OXFORD, Mich. – Prosecutors made one point clear Friday during their closing argument at the trial of the Oxford shooter’s mother: Their involuntary manslaughter case is largely about the information Jennifer Crumbley knew and didn’t share or act on.
Over the past two weeks, prosecutors have introduced testimony and evidence in court in an effort to prove Jennifer Crumbley’s alleged gross negligence played a role in the Oxford High School shooting carried out by her son. Since being charged with involuntary manslaughter more than two years ago, prosecutors have maintained that Crumbley failed to take steps that could have prevented the murder of four students on Nov. 30, 2021.
Crumbley’s trial came to an end Friday afternoon on its seventh day, leaving the jury with much to consider before deliberations begin on Monday, Feb. 5.
Throughout the trial, prosecutors introduced 21 witnesses, while the defense introduced only one: Jennifer Crumbley herself. Both sides ended the trial Friday with long, and at times emotional, pleas to the jury to consider the evidence -- or, in the defense’s opinion, lack thereof -- and make a “just” decision when they return to the court.
Ultimately, the jury will have to decide if the Oakland County prosecutors proved their case: that Crumbley is guilty of four counts of involuntary manslaughter. During her closing argument, Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald shared two theories related to involuntary manslaughter, telling the jury that they must find the prosecution proved at least one of those theories to find Crumbley guilty.
Here are the two manslaughter theories, as listed by the prosecutor’s office on Friday:
Gross negligence in the performance of lawful act
- Defendant caused death.
- In doing the act that caused death, defendant acted in a grossly negligent manner.
Gross negligence in failing to perform a legal duty
- Defendant had a legal duty to the victim.
- Defendant knew of the facts that gave rise to the duty.
- Defendant willfully neglected or refused to perform that duty, and her failure to perform it was grossly negligent to human life.
- The death of the victim was directly caused by defendant’s failure to perform this duty.
What Jennifer Crumbley ‘didn’t say’
Prosecutor McDonald began her closing argument by telling the jury it’s not her job, “nor is it right to sanitize what happened in the school that day.” Instead, she said her job is to present evidence, facts, and the truth. She then went through an overview of the witnesses called throughout the trial, and the testimonies they each shared. You can watch McDonald’s closing statement in the video down below.
One of the key points McDonald alleged in her hour and 15 minute closing statement was that Crumbley knew her son was troubled and needed help, and could have told someone or intervened, but didn’t. McDonald said there was information Crumbley knew that could’ve been shared with the school that might’ve changed everything.
McDonald focused in part on disturbing, mostly unanswered, text messages sent from the shooter to his mother, in which he said the house was haunted, he was seeing demons, he was hallucinating, clothes were flying around the room, and the like. When she took the stand in her own defense this week, Crumbley said that her son was just “messing around” when he would send texts like that -- but there was at least one instance when the shooter sent those messages, and subsequently asked if his mother could please just respond, but she did not.
Prosecutors allege Crumbley failed to take her son and his apparent struggles seriously.
McDonald also said Crumbley was well aware that her son had an insistent interest in weapons. The prosecutor said that when the mother attended a meeting with her son and a school counselor the morning of the shooting, she could have told school officials that she had just recently purchased a 9mm handgun for her son, who had allegedly insisted on getting that gun. But no such discussion of a gun was had, though the parents did say they took the shooter to the gun range the weekend before.
“Jennifer Crumbley wants you to believe that if only the school had done something different, we wouldn’t be here,” McDonald said. She reiterated that school officials had no idea about the believed mental health issues or the gun.
The shooter was allowed to return to class after the meeting ended, and would go on to carry out the school shooting soon after. The recently purchased gun was in his backpack.
“This is not an argument that the school did everything they should’ve done. I’m not going to say that to you,” McDonald told the jury Friday. “I’m not gonna tell you that I think it was OK they didn’t look in the backpack -- I don’t think it was. But this is about Jennifer Crumbley’s actions, and any attempt to make it about what [two school officials] did or didn’t do -- like it or not -- who did not have any of the information that was so jarring ... it’s about what she knew and what she didn’t say.”
---> What we learned about Oxford counselor’s meeting with parents, shooter amid mother’s trial
Crumbley testified this week that she didn’t have any reason to believe her son had mental health issues or required a mental health professional. The shooter did write in his journal and in texts to a friend, however, that he was struggling and needed help, and that his parents ignored his requests to see a therapist or a doctor.
While on the stand, Crumbley said she believed her son was just joking in his texts about ghosts and hallucinations, which he reportedly did often, and that she wouldn’t handle the situation any differently today given the information she knows now. McDonald reiterated that point repeatedly during her closing arguments: that Crumbley wouldn’t do anything differently.
---> Mother: Oxford shooter’s texts about ghosts, hallucinations just jokes
Defense attorney Shannon Smith asked the jury to find Crumbley not guilty because she should not be held responsible for her child’s actions.
“This is not justice. This is not how justice works. This case does nothing for the people who have already lost everything,” Smith said in her closing argument. “A not guilty verdict is the only fair and just result in this case.”
In her rebuttal statement following Smith’s closing argument, McDonald agreed that a guilty verdict wouldn’t appease any of the victims of the Oxford High School shooting and that nothing would. But she maintained that Crumbley’s actions, or failure to act, could have prevented the deaths of the four students murdered, and that the distress Crumbley has experienced pales in comparison to that of the victims’ families.
“When [Crumbley] took the stand, and she testified about her own loss, and she was asked the question, ‘You lost everything?’ She said ‘yes,’” McDonald said in her rebuttal. “She hasn’t lost everything, ladies and gentlemen. Her son is still alive. Find her guilty of four counts of involuntary manslaughter.”
---> Full updates: Day 7 of trial for mother of Oxford High School shooter (Feb. 2)
Watch the closing arguments
Prosecution’s closing argument - Friday, Feb. 2, 2024
Defense’s closing argument - Friday, Feb. 2, 2024
Prosecution’s rebuttal to defense - Friday, Feb. 2, 2024