OXFORD, Mich. – It’s been about a month since the trial for the mother of the Oxford High School shooter, and now, we’re about to do it all over again for his father. But don’t expect James Crumbley’s trial to simply be a replay of his wife’s.
As jury selection for this second trial looms, one of the most common questions I’ve received is, “Won’t this just be a repeat of what happened to his wife?”
I don’t necessarily think so.
Sure, there will be similarities. Prosecutors will jump through many of the same hoops to establish what happened during the school shooting, and we’ll probably see a lot of familiar evidence from the shooting range, the high school, and the Detroit building where the Crumbley parents were eventually arrested.
The prosecution’s plan worked last time. They got a guilty verdict. So many of those same tactics will come into play for James Crumbley.
But he’s got a different defense attorney, and she probably learned some lessons from what happened during the first trial.
Can defense take some responsibility without admitting guilt?
Even though the Crumbley parents decided to have separate trials, their fates have always been -- at least to some extent -- intertwined. It was their son, after all, who admitted to killing four students and injuring seven other people.
So while the Jennifer Crumbley trial was going on -- seven days of testimony and two days of jury deliberation -- I’m sure James Crumbley’s team was paying very close attention.
And obviously, attorney Mariell Lehman is planning to earn a very different outcome for her client.
We’ve heard from the jury forewoman and dozens of legal experts about the outcome of the Jennifer Crumbley trial. It’s clear that James Crumbley and his defense will have to take a different approach than the one deployed by Shannon Smith if they want to prove his innocence.
It didn’t seem to go over well with the jury when Jennifer Crumbley said there’s nothing she would change about her actions leading up to the shooting. I understand that the point of defending yourself in court is to deny wrongdoing, not admit to it.
But because this shooting had such tragic consequences, it’s possible the jury found her stance to be tone deaf, at best, or even heartless, at worst. It wouldn’t be a surprise to see James Crumbley try to take some form of responsibility without admitting guilt.
Jury members are human. Prosecutors knows that, and that’s at least partially why they will show -- Smith called it “parading” -- so much disturbing evidence from the school shooting. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the defense try to make James Crumbley a more sympathetic figure than his wife.
Jennifer Crumbley spent much of her testimony pointing fingers at other people. Her husband was in charge of the guns. He was the one texting attorneys on her burner phone. The school wasn’t clear about warning signs involving her son.
It’s a fine line to walk, but the defense might try to set a different tone. Could James Crumbley show remorse without incriminating himself? Smith’s closing argument was essentially, “This could happen to any parent,” and the jury clearly was not convinced.
Different presentation of evidence?
If you followed along with the Jennifer Crumbley trial, you’ll know one of the major points hammered home by the prosecution was that she didn’t show as much emotion as some might expect from the parent of a school shooter.
Videos showed Jennifer Crumbley on her phone during a police interview immediately after the shooting. She asked for a cigarette while sitting in the back of a police car while her house was being searched. Prosecutors made sure the jury noticed her demeanor.
The defense argued that there’s no “right” way to react to tragedy, but we’ll never truly know how those images of Jennifer Crumbley affected the jury’s opinion.
It’ll be harder for the prosecution to frame James Crumbley in the same light. He was visibly emotional at the police substation, and the prosecution even noted that he was “sobbing” in their transcription of that interview.
Another key factor could be the storage of the SIG Sauer 9 mm handgun that was used in the shooting. Jennifer Crumbley testified that her husband was in charge of securing the guns at their house, and it’s been established that he was the one who purchased the firearm with his son at a gun store.
That will likely be a key element of Lehman’s defense, because the jury forewoman said after the Jennifer Crumbley trial that, “The thing that really hammered it home is that she was the last adult with the gun.”
Clearly, the jury felt the shooter’s access to a weapon was key in Jennifer Crumbley’s guilty verdict.
New witnesses
Expect Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald and assistant county Prosecutor Marc Keast to rely on testimony from many of the same witnesses. But they’re already hinting who else they could call to the stand.
Judge Cheryl A. Matthews allowed prosecutors to add the former owner of the murder weapon to their witness list during a Feb. 22 hearing.
“He bought the eventual murder weapon in May (2021),” Keast said during the hearing. “He used it three times. He was provided with a cable lock. He never used the cable lock. He identified that as the same cable lock sold back to the firearm store, which in turn will be identified by those witnesses as the same cable lock sold to Mr. Crumbley.”
One week later, Matthews revealed that she will allow prosecutors to call one of two students who were shot near the bathroom where the shooter emerged when he started firing shots at the school.
Keast asked permission to add both students to the witness list, noting that both have turned 18 years old since the shooting. James Crumbley’s defense argued there’s already surveillance footage from the shooting, so these witnesses would only serve to turn the jury against him.
In the end, Matthews said the prosecution can pick one of the two students to testify.
Will James Crumbley testify?
It might be the biggest question heading into this trial: Will James Crumbley testify in his own defense?
Jennifer Crumbley’s testimony lasted two full days in court. She was the only witness called to the stand by the defense. She notably slipped up during cross examination and said the SIG Sauer was “his gun” (referring to the shooter).
During the Feb. 22 hearing, Keast said he doesn’t know if James Crumbley plans to testify. Either way, that will be a major difference from the first trial.
Our coverage
You can follow the entire James Crumbley trial on ClickOnDetroit.com and Local 4+. We’ll have live updates throughout jury selection, starting on Tuesday, and that will continue through the verdict.
Then, once the jury is seated and the trial begins, we’ll also have a live stream of court proceedings and analysis during breaks.
