Criminal Charges for Parents of a Mass Shooter?

The legal system is fighting gun violence by pushing the limits of criminal liability.

Photo by Chip Vincent on Unsplash

In 2021 the parents of Ethan Crumbley purchased a handgun for their son - then 15 - as an early Christmas present. Despite the fact that Ethan had shown signs of mental health problems to that date, the parents somehow had it in their head that a firearm was the answer.

A few weeks later four of Ethan’s classmates were dead, victims of a mass shooting perpetrated by Ethan with the very same gun.

Now, prosecutors want to hold the parents criminally responsible for the deaths of the shooting victims.

Not my crime, your crime

It’s a principle of US criminal law that one cannot be held liable for another’s crimes. That said, there are circumstances that can impose liability on participants in a crime. If you plan a crime with another you could be held liable for conspiracy (see one of the many charges against Trump in Georgia, where prosecutors are charging him with conspiracy to defraud the US). If you assist in the commission of a crime you can be held liable for “aiding and abetting” the crime.

Both of these ancillary theories of liability rest on the defendant’s knowledge of the intended crime. You can’t conspire to commit or aid and abet commit a crime if you don’t know a crime is being committed.

That’s why Ethan’s parents can’t be held liable for either conspiracy or aiding and abetting. They had no knowledge that Ethan would (or was planning on) murdering his classmates.

Criminal Negligence

Instead, prosecutors are charging the Crumbleys with involuntary manslaughter for the deaths of the victims, the legal requirement of which is criminal negligence or recklessness. By purchasing a handgun and failing to take care of Ethan, the prosecutors will argue, they were negligent and reckless and should be held liable for the ensuing deaths. This is where things get sticky.

Was it foreseeable?

When negligence is on the table the question lawyers argue about is this: would a reasonable person have seen this coming? 

Would a reasonable parent, given signs of Ethan’s mental health issues, foresee that purchasing a handgun for him could lead to the shooting deaths of others? 

If the jury says yes then the parents can be held criminally negligent & thrown in jail for the deaths of these kids. If the answer is no, they’ll be let off the hook.

To be clear, a “yes” finding would break new ground in the world of criminal law, where criminal negligence has not yet been used to impose liability on the parents of a mass shooter for the deaths of the shooting victims. Such a finding could provide ammunition to prosecutors across the country seeking to punish the enablers of the scourge of gun violence in our country by opening up a new avenue of criminality. It will also ratchet up the deterrent impact of the law in these cases: if parents know they may be on the hook for potential deaths caused by their kids, they’ll pay closer attention and think twice before weaponizing them.

Was this foreseeable? Would a reasonable person have expected it to happen?

ABC outlines some evidence to think about:

“Days before the shooting, a teacher allegedly saw Ethan Crumbley researching ammunition in class, and the school contacted his parents but they didn't respond, according to prosecutors. But Jennifer Crumbley did text her son, writing, "lol, I'm not mad at you, you have to learn not to get caught," according to prosecutors.”

Hours before the shooting, prosecutors said a teacher saw a note on Ethan Crumbley's desk that was "a drawing of a semi-automatic handgun pointing at the words, 'The thoughts won't stop, help me.' In another section of the note was a drawing of a bullet with the following words above that bullet, 'Blood everywhere.'"

The Crumbleys were called to the school over the incident, and said they'd get their son counseling, but did not take him home, prosecutors said.”

If there were a set of facts compelling a jury to impose criminal liability on parents of a mass shooter, this may well be the one to break new ground.

My two cents: find them criminally negligent. In our mass-shooting infested America it’s entirely foreseeable that purchasing a gun for your kid can result in deaths of others, especially if your child has shown clear signs of mental health despair. A guilty verdict here would empower the legal system to fight back against gun violence everywhere, and hopefully reduce the number of needless deaths we are witnessing every single year.