Jennifer Crumbley's lawyer seeks leniency ahead of sentencing: She's 'also suffered significantly'

DETROIT — Jennifer Crumbley's lawyer has asked a judge to allow the mother of the Oxford High School shooter to serve her involuntary manslaughter sentence under house arrest instead of going to prison, reiterating that Crumbley's criminal prosecution has painted a misleading narrative.

Crumbley and her husband, James, are the first parents in America to be held criminally responsible for a school shooting by their child. They are to be sentenced Tuesday for their separate convictions on four counts of involuntary manslaughter — one for each classmate their son murdered.

In a rare and unconventional request, defense attorney Shannon Smith has offered to let her client live in her guest house — on a tether — to spare her from going to prison.

Jennifer Crumbley is not the woman the prosecution has portrayed her to be, Smith argued, and has suffered enough already: She has been locked up for 23 hours a day for more than two years, with no contact with her son or husband.

"The victims and their families have suffered beyond what words can explain," Smith said in her sentencing memo but added: "Mrs. Crumbley has also suffered significantly."

Defense lawyer: Jennifer Crumbley 'in reality has lost everything'

Her son, Ethan Crumbley, who was 15 when he carried out his massacre, pleaded guilty to his crimes and is serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole. "She in reality has lost everything," Smith said. "And she is saddled with extra baggage knowing the horrific acts her son did to others and always second guessing every choice she made as a parent."

She added: "Mrs. Crumbley’s son is, in reality, gone forever."

And locking up his mother doesn't change anything or fix anything, Smith argued, maintaining Jennifer Crumbley can work remotely while on house arrest, and will not have any contact with the victims or their families.

"Further prison time does nothing to protect society — Mrs. Crumbley is not a threat to the community," Smith wrote, adding: "Putting Mrs. Crumbley in prison does nothing to further deter others from committing like offenses. There is no person who would want the events of November 30, 2021, to repeat themselves."

'A sexist and misogynistic attack on a mother'

Despite what the prosecution has said about Jennifer Crumbley, her lawyer and family maintain that she was a loving and involved parent who monitored her son's studies, enrolled him in multiple sports, took him on trips, and bragged about and posted his artwork on social media. She also was the breadwinner who worked two jobs to meet her family's needs.

"Criticizing Mrs. Crumbley for being 'rarely home' is a sexist and misogynistic attack on a mother. It’s certainly not criminal, nor would it be expected to lead to criminal behavior by a child, particularly when it was a two-parent household where Mr. Crumbley mostly worked from home — and was very close to home — even when he was DoorDashing in between jobs," wrote Smith, who also scoffed at the prosecution's claim that Jennifer Crumbley has shown "a complete lack of remorse by minimizing any role she had in the matter."

"The fact of the matter is that Mrs. Crumbley did have a minimal role in the matter," Smith wrote in her sentencing memo, which echoed the arguments she has made all along: What happened to the Crumbleys could happen to any parent in America.

In the end, Smith argues, the Crumbleys were manipulated by a teenage son who hid his dark side from his parents and later from school officials, revealing it only after committing his act of terror that no one, she stressed, saw coming.

"Any gross negligence on her part can only be found to be parenting mistakes that any parent could make," Smith wrote. "The shooter manipulated his parents to buy a gun, made detailed plans to commit a school shooting that he kept from his parents — even according to his own admission at his sentencing — found the hidden weapon where his father had stored it, stole the weapon, took it to school, was confronted about concerning drawings, lied effectively enough to convince school officials it was really a non-issue, and chose to open fire on his classmates and teachers."

Smith argued that while Jennifer Crumbley "obviously never shot or killed anyone," the actions or inactions that she is criticized for "are easily actions any parent could take, especially when dealing with a child who has never exhibited disciplinary issues or mental health issues to them, aside from typical arguments between parents and teenagers over little things like missing school assignments."

But an Oakland County jury disagreed and convicted her in February of four counts of involuntary manslaughter, concluding her actions and inactions caused the deaths of four students murdered by her son. On Tuesday, Jennifer and James Crumbley will learn their fate before Oakland County Circuit Judge Cheryl Matthews, who will sentence them for their part in the deaths of Tate Myre, 16; Hana St. Juliana, 14; Madisyn Baldwin, 17, and Justin Shilling, 17.

Jennifer Crumbley's family rallies for leniency

Each count carries a potential prison sentence of up to 15 years, though the sentences are expected to be served concurrently.

