes of the pre trial hearing today. Both parents are in leg cuffs with a chain that goes up to waist cuffs. Their lawyers ask if they could remove the waist cuffs so they could take notes etc. the sheriff said they are maximum security inmates and she would not be ok with allowing the handcuffs off while in court. Pretty ridiculous, there are dozens of cops in the courthouse and the couple would still have ankle cuffs. They don’t like this couple and they’re doing extra judicial punishments.
 
Kid brought a 6 inch hatchet to my kids' school the other day. Admin played it off as a 'tool'. I talked to the school resource officer and we were of the same opinion: There would have been a dead kid if either of us was in the area. There was more to it, but that's the basic facts. Admin did everything it could to avoid my insistence on a meeting to discuss it. Kid has been on out of school suspension since the incident. School admins are in no way shape or form the proper people to determine if something is a 'threat' or not.

The only thing keeping me somewhat calm is the suspension, and the age of the kid from what I've gathered. If the kid actually comes back to a highly competitive school, I'll go back on the warpath. Pretty sure my kid would be expelled if he showed up with a relatively harmless Nerf (tm) Gun.
Sounds like a “do you know who my dad is” scenario
 

“Jennifer Crumbley told her that she saw another during man who during morning work hours, would pick her up at the office and the two would go to a Costco across the street.”

Costco? The case seems weaker each week. Being a shitty parent isn’t criminal but it seems like the prosecution is really reaching here.
 

parents to stand trial for involuntary manslaughter, for the actions of their son, cause they purchased the gun for him
I'm remarkably ok with this.
The parents were pieces of shit who f***ed around and found out.

Finding out turned their son into a school shooter, destroying families.

The parents purchased the handgun knowing their son had issues. They were aware of ongoing issues after, they were summoned to the school over drawings of him using the handgun to kill others while asking for help, and did nothing. They didn't even bother to check for the handgun when they were summoned to the school the day of the shooting.

They have culpability here, their son was 15 years old when he committed these murders.
 
Last edited:
I'm remarkably ok with this.
The parents were precession of shit who f***ed around and found out.

Finding out turned their son into a school shooter, destroying family's.

The parents purchased the handgun knowing their son had issues. They were aware of ongoing issues after, they were summoned to the school over drawings of him using the handgun to kill others while asking for help, and did nothing. They didn't even bother to check for the handgun when they were summoned to the school the day of the shooting.

They have culpability here.
agree
 
Sentencing hearing right now.

Not to minimize what the surviving victims went through, but hearing the repeated mentions of "gun violence" makes me think that these victim statements were drafted by a gun control advocacy group. Crumbley did this. This sick bastard who would torture and kill animals. He and his parents are the ones to blame.
 
This case sets a precedent for sure but that Mom sure effed up bigtime. They’re going after Dad next.
 

Mom's guilty
Prosecutors say Jennifer Crumbley was grossly negligent when she failed to tell Oxford High School that the family had guns, including a 9 mm handgun that her son, Ethan Crumbley, used at a shooting range on the weekend before the Nov. 30, 2021, attack.
This quote is confusing
 
This case sets a precedent for sure but that Mom sure effed up bigtime. They’re going after Dad next.

I didn't follow the case then or now, so everything I know about is in this outtake:

Prosecutors say Jennifer Crumbley was grossly negligent when she failed to tell Oxford High School that the family had guns ...

I missed the part in the law (or sanity, even...) where a gun owner has to notify the school that they own firearms. In fact, if *I* worked in the front office of a high school and some parent came in saying they own guns, it would seem so off-the-wall a thing to mention I would probably assume they making a threat and call 911.

The jury ... asking if they could “infer anything” from prosecutors not presenting ... to explain specifically how he got access to a gun at home ...

“The answer is no," Oakland County Judge Cheryl Matthews said. “You’re only allowed to consider the evidence that was admitted in the case.”

The judge is flat wrong. If the jury feels the information is necessary, then the lawyers for either the prosecution or the defense were grossly negligent in not bringing it into evidence before it was asked. They should have set aside the instructions and ruled based on the law.


All that said, was there some morally sufficient reason that she should have told the school she owned a gun, or that the manner the kid got hold of it doesn't matter?

This verdict could conceivably be the shot-heard-round-the-world. Probably not, but maybe.
 
I didn't follow the case then or now, so everything I know about is in this outtake:



I missed the part in the law (or sanity, even...) where a gun owner has to notify the school that they own firearms. In fact, if *I* worked in the front office of a high school and some parent came in saying they own guns, it would seem so off-the-wall a thing to mention I would probably assume they making a threat and call 911.



The judge is flat wrong. If the jury feels the information is necessary, then the lawyers for either the prosecution or the defense were grossly negligent in not bringing it into evidence before it was asked. They should have set aside the instructions and ruled based on the law.


All that said, was there some morally sufficient reason that she should have told the school she owned a gun, or that the manner the kid got hold of it doesn't matter?

This verdict could conceivably be the shot-heard-round-the-world. Probably not, but maybe.
Her issue was not in failing to tell the school about the gun imho.

It was because her and her husband made a straw purchase of a handgun for an under age individual. It was his bday gift. They failed to address mental health issues brought up to them from the school. She posted on social media about all of this. The kid easily found the gun at home. In this case there is no wonder the parents would face prosecution for at least some measures of culpability wrt to a school shooting. And in this day and age with such vehement hatred for guns the court system was bound to make it stick.
 
It was because her and her husband made a straw purchase of a handgun for an under age individual. It was his bday gift. They failed to address mental health issues brought up to them from the school. She posted on social media about all of this. The kid easily found the gun at home. In this case there is no wonder the parents would face prosecution for at least some measures of culpability wrt to a school shooting. And in this day and age with such vehement hatred for guns the court system was bound to make it stick.
I haven't been following the case. If it was a gift, then it can't be a straw purchase. I would have expected the basis for criminal negligence to be that
a) The parents knew the child was "troubled" and threatening violence.
b) Any reasonable person would realize the need to secure the firearm so that it could not be used without supervision.
c) They failed to secure the firearm.

I vaguely recall something about a conference that day, and perhaps knowing that they had failed to secure the firearm, a reasonable person would have been terrified on that day that the kid was going to shoot up the school if he had managed to gain access to the weapon. At any rate, they, having the knowledge of exactly how secure the gun was or wasn't and the means of determining whether it was still in the house, might have squandered the last clear opportunity to prevent it.

I still wonder whether deep down the mother wanted it to happen and just couldn't herself foresee that she would be prosecuted, maybe a munchausen by proxy thing, or worse.
 
Back
Top Bottom