The prosecution, in sentencing memos filed last week, sought 10- to 15-year prison sentences for both Crumbleys. Both Crumbleys are asking to be sentenced to time served.

In an 80-page sentencing memo filed late Friday, Jennifer Crumbley's lawyer, mom, dad, pastor, and several other relatives pleaded with the judge to show Jennifer Crumbley mercy, maintaining she is not the neglectful mother as she has been portrayed.

"Contrary to how the prosecution and media depicted Jennifer, Ethan was the focus of her life," her father, a retired schoolteacher in Florida, wrote in a letter to the judge, stressing that his daughter "was absolutely distraught" after the shooting.

"She was devastated that people were hurt and killed, scared and appalled by what Ethan did, worried about him, terrified by threats and the public's outrage with her," the father's letter states, noting he has spoken to his daughter numerous times during her incarceration. "I can hear in her voice how this has taken an emotional and mental toll on her health. She has undeniably suffered and been punished."

Jennifer Crumbley's mother, also a former schoolteacher, asked for the same, stressing that her daughter — and the entire family — is heartbroken over the tragedy.

Her mother added, "She was so paralyzed with fear, and for the first time in her life, she did not have a safe place to go. We were the ones recommending for her to take the money out of the bank, so she could stay safe until they both turned themselves in the morning with their attorneys."

This latter comment challenges the prosecution narrative that the Crumbleys emptied their bank accounts after the shooting because they were fleeing to avoid prosecution.

Jennifer Crumbley's parents also told the judge that their daughter could live with them in Florida, should she be sentenced to house arrest.

'Mrs. Crumbley was damned no matter what she did'

In her sentencing memo, Smith rehashed much of the trial, and held strong to her defense that Jennifer Crumbley never saw any signs that her son was mentally struggling, that he would ever hurt himself or anyone else, and that she never knew of his plan to shoot up his school. She especially lashed out at the prosecution for its handling of the case, alleging it made up a story that her client was fleeing and then portrayed her client as a horrible mother.

"(T)he prosecution repeatedly characterized and continues to present Mrs. Crumbley as a selfish, callous, evil person and horrible mother who '… prioritize[ed] her own convenience over the safety to everyone in the school that day,' " Smith writes. "Mrs. Crumbley was damned no matter what she did or did not do."

For example, Smith argues, Jennifer Crumbley's reaction to the tragedy was criticized "at every turn" during the trial.

"The prosecution certainly tried to convey that Mrs. Crumbley did not care enough about what was going on, that she did not cry enough, and that she did not behave the way a mother of a school shooter would behave — despite the fact that there really is no formula about how a mother of a school shooter would behave after such a shocking and disturbing event was committed by their child," Smith wrote. "Ironically, as trial progressed, when Mrs. Crumbley did cry, watching the videos of her son’s horrific actions for the first time, the prosecution objected that 'she was crying.' "

Smith also sought to explain her client's testimony at trial, when Jennifer Crumbley told the jury that looking back, she would not have changed anything. Smith said her client was referring to what she knew before the shooting — that she would not have acted differently because she had no idea her son was planning to shoot up the school.

Lawyer: Of course shooter's mom would do things differently

In hindsight, however, Smith stressed that Jennifer Crumbley would have done a lot of things differently — which Jennifer Crumbley also stated in an interview with state officials preparing her presentencing report.

“At trial, when I was on the stand I was asked if I would have done anything differently, I testified that I would not have — and that is true without the benefit of (sic) hindsight that I have now. With the information I have now, of course my answer would be hugely different. There are so many things that I would change if I could go back in time," Jennifer Crumbley said in the interview.

Smith argued that by expressing grief for herself or her family, Jennifer Crumbley "is taking nothing from the victims in this case."

"It is possible to be sad for the victims AND the Crumbleys," Smith writes. "While this is a situation that has always been certain to end in disappointment for everyone, there is nothing that can rewind the events of November 30, 2021, which created irreparable damage, unimaginable loss and a nightmare that will continue for eternity."

Two juries have sided with the prosecution's assessment that the Crumbleys ignored a child who was mentally spiraling, bought him a gun instead of getting him help and never disclosed that gun to the school when given the chance.

"The prosecution has put on a narrative that they are righteous and virtuous throughout this case. As they have done this, they have misled the public and the media from the beginning of this case and through trial," Smith wrote, noting her client will appeal her conviction.

Contact Tresa Baldas: tbaldas@freepress.com.

Contributing: Thao Nguyen, USA TODAY